So you say the Invasion RNG chance got boosted, eh?

[dizzy]

Well, let me paint you this little picture that says nope. Fredrik W

1944, I get into a war with Germany and France playing as Spain. Utilizing many Mediterranean airbases, some excellent carrier designs, along with some prior savvy strategic choices, I was able to quickly dispatch their navy. Around 7-8 months into the war, I click to Invade Dalmatia, a Germany possession. I had around a 4:1 ratio at the time, or close to it. Soon after, I had around 213 fleet power to maybe 37 from the French and the Germans had some KE's and were around maybe 7 in the zone. So this numerical advantage stayed easily within my grasp as they could not get any replacement fleets up to challenge me and declined and ran from more battles than General George B. McClellan. My VP score was some 300k vs 70k or so.
Fast forward to 1948, a 42 month long war and my Invasion had been going on for around 35 months costing me a total of 187 million. On turn 43, fatigued at all the small skirmish missions, I elected not to do an invasion mission and the French, with a fleet power of less than 50 compared to my 250 or more invaded my colony of Libya. The AI had repeatedly declined invasion missions on my end and my invasion never triggered. 

I'm gonna flat out argue it's broken. I mean, I absolutely controlled the Mediterranean from one end to the other, I dominated every aspect of the war up until the last year when my sub numbers dwindled, I started losing the merchant sinking war, but for months and months, years even, I had more than 4:1 and I had virtually sunk every capital ship the Germans and French had. Yet my invasion doesnt fire. So I say broken.

Here's something to consider...  There should probably be a weight factor given to the RNG that boosts the chances based off of other factors. I say this because the RNG alone is awfully stupid and you cant have that in the game. It just defies reason and pisses us off. Maybe weight the RNG when you have a lopsided VP score like I had, and maybe having x-number of consecutive months of 4:1 supremacy, maybe having killed off all the enemy BC and BB ships or maybe spending 187 million on the invasion and going on for 43 months... maybe just MAYBE it should trigger?

[christian]

i have felt the buff massively to the point i could chain invade

what i found is that if an invasion dosent trigger within 6 months you change invasion target wait 6 months and change again

this worked really great with me chain taking the intirety of asia taking 3 german colonies within 7 months as japan and 4 french colonies within 10 months

i also managed to take every single one of britains colonies in asia and south pacific and also some in the indian ocean in a rougly 25 month war

but in the war against usa where i outnumbered them completely i was unable to take even a single colony at all
(i was japan)


i think what we need is a more reliable way to invade instead of pure total randomness
if you have 6 to 1 supperiority or 10 to 1 for example an invasion should trigger NO MATTER WHAT

the system is really unreliable and relies on luck sometimes you chain invade islands like its japan 1942 and other times you just cannot take anything

for each consecutive month planned on one colony the chance of an invasion should increase and by 10-15 months it should trigger (if fleet is still 4 to 1

chance of invasion being succesfull should increase the longer the invasion planning has been going on aka short invasion triggers make ground support battles ALOT MORE important and losing a single one could repel the invasion but a 15 month planned invasion you could loose 1 or 2 ground support battles before being unable to take said colony

declining battles enough times makes the enemy able to counter invade if you dont do counter invasion battles

never continously decline battles and pay attention to which battles are important (invasion battles ground support battles and some others)

id say just beat the remaining french units into non existance

[garrisonchisholm]

It is great that success was had, however I think we all agree a player should not just be dumping 100mil into the hopper and have no success with no feedback *along the way* as to why.

[rodentnavy]

Jun 14, 2019 23:26:49 GMT -6 dizzy said:

The AI had repeatedly declined invasion missions on my end and my invasion never triggered. 

This would be the key point for me. If the AI refuses to fight an invasion at sea then it is going to land anything else makes no sense. 

[yemo]

Jun 15, 2019 9:11:20 GMT -6 rodentnavy said:

Jun 14, 2019 23:26:49 GMT -6 dizzy said:

The AI had repeatedly declined invasion missions on my end and my invasion never triggered. 

This would be the key point for me. If the AI refuses to fight an invasion at sea then it is going to land anything makes no sense. 

Yeah, does not work the other way around though.

I observed this as well, if the enemy is too beaten and declines battles, you can hardly land an invasion.

But if you decline battles, the AI has no problem launching invasions at your possessions.

The invasion chance was never the problem. The problem was and is that invasions depend too much on chance and too little on the situation.

[alsadius]

Yeah, even if the rules were changed so that the defender declining an invasion battle means the invasion goes off, that'd be a big improvement.

[taeven]

Whenever my enemy declined an invasion battle my invasion suceeded automatically.

[yemo]

Jun 15, 2019 12:33:41 GMT -6 taeven said:

Whenever my enemy declined an invasion battle my invasion suceeded automatically.

AI detected !

[Fredrik W]

Jun 15, 2019 12:33:41 GMT -6 taeven said:

Whenever my enemy declined an invasion battle my invasion suceeded automatically.

Yes, that's the way it works.

[dizzy]

Jun 15, 2019 12:46:41 GMT -6 Fredrik W said:

Jun 15, 2019 12:33:41 GMT -6 taeven said:

Whenever my enemy declined an invasion battle my invasion suceeded automatically.

Yes, that's the way it works.

The opposite happened for me. Maybe its bugged? I was in a 2x nation war against France and Germany. Maybe that was why it wasnt working? There's a bug?


Both enemies repeatedly refused Invasion missions, and I successfully completed those missions on my end. I cant tell you how many missions I successfully escorted transports to some point in the middle of the sea and have to sit there and baby sit them so they wouldnt get picked off after reaching their target so I wouldnt get negative VP points because the enemy had next to zero naval assets for me to sink. And yet, NO invasion. But the second I decline an invasion on their part, one of my colonies gets invaded. How does that make sense, Fredrik W? I have a Spanish Armada complete with battleships, carriers, battlecruisers, cruisers and so many destroyers you cant count in the Mediterranean and the enemy has a couple destroyers and a cruiser and launches an invasion on me! Once I spend 187 million on an invasion, and sit there for 31 months waiting, I'd say it's broken. Go back to the drawing board, dude. Fix it. Do something. That's bullshit.

[hmssophia]

Jun 15, 2019 13:06:13 GMT -6 dizzy said:

I'd say it's broken. Go back to the drawing board, dude. Fix it. Do something. That's bullshit.

I get your frustrated but can you just chill a tiny bit. The dev is constantly releasing bug fixes.
I'm sorry you had a bad experience but damn son. Chill.

[hoffmads]

The excessive randomness part is, IMHO, not only frustrating but not quite realistic. The high command had at least a tentative date for invasions, which could of course be pushed back by things like weather or enemy action. Once the current system is fixed, it should really be revamped to give the player an ETA on the invasion, which could of course be pushed back by random events like the storms that pushed back Overlord.

[rob06waves2018]

I get the feeling that invasions were no more common in RTW 1. However, as they were random events, it was 'good to get' not 'irritating not to happen'. I can see lots of people getting cross about this so here's my proposal:
-change the invasion mechanic temporarily to make preparation free. This might even be soft-coded so players could do it themselves but I haven't checked
-Fredrik should do carry on with his presumably endless to-do list (and sleep and eat - don't kill yourself on our account mate)
-when invasions is at the top of the list, think about a non-RNG-based system based purely on Fleet superiority and limited by some other factor (1 or 2 a year or some such thing)

I know this isn't ideal but Fredrik is doing his best and can't do everything at once. This should at least change the idea from 'naff-all for your money' to 'something for nothing' as it was in RTW 1.

[dizzy]

Jun 15, 2019 14:57:52 GMT -6 hmssophia said:

Jun 15, 2019 13:06:13 GMT -6 dizzy said:

I'd say it's broken. Go back to the drawing board, dude. Fix it. Do something. That's bullshit.

I get your frustrated but can you just chill a tiny bit. The dev is constantly releasing bug fixes.
I'm sorry you had a bad experience but damn son. Chill.

What are you talking about? I never said 'RIGHT NOW!" Did I? No.

There's something hugely wrong with Invasions. We can pull out our construction hats and break it down, but its apparently very obvious. There's something inherently broken about a strictly RNG based invasion mechanic that ignores the situational facts, like consecutive monthly 4:1 naval supremacy, spending 150+ million on the invasion, waiting for 31 months and nothing happens, the AI gets to decline Invasion missions with no consequences, but you get invaded if you do the same... I could go on and on, but you get the idea. I'll say again with no urgency that this mechanic is broken, as in it does not work as intended, as fredrik already stated, the invasion should fire when its an invasion mission and you decline to fight that missions, well, the mission didnt fire. Multiple times. So not only is it bugged, it doesnt work as intended and it doesnt take into consideration situational facts. So I say he needs to go back to the drawing board because its broken.

One other thing, he doesn't need a fanboi to take up his defense. I'm not attacking him. I don't care what his plate is full of either. That's not my concern. If he gets around to it, he gets around to it. I'm pointing out a problem. If you don't like the way I point problems out, then stop looking at the glass half empty, hmssophia.

[christian]

Jun 15, 2019 16:01:02 GMT -6 dizzy said:

Jun 15, 2019 14:57:52 GMT -6 hmssophia said:

I get your frustrated but can you just chill a tiny bit. The dev is constantly releasing bug fixes.
I'm sorry you had a bad experience but damn son. Chill.

What are you talking about? I never said 'RIGHT NOW!" Did I? No.

There's something hugely wrong with Invasions. We can pull out our construction hats and break it down, but its apparently very obvious. There's something inherently broken about a strictly RNG based invasion mechanic that ignores the situational facts, like consecutive monthly 4:1 naval supremacy, spending 150+ million on the invasion, waiting for 31 months and nothing happens, the AI gets to decline Invasion missions with no consequences, but you get invaded if you do the same... I could go on and on, but you get the idea. I'll say again with no urgency that this mechanic is broken, as in it does not work as intended, as fredrik already stated, the invasion should fire when its an invasion mission and you decline to fight that missions, well, the mission didnt fire. Multiple times. So not only is it bugged, it doesnt work as intended and it doesnt take into consideration situational facts. So I say he needs to go back to the drawing board because its broken.

One other thing, he doesn't need a fanboi to take up his defense. I'm not attacking him. I don't care what his plate is full of either. That's not my concern. If he gets around to it, he gets around to it. I'm pointing out a problem. If you don't like the way I point problems out, then stop looking at the glass half empty, hmssophia .

you do seem very angry though and very frustrated which is perfectly understandable 

adding his name to what you are saying basically directly pointing at him dosent help either

calm language and less aggresive wording would work well 

i think suggesting fixes would also work quite well instead of just shouting what the problem is there need to be found a way to fix it without making invasions either too hard or way way too easy 

il post a suggestion of what i would imagine a better invasion mechanic would look like probably tomorrow since its gonna take a bit of time to finalize how it could all gonna work out and what would make the most sense
also drag paint out to illustrate