I browsed the forum a little bit, but I didn't find any thread or development diary regarding the naval warfare in DH. Since this topic is often criticized in other paradox titles I started this thread for discussions and suggestions regarding naval warfare.
I must admit I don't have much insight in this topic, so this is mostly superficial knowledge from different sources.
During all WW:
-The area of naval warfare during the time frame of DH saw many interesting revolutions technology wise. In my opinion the most important element is reconnaissance.
For most of the time frame the visual detection (From land/another ship and later plane) was the key element of reconnaissance. Second source was pinpointing a ship via the wireless signals. Only much later during ww2 radar recon was available. In game that translates to several gameplay elements. That means that without these techs even a Dreadnought or Battleship had a very low chance of detection.
-Intelligence was a primary source of information. There should be a mission in game to represent this fact. Especially decoding/deciphering of enemy radio traffic played a huge role. A successful mission should increase the detection value of all enemy ships by a small amount. Btw. the mathematical knowledge for decoding/deciphering (read technologies) should only increase the efficiency of spy missions, not directly increase the detection value itself.
-The resource consumption of ships (especially big ships) was enormous. E.g. Germany planed for 1944 in Plan Z 10 BB, 4 CV, 3 BC, 8 HC, 44 LC, 68 DD and 249 Subs. This constellation would need an estimated 6 million tons of fuel in one year to operate. During the whole year 1938 Germany needed 6,15 million tons of fuel, whereby only 2,18 where home produced. This meant that even without the two other military branches (air, land) this plan was next to impossible without additional fuel from somewhere. This doesn't even include the material necessary to build these ships. I think the ingame resource consumption of ships should be revised. This would also prevent fleets with a ridiculous big number of capital ships and at the same time increase the efficiency of smaller ships.
-In most games it seems to me that the deployment of smaller raiding task forces is senseless, since they will be wiped out by large formations with slow ships very fast. Ships should only be forced to battle if they are pursued formations with faster ships only, or have direct orders to search for conflict.
- Naval battles should be short. While it is true that some major battles took more than one day most of the battles where skirmishes between smaller forces. In the bigger battles however:
- Big naval battles were low-loss. This seems to be counter intuitive. But e.g. around 250 ships fought in the battle of Jutland and only 25 were sunk. In the Battle of the Philippine Sea (the largest aircraft carrier battle in history) out of 183 ships only 3 were sunk and 6 heavy damaged. With short battles it's the other way around. In the Battle of the Falkland Islands out of 13 military ships 4 were sunk.
WW1:
-Radio communication range was limited. Germany was the first country with global communication range. The reason for this was simple. They couldn't rely on the cable network, since huge parts belonged to the British empire. A colony or ship without a wireless receiver didn't get any information in case of war, which made coordinated maneuvers impossible and sometimes lead to situations were an island supported an enemy with coal/fuel because they didn't know they were at war with this country. On the other hand these global broadcast stations were to big and power hungry, even for the biggest ships. In game this is difficult to model. A ship outside a communication range must essentially be removed from players control/view.
-Since there weren't any other methods of detection a ship(especially raider) that stayed away from coastal regions and hand held radio silence was next to impossible to find. This is the reason why battles before the invention of the radar took place in coastal waters or well scouted (via planes) areas with very few exceptions. Since the map already includes the coastal areas I hope that these provide a huge bonus for detection in regions bordering allied territory, a smaller for neutral and none for enemy bordering coastal zones.
-Coaling stations were strategic points. After the occupation of most of the German colonial empire the raiders had to fall back to piracy, by capture enemy convoys. This means that in game each ship has only limited supply, that can be replenish by convoy raiding or staying in base for a few days.
WW2:
- Small carriers were mainly converted cruisers. This makes a conversion button necessary to upgrade cruisers to small carriers.
- Battles between carrier task forces were mainly between the aircrafts and carriers not the support ships. E.g in the Battle of the Philippine Sea the only ships (out of 183) sunk were 3 carriers. Other losses were aircrafts only.
- Carriers are useless in coastal zones, as well as sea zones were one side can field many land based air planes. This especial includes the Baltic sea, the English channel parts of the Mediterranean and the north sea. Even a normal bomber/CAS group, combined with fighters for air superiority is lethal for any ship including carriers. The shorter the response time (costal regions) the more likely the ship will never leave this area. The interdiction mission for air groups should include naval bombardment, if they have the capability and air superiority is assured. This should work like the naval interdiction mission that also attacks convoys, if the situation presents itself. Or the interdiction mission should work as reconnaissance mission for fleets with naval bombardment mission. This makes these zones a no go area for fleet operation and
...Maybe more to follow
I must admit I don't have much insight in this topic, so this is mostly superficial knowledge from different sources.
During all WW:
-The area of naval warfare during the time frame of DH saw many interesting revolutions technology wise. In my opinion the most important element is reconnaissance.
For most of the time frame the visual detection (From land/another ship and later plane) was the key element of reconnaissance. Second source was pinpointing a ship via the wireless signals. Only much later during ww2 radar recon was available. In game that translates to several gameplay elements. That means that without these techs even a Dreadnought or Battleship had a very low chance of detection.
-Intelligence was a primary source of information. There should be a mission in game to represent this fact. Especially decoding/deciphering of enemy radio traffic played a huge role. A successful mission should increase the detection value of all enemy ships by a small amount. Btw. the mathematical knowledge for decoding/deciphering (read technologies) should only increase the efficiency of spy missions, not directly increase the detection value itself.
-The resource consumption of ships (especially big ships) was enormous. E.g. Germany planed for 1944 in Plan Z 10 BB, 4 CV, 3 BC, 8 HC, 44 LC, 68 DD and 249 Subs. This constellation would need an estimated 6 million tons of fuel in one year to operate. During the whole year 1938 Germany needed 6,15 million tons of fuel, whereby only 2,18 where home produced. This meant that even without the two other military branches (air, land) this plan was next to impossible without additional fuel from somewhere. This doesn't even include the material necessary to build these ships. I think the ingame resource consumption of ships should be revised. This would also prevent fleets with a ridiculous big number of capital ships and at the same time increase the efficiency of smaller ships.
-In most games it seems to me that the deployment of smaller raiding task forces is senseless, since they will be wiped out by large formations with slow ships very fast. Ships should only be forced to battle if they are pursued formations with faster ships only, or have direct orders to search for conflict.
- Naval battles should be short. While it is true that some major battles took more than one day most of the battles where skirmishes between smaller forces. In the bigger battles however:
- Big naval battles were low-loss. This seems to be counter intuitive. But e.g. around 250 ships fought in the battle of Jutland and only 25 were sunk. In the Battle of the Philippine Sea (the largest aircraft carrier battle in history) out of 183 ships only 3 were sunk and 6 heavy damaged. With short battles it's the other way around. In the Battle of the Falkland Islands out of 13 military ships 4 were sunk.
WW1:
-Radio communication range was limited. Germany was the first country with global communication range. The reason for this was simple. They couldn't rely on the cable network, since huge parts belonged to the British empire. A colony or ship without a wireless receiver didn't get any information in case of war, which made coordinated maneuvers impossible and sometimes lead to situations were an island supported an enemy with coal/fuel because they didn't know they were at war with this country. On the other hand these global broadcast stations were to big and power hungry, even for the biggest ships. In game this is difficult to model. A ship outside a communication range must essentially be removed from players control/view.
-Since there weren't any other methods of detection a ship(especially raider) that stayed away from coastal regions and hand held radio silence was next to impossible to find. This is the reason why battles before the invention of the radar took place in coastal waters or well scouted (via planes) areas with very few exceptions. Since the map already includes the coastal areas I hope that these provide a huge bonus for detection in regions bordering allied territory, a smaller for neutral and none for enemy bordering coastal zones.
-Coaling stations were strategic points. After the occupation of most of the German colonial empire the raiders had to fall back to piracy, by capture enemy convoys. This means that in game each ship has only limited supply, that can be replenish by convoy raiding or staying in base for a few days.
WW2:
- Small carriers were mainly converted cruisers. This makes a conversion button necessary to upgrade cruisers to small carriers.
- Battles between carrier task forces were mainly between the aircrafts and carriers not the support ships. E.g in the Battle of the Philippine Sea the only ships (out of 183) sunk were 3 carriers. Other losses were aircrafts only.
- Carriers are useless in coastal zones, as well as sea zones were one side can field many land based air planes. This especial includes the Baltic sea, the English channel parts of the Mediterranean and the north sea. Even a normal bomber/CAS group, combined with fighters for air superiority is lethal for any ship including carriers. The shorter the response time (costal regions) the more likely the ship will never leave this area. The interdiction mission for air groups should include naval bombardment, if they have the capability and air superiority is assured. This should work like the naval interdiction mission that also attacks convoys, if the situation presents itself. Or the interdiction mission should work as reconnaissance mission for fleets with naval bombardment mission. This makes these zones a no go area for fleet operation and
...Maybe more to follow
Last edited:
