|
|
Post by thatzenoguy on Dec 6, 2018 2:55:40 GMT -6
I have a bunch of random ships in a zone, and then when I get into battle, I have a single DD against an AC or larger ship.
This isn't amusing.
|
|
|
|
Post by archelaos on Dec 6, 2018 6:14:05 GMT -6
I have a bunch of random ships in a zone, and then when I get into battle, I have a single DD against an AC or larger ship. This isn't amusing.
Guess commander of HMS Glorious would have similar comment? Just as the ones from Glowworm, german DDs in Narvik or Italian cruisers at Matapan...  |
|
saden
New Member
Posts: 42 
|
Post by saden on Dec 6, 2018 17:23:22 GMT -6
It's how the game works. I assume it just picks a random ship that fits some sort of criteria. It is very frustrating, but we'll just have to hope it gets fixed in RTW2
|
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Dec 6, 2018 17:46:19 GMT -6
You don't have to fix what isn't broken. The game simulates a war not a joust. 20th century combat didn't involve two armies lining up and sending their chosen champions to the center of the field to fight it out one on one. In addition to the examples archelaos mentioned, how many times during the Guadalcanal campaign did the Americans end up being forced to throw together an ad hoc formation of ships that hadn't trained together to try to fend off the Japanese in a night battle and end up paying a pretty heavy price for it? What about Taffy 3 at Samar? For large, set piece battles between battlefleets I could see the benefit to giving the player more control over division make-up and flagship choice but for the most part the battle simulator does its job more than well enough. Sometimes you are going to be USS Iowa at Truk beating up on a 6,000 ton light cruiser. Sometimes you are going to be USS Gambier Bay. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2018 8:11:56 GMT -6
I have a bunch of random ships in a zone, and then when I get into battle, I have a single DD against an AC or larger ship. This isn't amusing. The game is trying to generate a DD vs DD battle. But since the enemy has no DDs in the seazone, it'll pull whatever is available within 2 ship classes. MS-DD-CL-CA-BC-BB (or some such, AMC should be there somewhere). So first game looks for an available CL. - Enemy has no CL in the zone either. Next it looks for available CAs. - Yep enemy CA available. So you get DD vs CA which is... very bad. What if the enemy has no CAs either? Game will prompt the message "enemy has no available ships to generate force" (or words like that) and the turn gets passed. In reality there could be a BC there. But BC is 3 ship class away from DD and the gap is too big, and the battle is dropped. Anyway the logical conclusion is (game mechanism wise) leaving DDs out of colonial waters. They're a liability for this reason. But it also depends i.e. Japan fighting... France, the only shared seazone is SE Asia, which is colonial. Then Japan still needs a big fleet there. |
|
|
|
Post by thatzenoguy on Dec 7, 2018 17:32:18 GMT -6
I have a bunch of random ships in a zone, and then when I get into battle, I have a single DD against an AC or larger ship. This isn't amusing. The game is trying to generate a DD vs DD battle. But since the enemy has no DDs in the seazone, it'll pull whatever is available within 2 ship classes. MS-DD-CL-CA-BC-BB (or some such, AMC should be there somewhere). So first game looks for an available CL. - Enemy has no CL in the zone either. Next it looks for available CAs. - Yep enemy CA available. So you get DD vs CA which is... very bad. What if the enemy has no CAs either? Game will prompt the message "enemy has no available ships to generate force" (or words like that) and the turn gets passed. In reality there could be a BC there. But BC is 3 ship class away from DD and the gap is too big, and the battle is dropped. Anyway the logical conclusion is (game mechanism wise) leaving DDs out of colonial waters. They're a liability for this reason. But it also depends i.e. Japan fighting... France, the only shared seazone is SE Asia, which is colonial. Then Japan still needs a big fleet there. ;||| So in otherwords it's an issue with the force generation. Gotit. I hope RTW2 improves on this. |
|
|
|
Post by theexecuter on Dec 9, 2018 23:56:23 GMT -6
If the issue was evenly balanced, I wouldn't be so irritated by it.
As it is, the AI ALWAYS gets the advantage in force composition. If I outnumber the enemy, my admiral doesn't bring more ships to bear. If the enemy fleet outnumbers mine, it ALWAYS brings more ships to bear.
It is breaking my desire to play the game.
Just had yet another Russia v Germany war where I never receive a favorable force composition...and my DDs never torpedo their heavy warships. Admiral mode is a bitch and is, at times, literally unplayable.
|
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Dec 10, 2018 11:14:20 GMT -6
Just had yet another Russia v Germany war where I never receive a favorable force composition...and my DDs never torpedo their heavy warships. Admiral mode is a bitch and is, at times, literally unplayable. I hate crossing swords with anyone, especially in a forum which in general is so helpful, but I just have to disagree with this statement. You specifically may find it unplayable, but Admiral's Level does not "literally" make the game unplayable. I have played well over 100 games, and though there have been times I have taken off a week to recharge my batteries, I *only* play on Admiral's Level and have found each game as engaging as the last. Avoiding a discourse upon tactics and strategy, the player's DDs improve in capability over time on a line which closely parallels fleet speed and tubes embarked. Perhaps we need an AAR- literally a report and not a 'story' - which highlights the specifics of destroyer performance and surviving AI executed attacks. |
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Dec 10, 2018 13:42:14 GMT -6
I do find the AI's reluctance to fire torpedoes frustrating enough that I play captain's mode just to be able to fire manually (and to deal with the odd navigation bug where a destroyer flotilla hares off in the opposite direction from its lead division's course and away from the enemy force), but the AI certainly does fire torpedoes on the players behalf, and by the midgame is doing so fairly routinely (though it will still sometimes pass on choice shots). I certainly do not get the impression that the enemy gets any better performance in that regard than the player. The torpedo hits I do take are the result of mistakes and over-aggressiveness.
And for my part, I've largely stopped playing the game because it's *too* playable: I sit down to it and wake up a week later wondering where my free time went.
|
|
|
|
Post by theexecuter on Dec 10, 2018 14:12:13 GMT -6
With the benefit of a good night's sleep...
I do think the AI gets a bonus to launching torps, particularly if the human player is a nation with a poor education modifier. I find the captain execution of Russian or Italian ships not under my control is much less competent.
I think I have a potential solution for the force composition problem. Refusing to fight certain size battles. If your fleet is outnumbered or blockaded, large battle sizes are not your benefit. It just pulls more enemy ships into the engagement. If you have the advantage of numbers, don't fight small engagements. Force your enemy to bring his whole fleet out.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by director on Dec 10, 2018 19:44:16 GMT -6
The benefit the AI gets from torpedoes stems, I think, from its tactical position. If the AI is inferior in strength, it runs; if it is equal or superior it manuevers to always stay 'upstream' of the human player. This very much akin to the advantage of being uphill in a land battle, and the AI will manuever doggedly to protect its position. From ahead of your midships position it can roll torpedoes 'down' at you, adding your oncoming speed to that of the torpedoes. If the AI is astern of your midships position it will not launch torpedoes 'uphill' because the closing speed is reduced by your moving away from the firing ship.
My biggest fault lies in pressing the attack - ie, steaming 'uphill' into a torpedo barrage. I sometimes have to scrap a battle and restart, leasring all over again how to manuever patiently and entice the enemy into advancing on me.
|
|
|
|
Post by sittingduck on Dec 10, 2018 20:10:56 GMT -6
...This very much akin to the advantage of being uphill in a land battle, and the AI will manuever doggedly to protect its position. From ahead of your midships position it can roll torpedoes 'down' at you, adding your oncoming speed to that of the torpedoes. If the AI is astern of your midships position it will not launch torpedoes 'uphill' because the closing speed is reduced by your moving away from the firing ship... That's a good description. Makes sense and seems about the way it plays out. I'm too often guilty of trying to close broadside to broadside and eating a torpedo first... Does anyone have a torpedo arc available that's similar to the gun arc on the ship design screen? I would asume submerged mounts are more restricted than deck mounts. |
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Dec 10, 2018 22:04:13 GMT -6
The benefit the AI gets from torpedoes stems, I think, from its tactical position. If the AI is inferior in strength, it runs; if it is equal or superior it manuevers to always stay 'upstream' of the human player. This very much akin to the advantage of being uphill in a land battle, and the AI will manuever doggedly to protect its position. From ahead of your midships position it can roll torpedoes 'down' at you, adding your oncoming speed to that of the torpedoes. If the AI is astern of your midships position it will not launch torpedoes 'uphill' because the closing speed is reduced by your moving away from the firing ship. My biggest fault lies in pressing the attack - ie, steaming 'uphill' into a torpedo barrage. I sometimes have to scrap a battle and restart, leasring all over again how to manuever patiently and entice the enemy into advancing on me. This is what makes a fast battle line important: it allows you to get out ahead, or to keep up evasive maneuvering without losing ground. |
|
|
|
Post by theexecuter on Dec 10, 2018 23:18:36 GMT -6
That is true...but I mostly eat torpedoes while attempting to disengage from an unexpected night engagement.
That comes down to crew training, I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by MateDow on Dec 11, 2018 3:06:24 GMT -6
That is true...but I mostly eat torpedoes while attempting to disengage from an unexpected night engagement. That comes down to crew training, I think.
I've gotten most of my torpedo hits on enemy capital ships during those same engagements. Live by the sword...
I think that I saw in one of your posts that one of your emphasis areas was night battles. I don't have any proof, but I feel like I get more night battles when I have that selected, so I have stopped selecting that to lessen the change of night battles where my capital ships are so vulnerable. I've come to accept that I just want to disengage from night battles and avoid contact until the clock runs out. I'll accept a draw and then I'll crush the AI during the next battle where I can keep its destroyers and cruisers at arms length.
|
|
_(edited)_Screenshot_(739).png?width=180&height=180&fit=bounds)
