• 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.

Spricar

General
77 Badges
Dec 2, 2002
2.232
362
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Pride of Nations
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Cities in Motion
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • Sword of the Stars
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
OK, since EU3 should be built upon a new engine, will there finally be a limited AI naval range implemented?

On top of that, the impotance of naval power should be considerably improved...
 
I think attrition did the job where EU2 lacked a maximum range for ships.
Keeping it like this would be fine in my opinion since it works perfectly.

However, what I would like to see is every sea province having different amounts of time of navigation.
In otherwords, in EU2, no matter how big or small the sea province was, it would take the same amount of time for a ship group to navigate through this sea province.
If this could be correctly represented in EU3, it would make exploring alot slower, harder, tedious but alot more challenging and fun. ;)
 
Naval range is a concept from the age of steam. IMO, it's an entirely incorrect way to handle the question.
 
Mowers said:
reducing the number of naval provinces would help the AI and MPers if naval attrition was changed.

I didn't mean reducing the number of naval provinces.
I meant correctly representing the distances of different sized sea provinces, so that the North Atlantic Ocean sea province would not equal the same distance and time of navigation as the straits of Gibraltar, like in EU2.

George LeS said:
Naval range is a concept from the age of steam. IMO, it's an entirely incorrect way to handle the question.

That's as good a point as any person can make not to include naval ranges in EU3. ;)

Pishtaco said:
Have enormous sea-zones (eg. "north atlantic") and only allow fleets to be stationed one sea-zone away from a proper supply base.

Sort of like Civilization games deal with pre-navigational ships when it comes to coastal and sea provinces?
If so... nah! :p
 
George LeS said:
Naval range is a concept from the age of steam. IMO, it's an entirely incorrect way to handle the question.
OK, what would be the correct way of handling it?
 
Pishtaco said:
Have enormous sea-zones (eg. "north atlantic") and only allow fleets to be stationed one sea-zone away from a proper supply base.

Probably shouldn't be done: Fleets could travel *a long way* without supplies (or rather, by supplying themselves) The attrition from EU2 modelled this much better than any artificially imposed "Naval Range".
 
IMHO, the attrition concept of EU2 is fine, and any sort of naval range would be misplaced in the EU time frame, but I would be happy if the AI could be taught to deal with naval attrition.
 
George LeS said:
Naval range is a concept from the age of steam. IMO, it's an entirely incorrect way to handle the question.

:confused: Do you think just because ships were run by wind they could travel without any stops? They still had to get a supplies of food and water. Not to mention all the cases with unfavorable wind/without wind.

Magelland and his crew made a bunch of stops when they were travelling around the globe. Yet they almost failed and if I'm correct only 18 made it back. Without Magellan.

No ship in the age of sail could travel the unlimited range, their range was in some cases very limited. They were slower than steam ships+more dependable on the weather.

edit: I don't really care for the range, I want an AI, that will learn how to cope with atrittion or learn how to cope with limited range (if implemented). That should lead to more interesting and more important naval system.
 
noddy102 said:
I didn't mean reducing the number of naval provinces.
I meant correctly representing the distances of different sized sea provinces, so that the North Atlantic Ocean sea province would not equal the same distance and time of navigation as the straits of Gibraltar, like in EU2.

Indeed but the naval element of the game would benefit.
 
Spricar said:
:confused: Do you think just because ships were run by wind they could travel without any stops? They still had to get a supplies of food and water. Not to mention all the cases with unfavorable wind/without wind.

Magelland and his crew made a bunch of stops when they were travelling around the globe. Yet they almost failed and if I'm correct only 18 made it back. Without Magellan.

No ship in the age of sail could travel the unlimited range, their range was in some cases very limited. They were slower than steam ships+more dependable on the weather.

But don't you see that attrition accounts for this already in EU2?
 
Arilou said:
Probably shouldn't be done: Fleets could travel *a long way* without supplies (or rather, by supplying themselves) The attrition from EU2 modelled this much better than any artificially imposed "Naval Range".

I disagree with this. Fleets had a lot of trouble operating away from their supplies for long periods of time. The British could do this by the end of the EU3 period; the French could not. I grant that maybe more was possible for individual ships, but that should be below the scale of the game.
The attrition from EU2 didn't work, and led to lots of micromanagement.
 
Pishtaco said:
The attrition from EU2 didn't work, and led to lots of micromanagement.

But if micromanagement is your argument for introducing naval ranges, can you justify that there will be any less micromanaging?
 
noddy102 said:
But if micromanagement is your argument for introducing naval ranges, can you justify that there will be any less micromanaging?

I kind of like the HOI2 system. Of course with AI naval range limitations too...
 
noddy102 said:
I didn't mean reducing the number of naval provinces.
I meant correctly representing the distances of different sized sea provinces, so that the North Atlantic Ocean sea province would not equal the same distance and time of navigation as the straits of Gibraltar, like in EU2.
Agreed. But more than anything about attrition, range and distance, I'd wish for the role of the changing winds and currents to be correctly represented.

Depending on whether you had winds in your favor or not, travel times could be doubled or halved, if not more. No travel could ever be scheduled to take a given time, not until the age of steam (and even then...).
Also, storms more often delayed than sank ships, yet they do only the latter now. They don't even prevent combat, while they really should (at least most of times, or greatly reduce the chance of a successful interception).

Another point is blocus. Blocus has, in EU2, an influence on the income of the provinces. That's right. But that shouldn't be the only effect, it should also greatly reduce the income from trade in foreign CoTs (if CoTs are to be kept, in a form or another).
 
Ambassador said:
Agreed. But more than anything about attrition, range and distance, I'd wish for the role of the changing winds and currents to be correctly represented.

Depending on whether you had winds in your favor or not, travel times could be doubled or halved, if not more. No travel could ever be scheduled to take a given time, not until the age of steam (and even then...).
Also, storms more often delayed than sank ships, yet they do only the latter now. They don't even prevent combat, while they really should (at least most of times, or greatly reduce the chance of a successful interception).

Another point is blocus. Blocus has, in EU2, an influence on the income of the provinces. That's right. But that shouldn't be the only effect, it should also greatly reduce the income from trade in foreign CoTs (if CoTs are to be kept, in a form or another).

Your ideas I would also encourage. They would make for a more realistic naval system and exploring system too.

Ambassador said:
Another point is blocus. Blocus has, in EU2, an influence on the income of the provinces. That's right. But that shouldn't be the only effect, it should also greatly reduce the income from trade in foreign CoTs (if CoTs are to be kept, in a form or another).

What is blocus? :p
 
noddy102 said:
What is blocus? :p
A kind of french-speaking blockade. :rolleyes:
 
Ambassador said:
A kind of french-speaking blockade. :rolleyes:

Well I guess along with that, which would be a good idea too, would be to allow pirates to drawn from colony taxation etc.
However both this and blockading are issues which I doubt will get much support. :)
 
Pishtaco said:
I disagree with this. Fleets had a lot of trouble operating away from their supplies for long periods of time. The British could do this by the end of the EU3 period; the French could not. I grant that maybe more was possible for individual ships, but that should be below the scale of the game.
The attrition from EU2 didn't work, and led to lots of micromanagement.

But Francis Drake could take a small fleet all around South America.

Likewise ships could go from Europe to Asia essentially without stopping in a friendly port (simply by making landings on desert islands or along the coasts)

EDIT: I maintain that attrition is more "realistic" than a hard-coded naval range: The problem wasn't (like with steamships) that they'd run out of fuel (or even provisions, as these could be plundered/bartered for as you went, pretty much, though at losses, hence attrition)