Is there any point in having a navy?

[Antless]

From what has been shown so far, there seem to be a total of three countries in the world for whom building ships for anything but trade/transport and disrupting the same is an option. Will there be any way to "play from behind", causing more casualties then you suffer in the process, to a colossus like the RN, using your own fleet?

With the airforce, there is a doctrine focused on air superiority, providing you with a more defensive option against an opponent with superior numers. With the three trees shown for naval doctrine, non of them seem to give any such option.

While this seems very plausible, it also relegates naval action to "the thing you do in USA vs. Japan", which seems kind of disappointing to me.

 

[Daddl]

Of course you don't need ships to attack a nation which isn't located on an island or another continent. Why would you? Our world is somehow set up this way.

However, if you want to watch or watched the old World War Wednesday streams Germany vs. Great Britain, you see how advantageous it can be to have complete sea supremacy and be able to strike wherever you want to, with your enemy being unable to deter you.

Your "play from behind" is basically what Germany tried to do with their surface raiding battleships/cruisers, and it was said that this will be a viable option. Thats covered partially by the trade interdiction doctrine I believe.

 

[safe-keeper]

Ships are useful for every nation, probably more so in HOI3, where you can hide your vessels from enemy ships and planes far more effectively. You may not be able to take on majors' navies, but ships can be used for a variety of purposes anyway, you just need to be more careful how you do it.

 

[The_Framptonator]

Well you need a Navy if you plan on doing Naval invasions, which can help open another front or as we saw in the World Wednesday last week where Daniel landed in a port it, he could then bring in troops behind the front line.
And they can help protect convoys, so stuff like supplies and lend-lease will make it to its chosen destination in one piece.

Italy will probably need a solid navy to A) Stop the RN convoys from supplying Egypt, malta and so forth. B) To protect your own supply lanes to North Africa and finally C) If you can, you could actually force the RN out of the Mediterranean - (might be tricky)

Canada can also utilise a strong navy to protect its convoys and other Allies ones in the Western part of the Atlantic, this will relive some pressure of the RN from having to protect convoys across the whole Atlantic.

 

[WSnova]

You can always threaten with your fleet.

Lets say, Germany, Italy and Japan have 30 capital ships combined. They are distributed 5,10 and 15 for each.

Great Britain has 30 capitals in total.

Great Britain needs to defend home shores, shipping in the Mediterranean and its Asian possessions.

Germany needs to defend its coast, Italy needs to defend Mediterranean shipping and Japan has to defend Asian shipping.

As long as all the axis power are selective in their engagements GB will be under a big pressure. GB will want to at least match ship to ship each power, but what if an engagement goes wrong? So they need to have local superiority, a 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 to make sure they always win.

So all the axis powers need to do is to not lose and take engagements that go in their favour. Thats how a behind the curve power wins. They stretch the bigger power thin. But that is assuming the AI doesn´t suicide its fleet in a pointless manner.

So if GB moves 20 ships to the mediterranean to hunt down the Regia Marina, that leaves 10 to defend against the 20 from Japan and Germany. Its now time for Japan and Germany to strike. Italy just needs to not lose too many ships.

Or if they split their ships perfectly, what guarantees that Germany won´t get lucky and win an even engagement?

At least thats how it should work in theory for a power at a relative disadvantage and a stretched out bigger power. And of course for the major power its in its best interest if they can use their 30 ships against the 5, then against the 15 and then against the 10.

And of course, the point of having a navy is to:

-Protect your naval invasions and support them.
-Interfere with naval invasions and support.
-Protect your shipping
-Interfere with enemy shipping.


If you don´t have shiping to protect,don´t plan to do naval invasions, and you don´t mind the risk of naval invasions ( or know they can´t do it) then you don´t need a navy.

 

[Secret Master]

If you are just building navies with no idea as to what mission they will perform, then I would say you are failing at building in general. Taking on the Royal Navy without a clear goal is a recipe for wasting precious resources.

Ask yourself why you want to take on the RN. If your answer is "I want to sink British/Japanese convoys to strangle Britain/Japan for resources," then you have an answer. If your answer is, "I want to deny the Allies/Axis naval superiority in various regions to prevent amphibious attacks completely," then you have a different answer with different building parameters. If your answer is "Battleships look cool," then its time to question what you are doing with your life.

To give you an HOI3 example:

In a game as the Soviets, I built a large submarine force in time for a war in 1939. The submarines were not directed at Germany. I knew my foreign policy would cause the British AI to declare war sometime in 1939, so I planned to attack British shipping with my submarines while defending my shores from attack.
It worked great, even though I was coming from behind.

 

[WSnova]

Exactly, you have to have a plan for the Navy.

If you want to do a Sealion your build will be completely than if you just want to stretch the RN thin for your allies. Of course the strenght of the AI or human player determine a lot. If you can invade GB without much resistance like in HOI3 there is little point in building up many forces.

 

[HeilLoki]

If your answer is "Battleships look cool," then its time to question what you are doing with your life.

Seems you talk about Hitler. Come on, don't be so rude to Hitler. What has he ever done?

....

He did WHAT?

...

Oh...

 

[Secret Master]

Seems you talk about Hitler. Come on, don't be so rude to Hitler.

There's also Stalin and his bizarre obsession with battlecruisers.

 

[hewhoispale]

There's also Stalin and his bizarre obsession with battlecruisers.

They're fun-sized battleships!

 

[WSnova]

There's also Stalin and his bizarre obsession with battlecruisers.

They are like mini Battleships, so moe!

 

[Mannstien]

Ask yourself why you want to take on the RN. If your answer is "I want to sink British/Japanese convoys to strangle Britain/Japan for resources," then you have an answer. If your answer is, "I want to deny the Allies/Axis naval superiority in various regions to prevent amphibious attacks completely," then you have a different answer with different building parameters. If your answer is "Battleships look cool," then its time to question what you are doing with your life.

Great, have to ask that stupid question about life again...........Hate this quiz!!

 

[Secret Master]

They are like mini Battleships, so moe!

They're fun-sized battleships!

Yamato:

Stalin's battlecruisers:

 

[hewhoispale]

Yamato:

Stalin's battlecruisers:

Stalin's secret plan was to stock the lend-lease mini-fridge with battlecruisers and present the bill at the end of the war.

 

[potski]

So if GB moves 20 ships to the mediterranean to hunt down the Regia Marina, that leaves 10 to defend against the 20 from Japan and Germany. Its now time for Japan and Germany to strike. Italy just needs to not lose too many ships.

That's ok IRL, but UK could at any time largely abandon the Med and not worry about Italy, because of Gibraltar and Suez. Or they could do the opposite and move the capital ships to the Med, and as long as there are still active UK patrols of DD and subs in the North Sea area, Germany wouldn't be able to tell the big ships were gone. Fog of war, lack of radar/radio intelligence.

Plus Germany and Japan are a very long way apart, and they have no bases on the way. It would be very hard, I think probably impossible, to co-ordinate them into a super fleet capable of engaging the RN in one naval region in the game.

IRL the UK largely abandoned the Pacific after losing Singapore, and relied on distance and lack of bases to prevent the IJA crossing the Indian Ocean.

The UK not only has the ships, it has the bases in the Falklands, Ceylon, East Africa, Singapore, Hong Kong, Caribbean, Gibraltar and Alexandria, plus five friendly countries in the Commonwealth, that give it an unprecedented global reach up to Dec 1941. In the game as the UK you could literally patrol most of every sea and ocean, if you wanted, because you can make loads of small fleets, and each fleet can patrol three regions. Only the Black Sea and Baltic (if Denmark falls) are off limits.

UK capital fleets can hop their way round the world from base to base, and the Axis would never know they are coming, before they got there. They can escape into a base if they are threatened, and undertake repairs if they are damaged. Options which the IJN wouldn't have in the Atlantic for instance. And those naval bases usually have air bases, with NAV and fighter cover.

The chances of the IJA getting a fleet (even if they had the range) into the Atlantic without it being spotted must be quite low.

Then there's the French Fleet and US...

 

[Denkt]

Of the 3 big theaters, land, air and sea I think sea is the one that is the most friendly to the weak one. Seas are big so a ship can easly hide and if it is detected it may have plenty of time to run from the enemy. Even a small number of ships can be a hassle to any nation who is dependent on convoys, unlike on the land in which controll over the land is important you don't have to controll seazones, just keep enemy convoys away as everything about the seas is about convoys.

Naturally if you are dependent on convoys you need a large navy.

 

[potski]

Ships on their own can "hide" because they are difficult to spot. But it works both ways - those single convoy raiders would have difficulty finding any convoys. If they did, then the convoy should scatter in different directions, so they will be lucky to get hits on more than one or two.

One of the things I like is that nearly every country relies on convoys for their own resources, those they get from trade and their supplies. No-one of any importance can completely ignore the naval aspect of the game.

 

[HerrderGezeiten]

Ships are costly and it is just a matter of time to get caught.

In Europe (main continent) every minor against Germany should build troops/plains.
A ship will not save your a.....

Against Briton I would build Plains and attack the Rout and Harbours in Range if possible.
Maybe some Subs to attack at most.

I will not believe the AI (Germany/ Italy/ Japan, Briton, USA, Sow,..) will work good enough with you.
There are to many if`s to risk a surface fleet with a "normal" minor.

 

[JerkyJerry]

The OP asked is there any point to having a navy?


If I’m Germany there is no point at all for me to build a navy. If memory serves I’m fairly certain that the UK & USA be coming to me? Why would I spend all that I.C. when if I wait a week, my enemy will be attacking my strength? Before “D” Day, I as Germany have zero need for a navy. After surviving “D” Day then yes but before never.


If I’m U.S.S.R. never. Huge waste of I.C.


If I’m the U.K.? A navy? Not really sure I need a traditional navy. I need to get my troops across one sea space. Not really sure how much of a navy one would need. I mean, it is the German navy that would prevent me from crossing the channel? Yeah, as England I’m not too worried about that.


If I’m the U.S.A. then yeah I somewhat do. I’m a Carriers & Cruisers type Admiral. I really don’t build too much of anything else. IMO, America vs. Japan is a simple war of attrition no matter how you look at it. It is your call when you play America where you want to defeat Japan; at sea or in Asia? Once Japan loses either one (sea or Asia) they are a virtual albatross that will die a slow and agonizing death with little to no hope of recovery.


If I play Japan then no! I build the same type navy I build for the U.K. I just need to get across one water space to reach my goals and objectives. I play Japan from the main island of Japan back to Asia. My navy does not sail out into open water after DoW with USA. They don’t have to. America will come to me. I’m a much better defensive player than an offensive one. I don’t try to keep/acquire islands. I don’t try to stop/defeat/draw with America 1, 2 or 3 thousand miles away from Tokyo. That is just plain suicide. I’ll leave the long supply lines to America. I try to fight America and G.B. in India. I go west as quickly as I can so those two have far more supply line concerns than I do. I use transport planes like FedEx. When supplies absolutely/positively well you know the rest. If I have to fight America I want it to be as close to Tokyo as I can.


Any other country having a navy is well hilarious, that means you too Italy!

 

[hewhoispale]

The OP asked is there any point to having a navy?


If I’m Germany there is no point at all for me to build a navy. If memory serves I’m fairly certain that the UK & USA be coming to me? Why would I spend all that I.C. when if I wait a week, my enemy will be attacking my strength? Before “D” Day, I as Germany have zero need for a navy. After surviving “D” Day then yes but before never.


If I’m U.S.S.R. never. Huge waste of I.C.


If I’m the U.K.? A navy? Not really sure I need a traditional navy. I need to get my troops across one sea space. Not really sure how much of a navy one would need. I mean, it is the German navy that would prevent me from crossing the channel? Yeah, as England I’m not too worried about that.


If I’m the U.S.A. then yeah I somewhat do. I’m a Carriers & Cruisers type Admiral. I really don’t build too much of anything else. IMO, America vs. Japan is a simple war of attrition no matter how you look at it. It is your call when you play America where you want to defeat Japan; at sea or in Asia? Once Japan loses either one (sea or Asia) they are a virtual albatross that will die a slow and agonizing death with little to no hope of recovery.


If I play Japan then no! I build the same type navy I build for the U.K. I just need to get across one water space to reach my goals and objectives. I play Japan from the main island of Japan back to Asia. My navy does not sail out into open water after DoW with USA. They don’t have to. America will come to me. I’m a much better defensive player than an offensive one. I don’t try to keep/acquire islands. I don’t try to stop/defeat/draw with America 1, 2 or 3 thousand miles away from Tokyo. That is just plain suicide. I’ll leave the long supply lines to America. I try to fight America and G.B. in India. I go west as quickly as I can so those two have far more supply line concerns than I do. I use transport planes like FedEx. When supplies absolutely/positively well you know the rest. If I have to fight America I want it to be as close to Tokyo as I can.


Any other country having a navy is well hilarious, that means you too Italy!

Except those dockyards that aren't building ships can't be used for non-ship purposes, so you might as well build ships with them.