WTF My entire navy got wrecked easily?

[SophieX]

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.

They are talking about CL with the DLC MtG. As far as I can remember, without MtG you have a fully different situation belonging thing of naval-units and naval-combat with all "tactics" included.

 

[noobermenschen]

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.

It's possible since @JerkyJerry was in command of the battle (Harwood is Jerry's avatar). The battle may have started with UK subs raiding some convoys, the Italian fleet getting involved, and then finally your strike fleet piling on to the smol sub squadron and wrecking positioning for the Allied ships.

I have seen it from the other side, playing UK and watching French sub squadrons or convoy escorts screw up my naval battles. I finally just left the Eastern Med and let the Frenchies and Italians have at it.

 

[balmung60]

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.

Something else that doesn't help your case is that France has pretty bad starting templates for its ships.

Also, the AI is very bad at determining whether a naval matchup is good or bad, and you can easily create a situation where you have a fleet that will win every time but won't engage on any caution level except always engage because the AI thinks it's inferior.

I can't speak for non-MTG, especially because you can't make pure spotting ships without MTG, but pure CL does absolutely win and with few losses, especially with up-to-date cruiser armor, which is part of why the light cruisers can eat destroyers for days with ease - as screens, they're pretty well protected from torpedoes, and with armor, destroyers and older light cruisers can barely hurt them. I suspect that without MTG, you may have more use case for DDs as a spotting force.

 

[SophieX]

.... I suspect that without MTG, you may have more use case for DDs as a spotting force.

Spotting ( without MtG ) was not that point as it is now. The ship-tasks were mostly fixed due to a fixed and not changeable design

 

[kettyo]

So as i understand pre 1.6 battleships ruled, post 1.6 with MtG light cruisers rule. What about post 1.6 without MtG?

 

[SophieX]

So as i understand pre 1.6 battleships ruled, post 1.6 with MtG light cruisers rule. What about post 1.6 without MtG?

In a very general sense: yes. Pre 1.6 subs were very weak, compared to now with MtG. For this reason now subs ( especially tier 4 ) rule as well.

Post 1.6 without MtG: I don't know

 

[I had a bad name 99]

I think the naval part of the game would definitely need balancing, if your fleet got disproportionately outmatched even if you applied the 1:3 screening rule (which Paradox is obviously encouraging you to use). If not, cruiser spamming, MTG or not, to break the game is more like an exploit to me, which I try not to use for the sake of historical accuracy. Anyway, this's just what I think -- my game design philosophy, not a common view of the community.

I probably need to reload the save file once more, and improve the screening. Hopefully i can perform better against Italian fleet. It was more my fault for not paying attention to the naval side of battle at this part of the campaign, as I was too cocky.

 

[I had a bad name 99]

This was my problem. Should have built a stronger cruiser force within my fleet to counter their superior number, upon first sighting...

 

[SophieX]

Why didn't you use the units from the reserve-fleet ( ~ over 30 ships!!) ?

 

[Cavalry]

So as i understand pre 1.6 battleships ruled, post 1.6 with MtG light cruisers rule. What about post 1.6 without MtG?

Without Mtg it is harder to specialize. Look at the CL 1940 without MTG below. With MTG I can have a CL with 50 light attack vs 12 here. The MTG give fire control and Fire radar and slots. There are dozen of extra naval techs to boost light attack, cruiser attack and torpedo attack. The ship AA is also much better.

But even before MTG, some have very good results by spam DD only. You can try that to see if it still works.

 

[Cavalry]

This was my problem. Should have built a stronger cruiser force within my fleet to counter their superior number, upon first sighting...

View attachment 577085

They don't have enough screen. If war already starts, time to build DD full of torpedoes. These DD also help your screenline too.

 

[Cavalry]

Then is it viable to spam CL and not care about anything else?

If you are a minor and get outnumberred, cheap DD will be needed to increase numbers to share the incoming fire.

 

[I had a bad name 99]

Why didn't you use the units from the reserve-fleet ( ~ over 30 ships!!) ?

Nah, all submarines...

 

[SophieX]

At sea, don't underestimate numbers....even pre-MTG subs would have been useful in that battle; keeping the enemy screen busy. And for sure they would have given a few ( or perhaps even more ) deadly shots to them.

As an old wisdom at sea says: "Without any important reason, don't "split" your forces."

 

[I had a bad name 99]

At sea, don't underestimate numbers....even pre-MTG subs would have been useful in that battle; keeping the enemy screen busy. And for sure they would have given a few ( or perhaps even more ) deadly shots to them.

As an old wisdom at sea says: "Without any important reason, don't "split" your forces."

How does submarines work in naval combat? I don't want the destroyers' depth charges to disrupt them. Unless I am okay to sacrifice them for the bigger price (sinking entire Italian fleet).

 

[SophieX]

.... Unless I am okay to sacrifice them for the bigger price (sinking entire Italian fleet).

That was the meaning of my related post. Pre MTG......isn't there a button to patrol&engage?

 

[HugsAndSnuggles]

How does submarines work in naval combat?

They stay hidden, mostly. Every hour there's a chance to reveal a sub (based on their visibility and enemy sub detection), also subs can be revealed when they fire torps. Generally, subs will only fire torps when there's not enough screening (unless used with more aggressive settings) - screens are hard to hit with torps anyway - or when enemy capitals start retreating (in which case subs are supposed to ignore screening penalty).

 

[Cavalry]

Generally, subs will only fire torps when there's not enough screening (unless used with more aggressive settings)

Not sure on that, I thought they fire at the screen, like the DD fire their torpedo, but often miss.

The subs don't share incoming fire and will make your force bigger that reduce position advantage. So use them only when enemy don't have enough screen.

 

[kettyo]

Without Mtg it is harder to specialize. Look at the CL 1940 without MTG below. With MTG I can have a CL with 50 light attack vs 12 here. The MTG give fire control and Fire radar and slots. There are dozen of extra naval techs to boost light attack, cruiser attack and torpedo attack. The ship AA is also much better.

So that we might conclude that post 1.6 without MtG has the most balanced naval warfare so far?

Spamming battleships (pre 1.6) or light cruisers (post 1.6 with MtG) to defeat everything feels a bit silly to me.

A balanced fleet with proper capitals and screens should seriously beat a screens only fleet of a similar worth of total IC in my opinion given how much more research effort is to build a balanced fleet.

 

[HugsAndSnuggles]

Not sure on that, I thought they fire at the screen, like the DD fire their torpedo, but often miss.

Perhaps. But seeing how subs are too slow to be included in strike force anyway, the ones that join are, usually, convoy raiders or scouts operating in the area - not sure how their own engagement rules play into that.