Petition against Trirems , trirems everywhere !

[RagingJaws]

As for why it was not focused on more for I:R 1.0, the answer is simple: they chose to focus on something else. If better Naval System got it, something else would have to be removed to compensate.

Then maybe dev teams need to be bigger.

Frankly, it doesn't seem that difficult to me to have a fleshed out naval system. I'm just rapid fire spitballing here at 5 am because insomnia:

• Military vessels should be divided into two classes: Heavy Warships and Light Warships.
  
• Heavy Warships would not all be equal. The player should be able to mix and match the heaviest warships, like the deceres, with lighter heavy ships, like the quadrireme. While the heaviest warship may boost a large contingent of marines, it would be expensive to have a fleet of all deceres, for example.
  
• Light Warships, on the other hand, would be best served as anti-piracy vessels (or for state funded commerce raiding), scouts, and troop transportation. Lembus would be fantastic for both raiding and troop transport, both on the sea or against unprotected settlements, as would the trihemiolia which could even stand it for poorer nations as a front line warship.

I might edit my answer and go more in depth after some sleep.

 

[Shireknight]

Both Stellaris and HOI4 have lots of paid DLC but they enhance or expand idea's in the games or incorporate new idea's that the game designers thought of either late in development or even after the launch of the game, but regardless they were still released as complete games.

With all nations having just one model of ship I must admit it does sound like the naval aspect of Imperator is being deliberately left incomplete so that it can be fleshed out with paid DLC at some point in the future, which I thought was not a Paradox thing.

 

[Prometheus_1]

Then maybe dev teams need to be bigger.

Frankly, it doesn't seem that difficult to me to have a fleshed out naval system. I'm just rapid fire spitballing here at 5 am because insomnia:

• Military vessels should be divided into two classes: Heavy Warships and Light Warships.
  
• Heavy Warships would not all be equal. The player should be able to mix and match the heaviest warships, like the deceres, with lighter heavy ships, like the quadrireme. While the heaviest warship may boost a large contingent of marines, it would be expensive to have a fleet of all deceres, for example.
  
• Light Warships, on the other hand, would be best served as anti-piracy vessels (or for state funded commerce raiding), scouts, and troop transportation. Lembus would be fantastic for both raiding and troop transport, both on the sea or against unprotected settlements, as would the trihemiolia which could even stand it for poorer nations as a front line warship.

I might edit my answer and go more in depth after some sleep.

I would add the category of onerary ships wich where needed for transport and would be good for supply lines.
Then oceanic ships for seafaring in northern and western seas and then, fluvial ships like the ones used for large rivers and finally asian ship categories that I do not know but I doubt in India they had triremes...

So:

Triremes light
Poliremes heavy
Decemremes exceptional supersized ships
Onerary transport
Fluvial river transport
Ocean for oceanic coastline sailing
Asian.....?

 

[Manic Eskimo]

Not signed

I'm fine with what they have for the naval mechanics. The reason being, they haven't found a way to make naval combat interesting or necessary. At least in games I've played. I've not played HoI 4. So rather than doing half the job and trying to make a more complex system that doesn't really work and that not many players will engage with, like in EU4, they've made a bare bones feature that does what is needed.

For me naval mechanics in EU4 require far too much micro management of the player. One thing they could do is build a complex AI that you could hand over control to. But that's a lot of resources for a small part of the game. It's also something that would be a first in all paradox games. I remember the same arguments when CK was in development (IIRC I was on the opposite side) and they announced that there would be zero naval combat. Compared to that, what we are getting in I:Rome is a big step up. Do people still complain about a lack of navy mechanics in CK?

 

[hkrommel]

Agree with OP. There are ways to make naval combat varied and interesting with multiple ships. For example, warships could be divided into:

Artillery Ships: These are your catapult and ballista-bearing ships, really expensive, but good at blockades and reducing enemy ships from a distance. They should also be fairly tough, but easy to capture if you can board them.
Heavy Ships: These would come in ranged (archers/peltasts) and melee (marines) variants. These would be your capital ships, tough to destroy and tough to board, but slow and vulnerable to artillery because of their size.
Light Ships: These are the same as above, but screens. The melee versions would be more aggressive in trying to seek out and ram/board enemy ships with a chance of capture, and the ranged ships would focus on screening. These ships would also serve as anti-piracy vessels for their speed.

You could even remove artillery ships if you want, but given their usage during the period they seem important, plus it would make sense to include types that are good at port raiding/blockading.

 

[Thure]

We did not see an expansion after Vae Victis despite so much potential, and I think the patches stopped a short while afterwards. It got abandoned in the same vein as Sengoku.

Sengoku did get not even one expansion.

 

[Pilbur]

Signed. Such a basic naval system is really underwhelming...a small effort to introduce different types of ships and a simple rock-paper-scissor mechanism would be more than welcome.

 

[Cephei80]

But why should big ships be a win button against a nation that have invested more into navy than you and what is actually stoping them from also simply go big ships? As far as I can see, the arguments given here don't actually say anything interesting about adding more ships.

you will build a deck . if we have 4 types for exemple you will see what the enemy formation is composed of and you will try to build something to counter it .
again with byzantiu greece in eu4 you need only 60 heavy ships to beat the ottoman 200 galleys .
with netherland you need to balance your heavy fleet in a way better than england to beat them .
but if ALL ships are SAME class then strategy here does not exist , the one with higher number will always win , carthage have crazy bonuses too , how rome can beat a nation that have like 50 ports and lot of wood and a crazy naval doctrine and commerce bonuses ? same for seleucides or macedonia , how can they beat egypte like how macedonians or phrygians did in real life near salamis or rhodos ?

do you really want to face egypte on sea with an inferior navy and equal ships in power and an inferior naval doctrine ?

 

[Cephei80]

"Thirdly EU4 could support 4 ship types because they have distinct purposes. Big ships and galleys specialize in combat but in different seas which wont work in Imperator: Rome because of the lack of high seas. Light ships that protect trade wont work in Imperator because trade works differently and transport is not needed because warships also act as transports in Imperator: Rome"

wrong since all mediteranean states like to build heavy and medium aswel + light ships , ottomans like to have at high size fleet some 100 medium ship 200 galleys and some 20 heavy line ships . uk and netherland like to build some 40 heavy ships and the rest are medium ships like + 100 .
a unified italy like to build that 1/5 heavy , 2/5 medium , 2/5 light formations .

this make your theory of light galleys= heavy carracks wrong , a carrack can beat many light galleys alone and this is why mediteraneans use 3 types of ships . this theory would be true if both were balanced and each uk and ottomans use their respective ships but this does not happen .

 

[Cephei80]

Then maybe dev teams need to be bigger.

Frankly, it doesn't seem that difficult to me to have a fleshed out naval system. I'm just rapid fire spitballing here at 5 am because insomnia:

• Military vessels should be divided into two classes: Heavy Warships and Light Warships.
  
• Heavy Warships would not all be equal. The player should be able to mix and match the heaviest warships, like the deceres, with lighter heavy ships, like the quadrireme. While the heaviest warship may boost a large contingent of marines, it would be expensive to have a fleet of all deceres, for example.
  
• Light Warships, on the other hand, would be best served as anti-piracy vessels (or for state funded commerce raiding), scouts, and troop transportation. Lembus would be fantastic for both raiding and troop transport, both on the sea or against unprotected settlements, as would the trihemiolia which could even stand it for poorer nations as a front line warship.

I might edit my answer and go more in depth after some sleep.

and this how it was , during punic wars birems and trirems or rhodian 2.5 birems were used either in piracy or interception or as blockade runner , quinquerems and hepters and quadrarems were used on direct naval confrontations and naval blockade . during the siege of lilibayum romans failed so many times to catch the carthaginian rodhian class like birems that used to pierce the blockade daily and bring messages and food to the besieged city , romans had to throw lot of sand near the harbor to make those birems get stuck and captured , they couldnt catch them with their fat slow quinquerems .
raids should be this effective , fast and hard to catch . if raiders use my same kind of ships why i should fear them ? in ck2 they hard frustrating because they attack and retreat so fast and my armies cant catch them in time . but here i can just ambush them with my equal fleet in speed and crush ,
however if there is different types of ships things can be different .

 

[Denkt]

you will build a deck . if we have 4 types for exemple you will see what the enemy formation is composed of and you will try to build something to counter it .
again with byzantiu greece in eu4 you need only 60 heavy ships to beat the ottoman 200 galleys .
with netherland you need to balance your heavy fleet in a way better than england to beat them .

As far as I know there is no formations to naval warfare in the game. Both sides will use all their ships and overall effectivness depend on the positioning value.

but if ALL ships are SAME class then strategy here does not exist , the one with higher number will always win , carthage have crazy bonuses too , how rome can beat a nation that have like 50 ports and lot of wood and a crazy naval doctrine and commerce bonuses ? same for seleucides or macedonia , how can they beat egypte like how macedonians or phrygians did in real life near salamis or rhodos ?

I think you greatly overestimate the naval bonuses nations have. Carthage get some advantages over Rome but it is not massive. Egypt have the same ideas as other greek states so they have no advantage over the other diadochi and they also start with zero ships. I don't know how many ports each nation Control at the start and Phrygia Control the best Wood city in the game if I remember correctly. Nobody as far as I know have any specific Commerce bonuses as the game don't have national ideas like in EUIV.

do you really want to face egypte on sea with an inferior navy and equal ships in power and an inferior naval doctrine ?

This could be said about land warfare as well, the chance to win against a superior military is not that great. If your naval Power is inferior you have to build it up which is easier to do than the army because ships do not need Manpower.

wrong since all mediteranean states like to build heavy and medium aswel + light ships , ottomans like to have at high size fleet some 100 medium ship 200 galleys and some 20 heavy line ships . uk and netherland like to build some 40 heavy ships and the rest are medium ships like + 100 .
a unified italy like to build that 1/5 heavy , 2/5 medium , 2/5 light formations .

this make your theory of light galleys= heavy carracks wrong , a carrack can beat many light galleys alone and this is why mediteraneans use 3 types of ships . this theory would be true if both were balanced and each uk and ottomans use their respective ships but this does not happen .

Which tells absolutly nothing. Light ships in EUIV main role is to protect trade which is something that do not exist in Imperator: Rome. Big ships and galleys are both warships who have advantages over each other depending on what type of sea which don't really work in Imperator: Rome because the map only contains inland waters with very few unimportant exceptions. Likely one of the two is the better choice and you are better of building only one of them and ignore the other.

 

[hkrommel]

This could be said about land warfare as well, the chance to win against a superior military is not that great. If your naval Power is inferior you have to build it up which is easier to do than the army because ships do not need Manpower.

No, it can't because there are more than one type of land unit. There are a lot more variables to the equation, a lot more possible strategies and counters. Naval combat with only triremes is like fighting with only light infantry.

 

[Denkt]

No, it can't because there are more than one type of land unit. There are a lot more variables to the equation, a lot more possible strategies and counters. Naval combat with only triremes is like fighting with only light infantry.

The most important difference between land and naval warfare in the game is that land warfare each unit have a position on the battlefield while in naval warfare each navy fight as a blob.

 

[Prometheus_1]

I would like to push on this because its important... naval warfare was very important in ancient times... we had the largest ships ever built in the world right in classical age... unrivalled till modern times...

Like Tessarakonteres ships the Nemi ships, the Syracusia, etc...

Then Indian navy was different from classical ones...

http://enlight.lib.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-ENG/cha.htm

https://www.ancient.eu/amp/2-1259/

Yet is not true thay Romans weren't good at sea as they won every naval war and had ships that sailed up to Scandia and Canary islands, sailed to India and even commerced up to Indochina China and Japan as proved by recovered coins.

So ... not a precise list but sonething around that would be good.
Triremes light
Poliremes heavy
Decemremes exceptional supersized ships
Onerary transport
Fluvial river transport
Ocean for oceanic coastline sailing
Asian.....

 

[RagingJaws]

As far as I know there is no formations to naval warfare in the game. Both sides will use all their ships and overall effectivness depend on the positioning value.

Formations, not really, but positioning value could have been easily worked into the game as a more interesting mechanic than it currently is. Bigger ships that sport more durability/marine contingent for boarding could, in some situations, not always be the best option due to having subpar ability to position.

This could be said about land warfare as well, the chance to win against a superior military is not that great. If your naval Power is inferior you have to build it up which is easier to do than the army because ships do not need Manpower.

Somewhat silly that manpower doesn't seem to be a factor for navies. I suppose marines are merely spawned out of thin air.

Which tells absolutly nothing. Light ships in EUIV main role is to protect trade which is something that do not exist in Imperator: Rome. Big ships and galleys are both warships who have advantages over each other depending on what type of sea which don't really work in Imperator: Rome because the map only contains inland waters with very few unimportant exceptions. Likely one of the two is the better choice and you are better of building only one of them and ignore the other.

Glossing over India, which if anything is shafted even harder than the Mediterranean states in regards to their naval developments. Not really an "unimportant exception".

Everything about naval interaction is embarrassingly bland.

 

[hkrommel]

The most important difference between land and naval warfare in the game is that land warfare each unit have a position on the battlefield while in naval warfare each navy fight as a blob.

What do you mean by this?

 

[Ares Enyalios]

As i read Sengoku was just a text case for CK2 and was never meant to have expansions.

As for the naval battle: I also would like to see at least two more types but as an defense i think we could get at least a chance with naval technologies and the ideatree. If you focus on naval warfare your chance should get a bit better.

But in general i would love to see a bit more rock, paper, scissor and tactics than quantity wins. For example there should be some cases where certain units just win. For example 30000 heavy infantry against 10000 horsearchers with good supply. Carrhae (; Or using light infantry and archers in a swamp area against heavy infantry. The latter should win when having equal numbers but usually they don't.

 

[Wavey]

As for the naval battle: I also would like to see at least two more types but as an defense i think we could get at least a chance with naval technologies and the ideatree. If you focus on naval warfare your chance should get a bit better.

Focusing on naval technologies may help a little bit, but until we have a full tech list who knows.

More interesting is the idea that national ideas/military traditions may help. They don't. In fact they make the issue worse in some cases. Take north African traditions - they have an entire tree giving buffs to triremes. The barbarian military traditions don't have a single naval buff in any of their trees. Not one. Combined with the lack of ship variation and only two tactics which either counter one another or just mean both fleets have the same tactic buff we have a problem. The only way your Gallic empire can stand a chance at sea against say Carthage is either overwhelming numbers or having the greatest admiral in history.

 

[Cephei80]

As far as I know there is no formations to naval warfare in the game. Both sides will use all their ships and overall effectivness depend on the positioning value.


I think you greatly overestimate the naval bonuses nations have. Carthage get some advantages over Rome but it is not massive. Egypt have the same ideas as other greek states so they have no advantage over the other diadochi and they also start with zero ships. I don't know how many ports each nation Control at the start and Phrygia Control the best Wood city in the game if I remember correctly. Nobody as far as I know have any specific Commerce bonuses as the game don't have national ideas like in EUIV.


This could be said about land warfare as well, the chance to win against a superior military is not that great. If your naval Power is inferior you have to build it up which is easier to do than the army because ships do not need Manpower.


Which tells absolutly nothing. Light ships in EUIV main role is to protect trade which is something that do not exist in Imperator: Rome. Big ships and galleys are both warships who have advantages over each other depending on what type of sea which don't really work in Imperator: Rome because the map only contains inland waters with very few unimportant exceptions. Likely one of the two is the better choice and you are better of building only one of them and ignore the other.

mate , north africans have a whole path that focus on sea .

The second path is the “Naval Path”. (north africa )

• Phoenician Heritage +15% Offensive for Triremes
• Naval Dominance +15% Defensive for Triremes
• A Life at Sea Allows Repair at Sea ability
• Imposing Edifices +15% Defensiveness
• Putting our People to Work -25% Trireme Maintenance

meanwhile for the greeks&diadochis

they have
“Seleucid Path”

• Phoenician Sailors: Ship Offense +15% (only)

*Greek Path*

• Mine's Bigger Than Yours: Ship Defensive +15% (only)

*Antigonid Path*

• Proud Shipwrights: Ship Construction Cost -25% (only)

for italy they have only :

Support Path.

• State Navy: +15% Trireme Morale

Roman Path.
NONE

Tribal Path.

• Mare Nostrum: -25% Trireme Maintenance Cost

now please explain to me how a rome can beat a nation such as carthage that have TONS of ports and faster healing and ship maintenance and wood all over iberia and north africa and high income if you will use just their same ship types but not only in lower number but also with a weaker skills ?

it sound possible to beat egypte with macedon on land if you make a good army that include good cavalary etc , but here what can you do ?it just look like the higher number of ships > lower number from what it seems so far .

 

[sersorr]

Please paradox do something about this! I find it hard to “feel” the game if there is no ship variety. I mean I was planning to play as Carthage, Rhode and Athens and make my own naval empires. I guess I’ll stick to Eu4