• 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.

Usable Username

Corporal
27 Badges
Mar 28, 2021
45
41
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Magicka
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris
I have Posted a Suggestion thread up titled 'Navy - Efficient Balance Changes for a More Dynamic System' based on the learnings from this discussion thread.

Please head over and upvote the thread so we can get a more dynamic hoi4 Navy experience.

----------
An effort to implement as small a change for a large, positive impact on Hoi4 Navy as it stands.

Proposed Changes:

1. Introduce a new column in naval engagements for cruisers in-between destroyers and capitals, similar to what was done to carriers a while back.

2. Allow destroyers to screen for cruisers at a rate of 1-1 or 2-1. and apply a lesser screening bonus to accuracy in the cruiser column of ~10-20% that gives destroyers an opportunity to provide a supporting buff without making them a necessity for every fleet comp. Use cruiser column + destroyer column to provide screening to capitals.

3. Set both gun types to fire on all ranges. Weigh the gun types to each include cruisers as a high priority (column 1 and 2 high priority for lights, 2+ high priority for heavies), (optional extra) weight the gun types to bleed a small portion of shots towards their less then ideal targets, i.e. lights target capitals sometimes, Heavy guns have a small chance to target DD sometimes. Use Cruiser column + Capital Column to screen for Carriers + Transport column.

4. Upgrade light armour ratings to sit above their respectively tiered guns to reduce the effectiveness of light batteries when compared to heavy batteries at killing cruisers. Use devspective to set this number in such a way so that within reason, heavy cruisers become more efficient at killing heavily equipped cruisers, while at the very light and fast end of cruiser design, light guns can remain the most efficient. Tie a one off heavy damage accuracy buff to medium guns to balance. (Similar check to capital or not)

5. Consider proportional adjustments to destroyers and secondary batteries in line with the % armour increase.

6. Enjoy fielding a wider variety of fleet compositions that will each have advantages and disadvantages in different matchups and conditions.

Bonus: Hopefully all of these changes have been done before and dont employ anything particularly complex or new in the back end. Maby Gui exempted?? Sad to be proven wrong, but not surprised if i am.

The discussion continues....

Regards

Usable Username

----------------
Edit: added medium gun accuracy buff for balance as required.

Edit: updated light gun targeting.

Please note i have updated my first from its orgional to summarise the first 3 pages of posts.

Origional First post below.
-------------------

Problem - navy armour is useless for heavy cruisers and not particularly useful elsewhere as the speed increase for not using it is often better then using it. Leading metta of l1 DD and light gun CA essentially capitalises on this and effectively makes any updated heavy gun redundant. bb and shbb especially.

Solution:

Can we please consider giving light cruiser batteries/light batteries in general the ability to engage the second naval row at a scaling rate to screening efficiency maxing out say 20%? Perhaps the inverse rate to heavy guns? This could also provide a buff to BB as they would have a ?realistic? effect of taking some small gun attention for the fleet.

Consider adding a 5-15% damage reduction as soon as the armour beats the piercing, then add scaling as is on top. I.e.

And importantly add a small scaled damage reduction for guns that do pierce the enemies armour. I.e. l2 guns on L1 armour still gives a 10-20% reduction reduced to 0 with l3 guns. with cmdr and doctrine buffs moving this around.

Or/and .consider adding a heavy cruiser armour set.

Essentially an armour buff that is more scaled and not as powerful as the old 90% upfront reduction. Gives value to armour over a wider variety of situations.

Simple changes should reset the arms race and make a larger variety of fleet compesitions available.

Kind Regards

UsableUsername

P.s. can we please consider giving early BB like the Kongo class a historically appropriate set of secondary batteries? 16 152mm guns are currently reflected as 3.0 light attack.... heavy secondary mod?
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:

Usable Username

Corporal
27 Badges
Mar 28, 2021
45
41
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Magicka
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris
You commented on basically none of that.
On detail. I have posted my recommended changes at the start of this thread. and that includes strong feelings to have everything hit everything, and reduce targeting where you want by using ammo weightings and screening steps.
Proposed Changes:

1. Introduce a new column in naval engagements for cruisers in-between destroyers and capitals, similar to what was done to carriers a while back.

2. Allow destroyers to screen for cruisers at a rate of 1-1 or 2-1. and apply a lesser screening bonus to accuracy in the cruiser column of ~10-20% that gives destroyers an opportunity to provide a supporting buff without making them a necessity for every fleet comp. Use cruiser column + destroyer column to provide screening to capitals.

3. Set both gun types to fire on all ranges. Weigh the gun types to each include cruisers as a high priority (column 1 and 2 high priority for lights, 2+ high priority for heavies), (optional extra) weight the gun types to bleed a small portion of shots towards their less then ideal targets, i.e. lights target capitals sometimes, Heavy guns have a small chance to target DD sometimes. Use Cruiser column + Capital Column to screen for Carriers + Transport column.

4. Upgrade light armour ratings to sit above their respectively tiered guns to reduce the effectiveness of light batteries when compared to heavy batteries at killing cruisers. Use devspective to set this number in such a way so that within reason, heavy cruisers become more efficient at killing heavily equipped cruisers, while at the very light and fast end of cruiser design, light guns can remain the most efficient. Tie a one off heavy damage accuracy buff to medium guns to balance. (Similar check to capital or not)

5. Consider proportional adjustments to destroyers and secondary batteries in line with the % armour increase.
...i would leave the exact proportions of how to achieve that progression up to the developers.


I have also gone back and added another post covering some of the pieces i missed, if you have any particular items you want to point out id be happy to provide my position. ive tried to cover it all.

Either way, personally at least, i feel like i have a well fleshed out view of how i think we could achieve the sort of dynamic i was talking about in that post.

on that note, do you agree/disagree with what i was talking about? i note you commented on the role of lighter ships, but would like to hear your thoughts on the whole. Im pretty sure this is the sort of thing the developers have been trying to achieve with the system as is anyway, i dont think it is going to be particularly controversial outside of this thread.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:

Usable Username

Corporal
27 Badges
Mar 28, 2021
45
41
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Magicka
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris
Again, to make CBs work with identical targeting to BBs, they'd basically need to be suited to joining the patrol fleet and hope to win before a battleship strike fleet could join the battle.
Down the line, this sounds like the sort of thing you could unlock with a focus, only available to the countries who had them. Similar to the torpedo cruisers Japan gets.
 

balmung60

Field Marshal
101 Badges
Jan 20, 2013
6.515
2.763
  • Cities: Skylines Deluxe Edition
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Impire
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Knights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Field Marshal
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Galaxy Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Humble Paradox Bundle
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • 500k Club
  • Warlock 2: The Exiled
  • Victoria 2
  • Teleglitch: Die More Edition
Down the line, this sounds like the sort of thing you could unlock with a focus, only available to the countries who had them. Similar to the torpedo cruisers Japan gets.
But then how strict do you get with who had them? Only the USA because nobody else actually built one? Do you also include the USSR, Japan, and Netherlands because they at least considered building such ships? And do you include France because the Dunkerque class had similar characteristics to these other ships, or exclude them because France always considered the Dunkerque class to be battleships and the British called them battlecruisers? And if you give that many countries access to CBs by focus, should it really still be by focus or just by tech? After all, by that point, you've got about as many countries as actually built strategic bombers and those aren't locked behind a focus.
 
  • 1
Reactions:

Usable Username

Corporal
27 Badges
Mar 28, 2021
45
41
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Magicka
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris
But then how strict do you get with who had them? Only the USA because nobody else actually built one? Do you also include the USSR, Japan, and Netherlands because they at least considered building such ships? And do you include France because the Dunkerque class had similar characteristics to these other ships, or exclude them because France always considered the Dunkerque class to be battleships and the British called them battlecruisers? And if you give that many countries access to CBs by focus, should it really still be by focus or just by tech? After all, by that point, you've got about as many countries as actually built strategic bombers and those aren't locked behind a focus.
I'd probly just expect the USA to wind up with then, maby a minor who was heading in that direction if the devs feel like that country needs more flavour. But it's still going to be a pretty niche thing so no need to widely distribute. Strat bombers I'd say are more available to all for gameplay purposes, they work on a pretty integral mechanic.

Not that I'm in the head of the game designers, just spittballing.
 

Usable Username

Corporal
27 Badges
Mar 28, 2021
45
41
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Magicka
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris
on that note, do you agree/disagree with what i was talking about? i note you commented on the role of lighter ships, but would like to hear your thoughts on the whole. Im pretty sure this is the sort of thing the developers have been trying to achieve with the system as is anyway, i dont think it is going to be particularly controversial outside of this thread.
@Corpse Fool
@Paul.Ketcham

You two have been big contributors since early on, if I can get both of you on board with what I'm suggesting. I'll write it up and drop a summery on the suggestions page where we can Try and make a positive change with this thing.

Noting corpse probably hasn't seen a few of the recent posts yet.

Take your time. Be specific with items you don't like. Theory craft and try and break it somehow, then we can get this thing done.

Edit: anyone else watching who can see a problem, nows your chance.
 

Usable Username

Corporal
27 Badges
Mar 28, 2021
45
41
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: No Step Back
  • Hearts of Iron IV: By Blood Alone
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Stellaris: Federations
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • BATTLETECH: Heavy Metal
  • BATTLETECH: Season pass
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • BATTLETECH: Flashpoint
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Magicka
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • BATTLETECH
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Stellaris
I think we may have a problem with medium gun piercing. At tec lvl 2 against 1936 BB armor, DD scale against armour to apply 17% light cruiser around 34% and mediums 96.5%!.

96.5% will be way be gamebreakingly high as we have effectively made medium guns for cost efficient by cutting down their screen requirements. Thankfully medium gun piercing can be changed in isolation, or we consider a general armour buff for capitals same as we have discussed with cruisers, where the standard is to only apply ~80% agains like technology. But there will be a fair bit of balancing involved in that, torpedoes included.

Not ready to take a position on that one yet.

Got it wrong again, i accidently took the L2 BC armour of 26 for comparison.

New calcs against the actual level 2 BB armour of 31 are:

DD scale against armour to apply 16% light cruiser around 30% and mediums 82.5%.

this is probably still to high for medium guns.

Conditional on the fact that any light armour increase leaves enough space between Large armour sets i would advocate a direct decrease on medium gun piercing to about 60% of comparable damage to BB stock. Should be roughly proportionate for for the cost efficiencies of CA to BB.

main reason is that large guns piercing BB aren't an issue at the moment, so while i would be all for a full rework at the BB end of things. I don't believe it should be tackled as part of the first priority.

Balancing factors to that would be that BB are still set to receive a higher accuracy buff and because we are working with larger numbers, any bonuses that get applied to armour will likely run away from the piercing at a much quicker rate and reduce those percentages faster then at the cruiser level.