Harin, that´s a very good Idea too. That Idea you have in the new Battlestar Galactica Strategy-Game.
- 1
WTF My entire navy got wrecked easily?
- Thread starter I had a bad name 99
- 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.
I thought there is a real-time battle? what happened to it? Are you able to see the engagement, and who targets who.
It's only a waste if you use high-quality DDs for sub hunting, which you shouldn't be doing. Make specialized, cheap ships.
- 1
- 1
- 1
CL should be build very different from CA. They need to be fast to avoid a gigantic of torpedo and light attack at the screen line. My CL has min speed about 35, armor at level 1 or sometime 2 at max.
Then add the screen designer/advisor, Trade Interdiction doctrine 1st and 2nd tech. Then we have a CL much more different than CA.
- 1
Which reminds me: based on stats shown, designer also gives CA a screen bonus*. Are there any other screen buffs CA receives, perhaps? >.>
*of course I wouldn't be surprised if UI lied here
The conversation is keep getting more confusion. I don't have MTG, only vanilla. Words like screen designer don't apply to me. So is CA better than CL in dodging torpedo, or not? The base one, not the customised version.
No, CA have starting surface visibility higher than CL. It always get hit easier than CL by all kind of weapon. But there is no torpedo hitting battle line if you have full screen.
- 2
The screen designer of Sweden give bonus to CA or capitals, too. But it also give a penalty. The Altantic designer give: Capital: armor + 10%, heavy attack +10%
- 2
It's a shame that they built this in-depth naval simulator and I basically only build a few destroyers and a ton of light cruisers.
I'd like it if I was more incentivised to build the big ships, but building them means using a ton more research, and a swarm of light cruisers can efficiently defeat any opponent in a fleet battle anyway. Their light guns shred the enemy screens, then their torpedoes deal with the remaining large ships.
Is there an efficient fleet counter to the light cruiser swarm? Obviously you can just mass naval bombers, but that beats anything at sea.
I suppose a potential counter might be four carriers and a ton of light cruisers, or four carriers, a battleship and a ton of light cruisers, but these counters require several times as much research to set up, and I'm not sure if they're even cost-efficient at the end of it.
I'd like it if I was more incentivised to build the big ships, but building them means using a ton more research, and a swarm of light cruisers can efficiently defeat any opponent in a fleet battle anyway. Their light guns shred the enemy screens, then their torpedoes deal with the remaining large ships.
Is there an efficient fleet counter to the light cruiser swarm? Obviously you can just mass naval bombers, but that beats anything at sea.
I suppose a potential counter might be four carriers and a ton of light cruisers, or four carriers, a battleship and a ton of light cruisers, but these counters require several times as much research to set up, and I'm not sure if they're even cost-efficient at the end of it.
- 1
- 1
Yeah, they better fix this. So much for battleships being the pride of navy.
Edit: but shouldn't battleships have light guns to help your screening ships in the fight?
Chiming in that it was probably a screening failure - light cruisers melt all other screens (also, alarmingly capable of melting capital ships with sheer weight of fire). Once the superior Italian light cruiser force broke your screens, it was all over.
If you want to win at sea, light cruisers are basically the only ships you need and everything else is basically show because naval balance is nearly non-existent. Bring lots of fast, armored light cruisers with as many guns as possible (possibly replacing one gun battery with torpedoes, but it's basically an optional optimization) and you can beat pretty much everything.
If you want to win at sea, light cruisers are basically the only ships you need and everything else is basically show because naval balance is nearly non-existent. Bring lots of fast, armored light cruisers with as many guns as possible (possibly replacing one gun battery with torpedoes, but it's basically an optional optimization) and you can beat pretty much everything.
- 2
- 1
They do, and dual purpose secondaries are great, but battleships are expensive and your cruisers will probably have as many as possible anyway because they cost less speed and steel than light cruiser batteries.
- 1
My point is that BB is not totally helpless. For example, having 5 battleship + 20 cruisers + 10 destroyers VS 25 cruisers + 10 destroyers. I am sure, the heavy armor, long range gun + light gun of battleships can help your cruisers in the screenfight??
Edit: What they should balance is not to make torpedo from DD too overpowered against battleships. Cos they have torpedo belt and decent speed to dodge. So even if screens are down, the battleship can still carry their own weight and fight to a respectable end. I don't think in history, DD has such a devastating effect on BB. Only aircraft carriers.
Essentially, everything but CL and SS is basically for show. CLs win battles and SS harasses convoys and gets cheap naval supremacy. DDs can try to stop SS but that's about it.
CA, BC, BB, and CV are basically for flexing when you already have naval supremacy. Of all of them, CAs are the worst deal and exist pretty much solely to screen carriers.
The first fleet has a much higher NIC cost and my money would still be on the second fleet
- 1
Pretty much, yeah. Make a spotter CL (as many seaplanes as possible) and a gunship CL and build about two gunships to every spotter.
Why would I need more than certain number of spotters? Aren't patrol and strike force TFs supposed to be operating separately? I'd think you only need 5 patrol vessels per sea zones and the rest for combat purposes? Is there any other benefits to having more spotters than being able to find the enemy quicker?
CLs aren't nearly as bad of gas guzzlers as capitals, so you can have roving packs of combat-capable CLs all at sea, and so long as they can spot and run down enemies, the cruisers can easily sink enemy patrol forces before their own strike force ever arrives. At some point, they won't have any screens left and their capitals will either stay bottled up or also suffer defeat in detail. In fact, one of the huge perks or CL task forces is that they can both spot and fight economically.
2 gunships to every spotter is the ratio I use because I'm lazy enough that I'm not going to bother with a finer split and 15-20 fully-armored (and about 2/3 of them fully armed as well) CLs is a very formidable force. If you're going for larger task forces, then sure, reduce the spotter contingent.
- 2
- 1
While light cruiser seems overpowered, it is a bit extreme to say that it is the only reason why I lost this naval battle so thoroughly. The Italian still have six capital ships (vs my five), so we can't ignore them as a factor.
Also, this defeat seems like a bad luck to me. I actually reloaded the save files twice, and the Italian fleet ran away from mine. I still lost some DD and suffered some damage on battleships, but not as thorough as this one.
But you're right that the light cruisers play a major role in my defeat this time. Though we cannot discount the fact that they have a lot of big guns on their side too.
Edit: As for the strategy of spamming CL to gain naval dominance, i am not sure how this goes around in the community especially among MP pros. But I am not a pro and still learning the game. I feel that it is better to have a more balanced approach because screening ships like light cruisers still lack the "stability" and staying power of a battleship. So even though the NIC is higher, i would opt for a more "proper" fleet that can tackle different situations, rather than just aggressively sinking other ships. As long as the screen is sizeable and can protect capital well, i guess it is okay to invest in them.
Last edited: