Naval warfare is rubbish

[Jyri]

You need at least one heavy ship per carrier for screening purposes or else the enemy heavy guns can shoot your carrier directly. You can get away with CA or BC if you don't want to use BB but you need the heavy screens.

Yes in real life fast carriers can keep away from other task forces and stay out of gun range but HOI4 doesn't work like that. Speed makes you harder to spot and catch but once combat is engaged all speed does is give you a small dodge increase and make it easier to disengage.

The way the TF system works is the AI will send out the smallest force it thinks has a chance - so if you have 10BBs in one stack and 2BBs in another then it should send out 2 BBs against small enemy forces and the big against big. You only have small TFs - I'm not sure the system will send out multiple TFs to try and equal the enemy fleet. Oh and the threat calculation is ummm.... not precise. So it will ofter send out your big surface fleet against a big force of ... submarines

Thank you for enlightening me on those points! Lmao, who else remembers when the game was being designed, one of it's selling points compared to hoi3 was being simpler and easier to analyze what's going on? xD

 

[The Colonel]

Thank you for enlightening me on those points! Lmao, who else remembers when the game was being designed, one of it's selling points compared to hoi3 was being simpler and easier to analyze what's going on? xD

Yeah the core mechanics might be simpler to like draw frontlines and fight, but there are so many stats that are hidden, not explained in the game at all (so you have no idea which to prioritize), or straight up don't work. I am not really a stellaris player but I understand they have a "custodian" team addressing backlog issues and that seems like a godsend, esp. considering all the outstanding known focus tree bugs and such...

 

[goodcigar]

There's so many areas for improvement in the naval gameplay. It was a good first pass but then they never touched it again. It's why HOI4 needs a Custodian Team like Stellaris.

 

[Jedras]

Mixing my 20kt bbs with my 30kt bbs and cvs is the last thing i want to do, also it eliminates the flexibility of spreading my forces to other areas.
I had just a blast designing a task force around fast bbs north carolina and washington, for them just to circle jerk in guam watching scouts and two tfs getting some whoopass.
My tfs were designed like this:
Scouts: 2x CA 2x CL (high SD) 20 x DD
Carriers: 2x CV 10x DD
Battleships: 2xBB 2x CL 8x DD
Subs x 20
My main battleforce of spruance had three of those CV TF'S and two BB TF'S

Well, that's probably the reason you lose
Using battleships and carriers separately is actually a decent idea, as carriers are significantly faster. Your problem is making scout taskforces too large and battle taskforces too small
You want your carrier taskforce to have proper screening, something like 2CV, 2CA, 4CL, 12DD (although it's better to double up). Meanwhile, your scout taskforce should only have DDs and CLs, as they are faster, have better spotting and are cheaper. They don't need heavier ships because they only have to last for the short time it takes the battlefleet to arrive. I use 6-8DDs and 1-2CLs per scout taskforce and it works wonders

 

[twillie96]

Oh and the threat calculation is ummm.... not precise. So it will ofter send out your big surface fleet against a big force of ... submarines

It considers submarines as a large threat and will send out a taskforce with depth charges to attack it. Your big batllefleet tends to have destroyers. Even if you don't outfit those with depth charges, they still have a default 1 depth charge attack.

Yesterday I used a strike force consisting of light cruisers without depth charges and those refused to engage spotted submarine fleets.

 

[Morbus Bubbonicus]

Do what everyone does - ignore naval warfare build up naval bombers, little-by-little thin the swarm of ships like US fleet or roylal navy or japanese armada. Then build something like a decent strike force to get naval supremacy to execute a naval landing. Never bother with naval building other than sub spam.

 

[Dimmie_Dumm]

Do what everyone does - ignore naval warfare build up naval bombers, little-by-little thin the swarm of ships like US fleet or roylal navy or japanese armada. Then build something like a decent strike force to get naval supremacy to execute a naval landing. Never bother with naval building other than sub spam.

Yeah. I wish land warfare could work with the same treatment - I, for one, could care less about micromanaging those bands with helmets and horseys, but I'm forced to babysit all that because there for some reason is no cheap I-win solution for land war to i.e. render tanks impotent - like, say, anti-tank mines. Pure hypocrisy.

Vicky 3 might become the game for this very reason - it gonna use the unified approach for all types of warfare.

 

[Alexander 'The Grape']

Do what everyone does - ignore naval warfare build up naval bombers, little-by-little thin the swarm of ships like US fleet or roylal navy or japanese armada. Then build something like a decent strike force to get naval supremacy to execute a naval landing. Never bother with naval building other than sub spam.

That only works in single player because the naval ai is terrible. In multiplayer a decent fleet is vital for many nations if you ever want to successfully naval invade against an aware opponent

 

[Dimmie_Dumm]

That only works in single player because the naval ai is terrible. In multiplayer a decent fleet is vital for many nations if you ever want to successfully naval invade against an aware opponent

The problem with this type of thinking is that it never comes along with saying that [in whateverplayer] a decent airforce force is vital for many nations if they ever want to successfully paradrop against an aware opponent. And then limiting their point to just that.

 

[Qwerlancer]

Naval Battle in paradox games means doomstacking with a composite of fodders and glass cannons. In hoi4 it is more ridiculous that capital ships are completely useless. Roach DDs + any variant of CAs can beat all navies in their universe.

 

[Znail]

What OP describes is a function of the utter failure of the "positioning" stat. It's meant to encourage small taskforces and limited engagements but it just isn't fit for purpose. It can't even be modded out; even mods that make positioning extremely impactful still reward "deathstacking". Just with fewer, more powerful ships.

Carrier overstacking works (kinda) but because it's only for the one ship type, it just makes carriers worse.

Really, navy needs 3 things

1) Positioning overhauled or replaced with some kind of combat width system similar to land combat, or carrier-style overstacking
2) Overall balancing (Air vs navy and the value of heavy ships being prime targets)
3) A UI rework so it's not infuriating for new players to use!

It would also be nice if Strike Force ships would automatically intercept naval invasions, rather than sitting there uselessly because the enemy got naval supremacy for 2 minutes and you haven't had time to set them to convoy raid; that would actually make navy more relevant to the overall game. And where is the ability to blockade ports!


Nail on the head!

1) The only problem with Positioning is the massive penalty for reinforcing. That alone is what mandates deathstacks. It's also totally illogical as there is no reason being reinforced should be so disruptive for days or even weeks. It's a bit ironic that a mechanic that is supposed to help smaller formations does the opposite.

 

[Putuna]

That only works in single player because the naval ai is terrible. In multiplayer a decent fleet is vital for many nations if you ever want to successfully naval invade against an aware opponent

I mean is it though? I have played quite a bit of MP and the only time naval is even slightly important is mods that nerf that shit out of naval bombers. If you play vanilla spamming naval bombers and subs is perfectly effective.

The allies allies have to know a little bit about navy but 90% of that knowledge is fight under green air.

 

[Eddie121]

I agree it's exciting to crush an enemy's fleet, and naval warfare is mostly fine for the purposes of the game (bar outstanding bugs and it being so easy to use bathtub subs to get naval superiority to launch an invasion), BUT I still wish it could be more developed as a system. Rn the way the underlying systems work is somewhat simplistic and results in this weird universe where Japanese kantai kessen doctrine is 100% correct bc against a competent opponent you will have one massive battle that irrevocably destroys the loser's fleet and grants the victor complete naval dominance in most cases. I wish they limited battles so you couldn't have these ridiculous clashes with 400+ ships engaging simultaneously and to encourage more in terms of stationing fleets in many places simultaneously like real navies did rather than having one massive roving doomstack with a few scout ships. This would also help avoid the outcome of having your entire game's purpose and years of build up be erased in a few minutes after hours of preparation. Midway might have been devastating, but the US didn't literally sink every capital ship the Japanese had.

WW2 lacked a single, decisive battle not because it was impossible due to technology and logistics, but because neither side was ready to risk all their assets in a single battle. THey prefered to 'hedge' risk by splitting up their task forces.

 

[Eddie121]

What I don't like with current naval gameplay:

• Heavy ships are fun but not fun to use.
• Refitting is alright idea but slow and eats experience.
• Cheap ship designs are more worth it than expensive ones. For example single part dds used as damage tankers.
• Way too large task forces.
• Swarming naval bombers.
• Training is better experience source than actual battles.
• Later sub techs are too good.

And I agree with admiral traits not really working well.

Also:

• Variant management is computationally inefficient; if you have lots of variants it takes several seconds just to implement one module change.
• Need to double Dockyard output to match historical production levels

 

[LordWahu]

WW2 lacked a single, decisive battle not because it was impossible due to technology and logistics, but because neither side was ready to risk all their assets in a single battle. THey prefered to 'hedge' risk by splitting up their task forces.

In the Pacific theatre, you had several of these, most famously Midway (well...arguably Pearl Harbor is more famous, but that was less of a battle)

Everything that could be thrown at it was thrown at it, and one side was rather soundly and destructively beaten

Yet the naval war continued after that. New forces entered the field, other fleets were reorganized, and doctrines changed to adjust to the losses

Despite the massive amount of manpower and material poured into it, it wasn't one-and-done

Even after Leyte Gulf, when the Japanese navy had effectively ceased to be and they didn't have the oil to keep their ships going, they were still trying to have a naval presence

The way the mechanics sit right now, you get one major battle, one side is crippled, and then they're pretty much out of the game, either stuck for repairs or just dead

At which point, you're own fleet is pretty much out of the game, as their only purpose is to destroy the other fleet

 

[Morbus Bubbonicus]

Most of the problem comes from need to manually create each and every variant from scratch.
Let's face it - people play by metas. And create same variants in every game. Should we have "Save as..." and "Load..." optionf of variants - most complains will be gone because it will erase most annoying part of wasting time with creating ships from scratch.

 

[Alexander 'The Grape']

I mean is it though? I have played quite a bit of MP and the only time naval is even slightly important is mods that nerf that shit out of naval bombers. If you play vanilla spamming naval bombers and subs is perfectly effective.

The allies allies have to know a little bit about navy but 90% of that knowledge is fight under green air.

Nav bombers don't stop naval invasions. Subs do work but escorts completely nullify them. And fighting under green air is not a guarantee of success, though ofc it does help. Navbombing in general is overpowered for sure, but an aware enemy will only be around to bomb for tactical reasons that are usually worthwhile for the naval power (ensuring an invasion succeeds, raiding a vital port, killing your fleet).

Otherwise they just sit on strike force and deny you naval supremacy for the whole game while being out of reach of your bombers...

 

[dratheos]

Otherwise they just sit on strike force and deny you naval supremacy for the whole game while being out of reach of your bombers...

At minimum I'd like a "force battle" button that either forces every task force assigned to that seazone to come to come out and fight or clears their mission and gives me 100% naval superiority. That was basically the japanese plan at midway, we should be able to do it too.

 

[twillie96]

At minimum I'd like a "force battle" button that either forces every task force assigned to that seazone to come to come out and fight or clears their mission and gives me 100% naval superiority. That was basically the japanese plan at midway, we should be able to do it too.

The Japanese forced a battle by naval invading Midway Island. The Americans decided to engage, because they rightfully saw an opportunity to damage the Japanese navy. If you don't want to engage, you don't have to. I don't think this needs to be an option.

 

[LordWahu]

The Japanese forced a battle by naval invading Midway Island. The Americans decided to engage, because they rightfully saw an opportunity to damage the Japanese navy. If you don't want to engage, you don't have to. I don't think this needs to be an option.

It wasn't so much an invasion as it was a bombing raid to cripple the facilities

But this is honestly part of the problem: There is no reason to do the attack at Midway because carrier bombers can't damage airfields and such

Aside from invasion support and fighting other fleets, ships are useless. And they very much had a lot more use than that IRL

My optimal solution, both to get fleets out of port and to make ships have more use, would be to give them more missions

Give them the ability to shore bombard. Let them blockade beyond just lucky raiding. Give them more to do. If they have more to do, not only will they spend more time out of port (allowing for actual engagements) but it makes naval efforts a better investment