Naval Battles Discussion

[unmerged(10894)]

The more I am involved in naval wars, the more I see about it that seems broken. It is probably the most predictable area of the game. I'd really like to have a discussion on what people think about them. And since I'm the first poster I might as well go first.

Naval Battles Themselves

Ever seen that beloved navy of yours die in an instant upon facing an opponent? Ever see 1/2 of the world's naval population die in one battle? You're not alone. Way too many ships are killed in naval battles, especially later on in the game.

I think that naval battles would be so much better if morale was the main factor in battles. In reality navies did not suffer really large loses, but morale was often the main resultant of battles. Sure ships would get sunk, and occasionally a whole fleet would get killed (lepanto anyone), but this was often not the case. Usually fleets were large investments that could be relied upon to protect themselves with, even if a couple of battles had been lost.

Naval Leadership

I'm curious, has anyone ever bet Nelson? On land, armies have a chance to beat other armies like themselves with much better leaders, but on sea this is harder ever the case. All else being anything close to equal, better naval leaders will mean you'll win the war, in style.

IMHO naval battles with leaders should become in a way more random. On a good day, these leaders will kill the crap out of anyone who dares stand in their way. On a bad day they may be little better than having just generic leaders. This would allow nations without these leaders at lest a chance to face up to the ones with leaders, and should allow more flexibility overall.

 

[unmerged(21937)]

Imo it's funny how different naval battles are in 15th cent and 17th cent in EU2. In 15th cent we have 25 ship navy fighting 20 ship navy for months and in the end loser retreats, after losing 5 ships. Then in 17th cent, 250 ship navy swoops on a 200 ship and in a matter of days, loser loses 150 ships and the remains of his fleet retreat...

 

[HolisticGod]

Bocaj,

I agree with the second point. Admirals should have less affect on battles, not more.

The first is generally correct, except that EU doesn't model battle damage (which could take months, if not years, to repair-in real terms, losing them is just easier) and there are too many ships.

Of course, as you've said, we need to greatly reduce the number of ships, too...

 

[admiral drake]

Bocaj,

I agree with the second point. Admirals should have less affect on battles, not more.

The first is generally correct, except that EU doesn't model battle damage (which could take months, if not years, to repair-in real terms, losing them is just easier) and there are too many ships.

Of course, as you've said, we need to greatly reduce the number of ships, too...

to many ships doesn't justefy loosing entire fleet or half every batle you loose in 17+ however loosing 5ships in 500vs500batles wouldn't be a good idea either

 

[HolisticGod]

Drake,

I think we need to reduce the number of buildable warships to a fraction, making transports a necessity and galleys somewhat more valuable, at least in coastal defense.

Also, naval replacement. That's the big issue. You know as well as I do losing two hundred of five hundred ships in one battle barely touches a good GB in the late game.

Take a look at the GD forum, Drake. Few people better qualify to discuss these issues than you.

 

[King John]

It'd be nice if there was a way to model increased hull thickness in newer ships, rather than just increased firepower.

 

[admiral drake]

Drake,

I think we need to reduce the number of buildable warships to a fraction, making transports a necessity and galleys somewhat more valuable, at least in coastal defense.

Also, naval replacement. That's the big issue. You know as well as I do losing two hundred of five hundred ships in one battle barely touches a good GB in the late game.

Take a look at the GD forum, Drake. Few people better qualify to discuss these issues than you.

i'm more concerned with those nations having less support then english , dutch and port loosing 500-600 to english lategame and right now a descent played england wil always rule the sea in the end people tryng to beat him just gets fleet whiped out there

 

[Count Drew]

Decent points! Well, some of the same thing could be said for Land Armies during the Napoleonic Phaze of combat. Why do they just dissappear sometimes??? I heard there was some patches for this, while during the earlier LT Phazes of combat you always manage a retreat! It must be a bug? So the same probably is likely for Naval Tech, it's a bug that makes the combat too fast, and too powerful. It should be phazed down some and more based upon morale for victory.

Navalmen are important.. Often ships survive but the men on them do not. Not only that but ever see an Admiral Die in combat if he succeeded in retreating at least? I don't recall this...

I have never personally defeated Nelson unless something was grossly inadequate. Once when a Spanish and Portuguese Armada of 1800 ships faced off against my SUPERIOR 600 English Ones they managed to take heavy losses and force a retreat. I came back, a few months later with 700 ships and whiped them off the face of the Earth.

I think with the introduction of Straights the Naval Aspects of this game should be looked over again.

 

[HolisticGod]

John,

I wonder if Johan could rig that...

 

[HolisticGod]

Drew,

Land is a different issue.

Unless battles become more decisive in terms of VPs and morale becomes a constant factor, you have to have those losses or wars will never end.

Naval combat is far easier to fix. And frankly-it's broken. Land is just bent. And pleasently so.

 

[HolisticGod]

Drake,

Which is what Bocaj means by changing the leaders. Nelson was good. Very good. But you can't compare what he did against a paper pusher (Bruyies) and an outright incompetent and quite possible psychopath (Villanevue) to any General. Admirals often had less influence over actual battles than their counterparts on land. What they influenced was training-and, most importantly, at least in some cases, they assigned Captains, who with their ship-board officers were, tactically, the most important factors.

As for England's support, I think naval support should be scrapped altogether. It should just cost far more in maint.

 

[HolisticGod]

Drew,

Two more naval reform threads are in GD...

Where this should probably move.