You noobs are always complaining about the sea attrition rate. Walking on water is supposed to be a CHALLENGE. You need to be Jesus or a high-level basilisk lizard to do it. Git gud or git rekt.
- 4
Paradox: Why don't let army sail in the sea without ship?
- Thread starter qijiang_ok
- Start date
-
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.
Not being able to split up wouldn't be that big a deal? And having to click an extra button IS that big a deal? You have some messed up priorities.
While raiding you don't send your entire fleet back with the loot. You send a few ships back with the loot, while the rest stays and keeps looting.
Are you trying to make the Germanics even more annoying? Wait, I'd better stop giving the dev team ideas.
This is why centralised nations like Byzantium (Which had a standing fleet based at Constantinople) need vassal mercenary units equipped solely with ships.
Yeah, ships are pretty useless and tedious and could probably be replaced with a concept of transport capacity or naval tradition or whatnot. As is they do not contribute to the gameplay.
Edit: Then again, it's quite satisfying returning boats full of loot from raids. =)
Edit: Then again, it's quite satisfying returning boats full of loot from raids. =)
But in game, that only makes it take longer to get your troops on the boats, because you need to gather everyone at Constantinople)
As it is, you click on your vassal province at the coast, click on raise troops and ships, select the units, hit G, and they are in the boats.
Automated boats are cheesy. Civ5 is cheesy (long live Civ4). It would be very disappointing if such a silly automation was thrown into the game. Merchant Republics would be slightly less useful. The Norse flavor event for 790's would be pointless. Building up your own castle/cities' naval forces would be pointless. An entire tech bar section would be pointless. Removing one thing, that causes other things generally agreed to be good to be not needed for the game play, would be a bad design decision.
OP: Playing the Byzantine's and getting naval ships loaded is hardly taxing to the player. Get all your Despots' navies raised first, then raise their armies in the selected coastal province where the ships are located, board, and go east or west depending on war location. Simple. I've rarely seen vassals unable to raise enough ships to move their own levies. The few that do suffer that problem are early tech vassals and those not given enough coastline to work with. For either situation, that's why you turn to your MR's to fill the gap. Or your own ships.
If you're not using Despots, you're not playing the Byzantines with an eye for smooth Empire management. Factions should be higher on your list of tedious issues to deal with in that case.
OP: Playing the Byzantine's and getting naval ships loaded is hardly taxing to the player. Get all your Despots' navies raised first, then raise their armies in the selected coastal province where the ships are located, board, and go east or west depending on war location. Simple. I've rarely seen vassals unable to raise enough ships to move their own levies. The few that do suffer that problem are early tech vassals and those not given enough coastline to work with. For either situation, that's why you turn to your MR's to fill the gap. Or your own ships.
If you're not using Despots, you're not playing the Byzantines with an eye for smooth Empire management. Factions should be higher on your list of tedious issues to deal with in that case.
While doing away with ships is probably never going to happen, at the very least give us a button to raise levies and board ships
- 1
Getting rid of normal ships does not mean getting rid of modeling the concept of ships. As has been mentioned, a HoI convoy-style system could work, where you just need to have the ships available, but don't need to micromanage their movement. That is, if you have 100 ships, you can put no more than 10000 men on the water, at the same cost-per-day as before... except for not having to pay for ships that are just waiting, which could be made up for by perhaps increasing the base cost-per-day while troops are embarked.
It might not be better, but it might not be worse. I side with keeping the current system only because I think we'll see naval combat some day.
It might not be better, but it might not be worse. I side with keeping the current system only because I think we'll see naval combat some day.
It's not like people cannot learn. Even landlocked places have rivers and river boats. Not to mention when said tribes migrate to seaside they could learn from the people living there.
OK, let's start with TW:Attila's setting. Vandals started the game in a landlocked position, yet they launched raids into Rome from North Africa during endgame time. Is it really hard to imagine people can learn?
You lot do know that this mechanic with automatic ships was in CKI and that it was removed?
- 1
Yeah, AFTER they had settled in North Africa and spent time learning how to use ships. They didn't march to a coastline from their land-locked homeland and immediately, instantly and at no cost begin to sail the Mediterranean like pros.
That's why you add the 4,000 strong tagmata. You have 8,000 men in CM, 16,000 in TOG, and 22,000 in 1066.
I will repeat the best comment so far: "We could just add naval battles to the game?"
At least we could make ships worth more strategically if adding sea-battles is to hard to do:
1. Making it so that you need naval superiority in the sea region if you want to land your army (or retreat to the ships again). This would force players to think about their naval strategy more (and not just try raising as few of those expensive ships as possible). It would also make sense that if the enemy had a large fleet, you cant just quietly unload your men. This would also make it possible to create a "coastal defence" against raiders (by having more ships than them, so expensive).
2. Increase the attrition greatly when fighting more than 1 province from your (and your allies) country borders OR from a sea-region where you have superiority. This would stop the silly armies wading through enemy territory without worrying about attrition, and at the same time make situations like the crusades possible where a crusader navy can supply the crusaders only along the coast).
These would create a lot of possibilities to use you navies tactically and strategically, and add interesting flavours to the game.
By the way: it seem the armies can sometimes magically flow over water, for instance Orkney keeps getting attack from Scotland, even though the water there is very dangerous, one of the reasons why Orkney historically was "norse" until after the game ends. Also German crusaders walking across several Danish channels in their holy wars for southern Norway, even though naval superiority was one of the things keeping Denmark safe in most of the games period. Similar armies in the Mediterranean don't need ships to attack certain islands etc.
At least we could make ships worth more strategically if adding sea-battles is to hard to do:
1. Making it so that you need naval superiority in the sea region if you want to land your army (or retreat to the ships again). This would force players to think about their naval strategy more (and not just try raising as few of those expensive ships as possible). It would also make sense that if the enemy had a large fleet, you cant just quietly unload your men. This would also make it possible to create a "coastal defence" against raiders (by having more ships than them, so expensive).
2. Increase the attrition greatly when fighting more than 1 province from your (and your allies) country borders OR from a sea-region where you have superiority. This would stop the silly armies wading through enemy territory without worrying about attrition, and at the same time make situations like the crusades possible where a crusader navy can supply the crusaders only along the coast).
These would create a lot of possibilities to use you navies tactically and strategically, and add interesting flavours to the game.
By the way: it seem the armies can sometimes magically flow over water, for instance Orkney keeps getting attack from Scotland, even though the water there is very dangerous, one of the reasons why Orkney historically was "norse" until after the game ends. Also German crusaders walking across several Danish channels in their holy wars for southern Norway, even though naval superiority was one of the things keeping Denmark safe in most of the games period. Similar armies in the Mediterranean don't need ships to attack certain islands etc.
- 1
I love the idea of using fleets to prevent attrition.
I also like the idea of using fleets to block of areas. As an example, you could look at Total War (I know, completely different mechanics), where you have places where an army can cross the water, but you could place ships there to block it.