I like the idea of making navy more meaningful.Right no it has few purposes and its hardly worth the price unless you are colonial nation.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
jorian said:That I meant too. Like in HoI, supply-lines
Not the resource 'supplies'
Oh, OK.
Smirfy said:Perhaps Georges system is worth considering, I have heard none better
As I understand it it works on the zone of control priciple that the blockade will weaken the further one gets from your base, numbers dependant of course.
Not exactly, a given fleet couldn't blockade everything in range, if that's what you're thinking. What I mean is that a fleet on blockade would routinely send some ships back to base to resupply. That means its effective strength is lessened. I assume no one wants to keep track of this; sending ships back & forth themselves. So we go up one level of abstraction: at a given distance from base, x% of the fleet is either back at the base, or en route to or from it. The greater the distance, the greater the %.
The bottom line is that, of a 10 ship squadron, some of them are missing, at all times. So, for all practical purposes, it's a 7- or 8-ship unit (or whatever). If you fight a battle, those other ships just don't take part; they weren't there. If there's a factor involving fleet size to calculate (e.g., 5 for blockade), they don't count. Thus you'd have to send an 8 ship squadron to blockade Toulon, but only 6 for Cartagena (from Gibraltar).
Of course, the machine would do all this; all we'd see is the effective size of the fleet. And it would entail some way of designating a particular duty to each squadron, as this only works for fleets on station; if you're just passing through the Med, e.g., invading Egypt, this wouldn't apply.
This was intended for blockade of an enemy's battle fleet. My mention of ZOCs was really intended for another sense of "blockade", trade interdiction. Here, you didn't keep ships off his coast in the same way, it just wasn't feasible. Plus, this was something a country could do without having sea control. I was assuming here that a squadron would be put out on the trade lanes, & would interdict stuff passing by, & would have an effect on adjacent zones. But, without a clear idea of what the trade routes would be like, I can't be more specific. It would act somewhat like pirates, but without having to put ships next to every coastal province.
Hopefully their will be much much more AI management of the navy. I might want to decide what the main battle fleet is but I don't want to have to micromange every Frigate in a five Ocean empire. I'd like to be able to pick up an army in Lincoln dump it on California and for the AI to get the ships and make the appropriate stops.
Blockading needs to be handled in a similar way.
As it is I find colonial empires can become very tiresome and I don't even think of the split and group trick to avoid attrition.
Blockading needs to be handled in a similar way.
As it is I find colonial empires can become very tiresome and I don't even think of the split and group trick to avoid attrition.
Its true that troops could survive off the land pretty well in most cases, and staying alive is pretty well modeled by the current attrition system. On the other hand, what you're mostly paying for on your military upkeep, what those arsenals pour out to increase your supply limit, is gunpowder.
During the 20 years war most of the campaigns followed the courses of major rivers so that the armies could be kept in supply.
During the 20 years war most of the campaigns followed the courses of major rivers so that the armies could be kept in supply.
George LeS said:
I assumed you meant if you had 10 warships in habour and ticked the blockade button the computer then asked you for the sea zone you then clicked on it. If the sea zone in question was ajacent all 10 ships went into a blockade box if it was 2-3 zones away 9 went in a blockade box, for 4-5 zones 8 ships went in etc etc. When your need for a blockade is over just untick the blockade.
If an enemy fleet of 10 ships came into the sea zone that was 2-3 zones away from your the base they would face 9 ship.
That was my intereptation
This could, perhaps, be more easily modelled if HOI's organisation was in the game. Putting a fleet on a blockading mission would lower it's org. the further the fleet is from the nearest friendly port, the greater the reduction.George LeS said:
When the fleet sails off again org. would slowly recover. Representing the ships returning one by one.
EDIT: I suppose the same might apply to a fleet that's on a patrolling mission. In short any fleet that is folowing a known pattern so the transport ships knwo where to return to.
Last edited:
I think that some of the things mentioned here would be nice to have...
Fewer ports (restricting it only to deep-water ports could be good), ships on station having a supply line, patrolling ships interdicting trade, and overseas troops needing supplies according to the tech level of those troops, all of that would make things more realistic, and they could be done without too much micromanaging.
Fewer ports (restricting it only to deep-water ports could be good), ships on station having a supply line, patrolling ships interdicting trade, and overseas troops needing supplies according to the tech level of those troops, all of that would make things more realistic, and they could be done without too much micromanaging.
That would mean removing all ports from the Low Countries, which is a no go.
(could be that i have misunderstood what you mean by deep-water port)
Ports with the capability to anchor and service large ships, either merchantmen or warships, and not just one or two, but several at the same time.
Not hugely different from the current situation i think. Not all provinces on the coast have a port in the game after all.Kelvin said:
Smirfy said:Org is a crap way to handle naval
I'll go with anything that makes navies historical relevant. Doesnt mean to say that this is a good solution, rather its simply better.
Last edited by a moderator:
Registered said:
I don't have HOI, so I may be way off base here. (I have been reading the HOI, Vickie, & CK fora since the EUIII announcement). As I understand it, the HOI organization factor is somewhat analagous to morale in EU2. If so, I'd largely oppose this. There's no reason the RN or Dutch should suffer too much from being on blockade, at least if its for a reasonable period. All I'm saying is that, effectively, the size of the fleet is diminished. And when you return to base, they're all there. (There is a related issue about morale, but I do think it should be treated separately. It's in one of the other threads.)
Smirfy said:
That's not far off, & might be a useful mechanic. But something needs to be done to prevent the odd-men-out from being used for anything else.
Not quite. Morale and org. are two seperate things. You know what morale is of course.George LeS said:
Org., on the other hand, indicates what percentage of a force (army/fleet) is in effective fighting condition. Org. can be lost by moving through bad terrain (or storms in the case of a fleet) and enemy attacks. If ships stray fom the main fleet it's fighting capacity (org.) is reduced.
So losing org. would do about the same thing that you proposed but without confusing the player by suddenly making part of his fleet disappear.
George LeS said:
Yes that would be needed. I think it is basically a sound mechanic
Registered said:
IMHO org never worked in naval both from a game point of view and and from a naval history viewpoint it is perplexing
I like the Idea of having fleets "lose effectiveness" when far from a resupply-point due to part of the fleet resupplying. Transports would be the first to count as on resupply.