|
|
Post by hossster on Jul 30, 2015 14:27:42 GMT -6
I have been playing a game with the US. I have a large advantage over my French opponents (~ 1910 with some BBs and BCs). We have been fighting int he Caribbean mostly.
I find that if I have too much advantage over his fleet (i.e. too large a ratio of the better ships) he seems to decline battle. I have been experimenting with keeping more than him in the area but not too much. It seems to help ... but I would like a battle where I can use my extra numbers.
Any thoughts on this? Experiences?
|
|
|
|
Post by Fredrik W on Jul 31, 2015 1:23:26 GMT -6
The AI is smart enough that it usually won't accept a battle against too superior odds. Fleet battles were not all that common or easy to bring about in reality.
In the game, one way is to put a lot of strength in his build area and blockade him, though that has its disadvantages as the US against a European nation.
|
|
|
|
Post by ccip on Jul 31, 2015 7:54:19 GMT -6
The other side of it too is that the only time there's any strategic motivation to provoke a fleet battle is when the two sides are closely matched. If you're at a disadvantage in a blockade, a fleet battle is the worst thing you can do - you need to get raiders out and try and reduce enemy concentration. If you're the stronger blockading power, then you're usually going to win through means other than battle pretty quickly anyways as long as you can keep up the blockade. Unless both sides clearly have even chances, a fleet battle is about the worst thing that can happen from a strategic perspective. Fleet battles are means to resolving stalemates, rather than saving yourself from a bad strategic position or capping off a victory - otherwise, a fleet-in-being, raiding and blockade are your means. That would be the established doctrine of any navy in that period. In that regard, it's not surprising that the two fleet battles that actually ever took place historically (Tsushima and Jutland) were basically strategic mistakes by one or both of the sides.
|
|
