Naval Combat and CV Fleets - Bloodless battles

[Kirth Gersen]

Playing as USA, I built up a number of fleets including two 30 ship monsters, both with 3 or 4 CVs.

The problem is that I don't seem to be able to kill anything (or be killed). I have had a number of run ins with the IJN, and gone looking for trouble. Despite numerous multi-hour battles (mostly at long range), the worst I have had is a loss of org on some ships.

After 6 months of full on Pacific War, I've lost 4 subs and they have lost 2 subs, a BB and a TP.

The worse situations are when I bump into a flotilla of largely unprotected TPs and they get away without hardly a scratch.

Am I using the CVs wrong?

 

[unmerged(42723)]

Similar stuff has been mentioned by several people, naval warfare in general needs some change to get some more decisive results, hopefully in the patch.

Edit: though esp. early CVs without several CAG upgrades were never sinking that much, they became much stronger though since lvl 4-5 plus adaequate doctrine research.

 

[son of liberty]

You don't have enough cv's in your fleet. Try for 8 cv, 2 cvl per fleet. Upgrades, doctrines, and either King or Nimitz as naval minister.

 

[Josip]

You don't have enough cv's in your fleet. Try for 8 cv, 2 cvl per fleet. Upgrades, doctrines, and either King or Nimitz as naval minister.

Why do you mix CVs and CVLs in the same fleet? Not a good idea, CVLs have less range, and worse stats. I find that 8 CVs + 8-10 DDs work great.

 

[Uandwhosearmy]

You should hardly be required to have eight carriers per fleet to be able to fight decisive battles.

 

[son of liberty]

Why do you mix CVs and CVLs in the same fleet? Not a good idea, CVLs have less range, and worse stats. I find that 8 CVs + 8-10 DDs work great.

Damage soaks. In your fleet, your cv's are the only target for other cv's.

 

[Kirth Gersen]

Similar stuff has been mentioned by several people, naval warfare in general needs some change to get some more decisive results, hopefully in the patch.

Edit: though esp. early CVs without several CAG upgrades were never sinking that much, they became much stronger though since lvl 4-5 plus adaequate doctrine research.

ta

You don't have enough cv's in your fleet. Try for 8 cv, 2 cvl per fleet. Upgrades, doctrines, and either King or Nimitz as naval minister.

Hmm - bit gamey though - 10 carriers in a fleet.

 

[Mjarr]

Skilled commander + reasonable doctrine level and you can do damage even with 2-4 carriers without too much issues. But yes, it's true that in AoD naval battles are bit too indecisive. If you want to personally mod it, find naval damage multiplier (ship vs ship) and increase it from 1.0 to 1.4 - 1.7 and they are generally speaking more decisive while still staying away from the "sink hundred ships in two hours" issue.

Besides, less ships means beter overall positioning most of the time. It's quite interesting how some naval combat changes in AoD actually makes smaller task forces useful aswell.

 

[unmerged(19908)]

Yeah also I noticed no damage at all when carriers were involved. I'm not sure I want to do the 10 carriers and 10 destroyers in a fleet formula people are recommending. I prefer my fleet to be reasonably realistic and include some cruiser or BBs as well with at most a couple of carriers.

I tried using a single battlecruiser with the camo brigade for anti-convoy work. It only met up with small enemy fleets of light cruisers and destroyers and we actually managed to ding each other up a bit before carrying on. This is worth a try if you are put off by the carrier spam approach to naval combat.

 

[Syntalynder]

Modifying the misc file will give better results until the patch arrives.

Program Files\Arsenal of Democracy\db\misc

change

# Naval - Naval Combat STR damage (All Naval units attacks against Naval units)
	0.5

to

# Naval - Naval Combat STR damage (All Naval units attacks against Naval units)
	0.89

 

[Julle64]

Modifying the misc file will give better results until the patch arrives.

Program Files\Arsenal of Democracy\db\misc

change

# Naval - Naval Combat STR damage (All Naval units attacks against Naval units)
	0.5

to

# Naval - Naval Combat STR damage (All Naval units attacks against Naval units)
	0.89

In my USA game 0.80 wasn't enough. So I went up to 1.00. Someone mentioned even 1.40.

 

[Kirth Gersen]

In my USA game 0.80 wasn't enough. So I went up to 1.00. Someone mentioned even 1.40.

I set it to 1.00 and it seems to work reasonably. A few small engagements with no losses, then a fleet action 32 of mine (2 CV) v 20 of IJN (1 CV), and I took out a CV, a CA and a DD. Feels better.

 

[DarkSoul1984]

As Germany with CVs I tend to do a lot of damage in the later years (1943 and onward) with 18 ship fleets of 4 CV 4 CL 10 DD. The trick is to follow the enemy fleet as it attempts to disengage and retreat. Before 1943 most of my damage is done with the Bismarck and Tirpitz.

 

[Syntalynder]

I set it to 1.00 and it seems to work reasonably. A few small engagements with no losses, then a fleet action 32 of mine (2 CV) v 20 of IJN (1 CV), and I took out a CV, a CA and a DD. Feels better.

That appears better! I'll try.

 

[Amoral]

It can take several running battles to get a decisive result. I set the Naval Battle message to pause the game. Then if I win the fight, I set my fleet to manually pursue. If my fleet is faster (and I make sure it is) I'll arrive in the next seazone before the enemy, and another battle will occur. Ideally this continues until the enemy reaches the nearest (hopefully badly defended) port, and I proceed to port strike them.

Badly damaged ships are a real liability for the AI. It doesn't scrap a BBII that gets totalled. It fixes it. That's like tricking the AI into building a BBII in 1941.

 

[Johnhawkwood]

I tried using a single battlecruiser with the camo brigade for anti-convoy work. It only met up with small enemy fleets of light cruisers and destroyers and we actually managed to ding each other up a bit before carrying on. This is worth a try if you are put off by the carrier spam approach to naval combat.

Does this actually work does it? I have been thinking about doing it as Germany in 39 - 42

 

[Kirth Gersen]

Does this actually work does it? I have been thinking about doing it as Germany in 39 - 42

Hope it does, I like the Graf Spree authenticity to it.

 

[Johnhawkwood]

Hope it does, I like the Graf Spree authenticity to it.

I was thinking of sending both BC's and HC's for some historical raids - no point in vanilla etc

 

[GAGA Extrem]

During the early game, CV are indeed somewhat lacking fire power (as it was in RL ), but try again in 1942 with appropiate doctrines and upgrades - they become really, really powerful.

As it should be imo. The german CV I spam from ArmA was ridicolous anyway.

Does this actually work does it? I have been thinking about doing it as Germany in 39 - 42

It works, although enemy task groups are dangerous. I have sent a few pairs of BC III on covoy raids at the african west coast and got decent results. Small taskgroups, esp. without caps, usually suffer heavy losses, while you can even withstand one or two CA with screens. So in a way, camo BC are also good against small sub hunter groups GB or USA likes to deploy - with a bit luck I even managed to damage one or two CVL from a larger tastkgroup!

 

[Syntalynder]

Theres a myth about WW2 Naval combats and people expect scores of ships to be sunk.

check out this set of info:

Total naval losses 1939-45
* includes equivalents to destroyer escorts

Note Subs & Destroyers do not represent HOI units (HOI units =several ships or subs).

USA
CV 11, BB 2, CR 10, DD 71, SS 53

UK
CV 8, BB 5, CR 30, DD 110, SS 77

USSR
BB 1, CR 3, DD 33, SS c.100

Australia
CR 3.DD 4

Canada
DD 6

Japan
CV 19, BB 8 (3 foundered in port), CR 37, DD 134*, SS 130

Germany
BB 9 (3 scuttled), CR 7 (3 scuttled), DD 44* (6 scuttled), SS 785 (17 scuttled)

Italy
BB 1, CR 11, DD 84*, SS 84

Taken From The World War II Databook, by John Ellis, Aurum Press, ISBN 1-85410-254-0