Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2020 10:43:09 GMT -6
For the record I too have noted battles where I get a pair of DDs or 2 old CLs selected instead of my fleet for my Fleet action, but I have been unable to pin down what the circumstances are that lead to this odd battle generation. I would say on the whole 1 in 10 of my battles might be a non-competitive mismatch that I doubt would be intended by a designer (ie, there is likely a bug somewhere), however I can also have a run of wars where I don't see it at all. I am theorizing that the mismatch battle might have to do with fleets that have been reinforced recently by light forces, but it is difficult to know exactly what the AI has done. I will try to focus on this in the coming days. It would be helpful for those who note this battle generation behavior to advise what era it occurred in, as to my recollection it happens more often in the 20s & 30s. All you need is a check in a code in form of IF, that would use the total "value" (or 1000x their total tonage in tons) and if the enemy has more than 3 times your number, it would run a RETURN or something, that would lead to an argument that would add more ships from your fleet, and if you dont have any available at that time and place, it would automaticaly nope you out of the battle and give enemy a few VPs.
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Oct 14, 2020 11:22:26 GMT -6
It should produce at least a bit unbalanced battles. Neither the battle of Jutland, nor the battle of Denmark strait, nor the battle of Falklands were balanced. The side with bigger navy had a bigger fleet available in all of those battles. And at the same time I can point you to Samar, Guadalcanal and or Coral Sea where the side with more ships in the region ending up showing up with less or equal force than that of their enemy. (Coral Sea in particular is essentially the same as your I have 12 ship but only get 9, my enemy have 9 and they get 9.) A bigger fleet should not in any way means you are automatically going to always have the bigger force. Also my experience with most large fleet battle missions in game is that the side with more ships do indeed gets to bring more, even if the ratio may turn out to be something like 16 v 12 rather than 20 v 14. I do think the game likes to throw out too many cruiser 1v1s when one side is basically blockading the other, but that is something that can be fine tuned. I do not want any sort of enforced balancing of the battle as a strict match of player's fleet size. Some additional player agency is nice, but taking all the surprise out of the war will make it boring.
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Oct 14, 2020 15:29:17 GMT -6
2 DDs or 2 CLs against a whole fleet shouldn't happen (in my opinion mind you, I am not speaking for Fredrik or William), so that is the "bug" which I think we need to find and fix. Discussions are ongoing internally, that's all I can say for now.
-and by "whole fleet" I mean many ships of every class against 2 DDs or 2 CLs, which seems especially irksome when you have a comparable assemblage to your very large enemy fleet in the zone.
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Oct 14, 2020 17:24:40 GMT -6
-and by "whole fleet" I mean many ships of every class against 2 DDs or 2 CLs, which seems especially irksome when you have a comparable assemblage to your very large enemy fleet in the zone. The traditional phrasing for this sort of grievance is: TURKEY TROTS TO WATER GG FROM CINCPAC ACTION COM THIRD FLEET INFO COMINCH CTF SEVENTY-SEVEN X WHERE IS RPT WHERE IS TASK FORCE THIRTY FOUR RR THE WORLD WONDERS But it would be nice to be given the rope to do this to ourselves, rather than just having it foisted upon us by the RNG.
|
|
|
Post by cuthalin on Oct 14, 2020 20:54:56 GMT -6
Does the " it happened in real life " explain why in 2 separate Destroyer Engagements i had 7 DD's and the enemy had 2 CL's + 7 DD's and then 2BB's and 7 DD's. Just to make a small point, why make a CLAA to protect my CV's if the game doesn't always assign them. I seriously doubt that the US carrier fleets every sailed without them ! Any nation would send out a Task Force of ships they chose, and not just a random bunch ! Japan certainly did for Pearl Harbour and Midway, but that is not applicable in RTW2 ! All I want is to be able to assign missions to the ships, not just Active Fleet, but actual task groups, so I can have ALL my elements of the same ship class not 3 mixed BB elements.
Currently the game will make a force of 1 x 18 kt and 2 x 20 kt B's three times, instead of 3 x 18 kt + 3 x 20 kt twice, and I am certain EVERY Admiral chose the later if possible !
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Oct 15, 2020 0:24:36 GMT -6
Does the " it happened in real life " explain why in 2 separate Destroyer Engagements i had 7 DD's and the enemy had 2 CL's + 7 DD's and then 2BB's and 7 DD's. Just to make a small point, why make a CLAA to protect my CV's if the game doesn't always assign them. I seriously doubt that the US carrier fleets every sailed without them ! Any nation would send out a Task Force of ships they chose, and not just a random bunch ! Japan certainly did for Pearl Harbour and Midway, but that is not applicable in RTW2 ! All I want is to be able to assign missions to the ships, not just Active Fleet, but actual task groups, so I can have ALL my elements of the same ship class not 3 mixed BB elements.
Currently the game will make a force of 1 x 18 kt and 2 x 20 kt B's three times, instead of 3 x 18 kt + 3 x 20 kt twice, and I am certain EVERY Admiral chose the later if possible !
US Navy at the end of war have so many resources and ships, they can do it but look at the 42 and 43 and it is another story, US Navy used ships which were available not which they wish to have available. Same thing is for Royal Navy using her old battleships as escorts for carriers including R class which was certainly far from ideal circumstances. They cruisers in the Mediterranean were what was available with preference sending cruisers better equipped to AA role but again far from ideal disposition. So yes, if your fleet is 3 times larger, you have commintments elsewhere, it is logical having AA cruisers protecting carriers but otherwise it is far from being guaranteed.
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Oct 15, 2020 11:58:01 GMT -6
Does the " it happened in real life " explain why in 2 separate Destroyer Engagements i had 7 DD's and the enemy had 2 CL's + 7 DD's and then 2BB's and 7 DD's. Just to make a small point, why make a CLAA to protect my CV's if the game doesn't always assign them. I seriously doubt that the US carrier fleets every sailed without them ! Any nation would send out a Task Force of ships they chose, and not just a random bunch ! Japan certainly did for Pearl Harbour and Midway, but that is not applicable in RTW2 ! All I want is to be able to assign missions to the ships, not just Active Fleet, but actual task groups, so I can have ALL my elements of the same ship class not 3 mixed BB elements.
Currently the game will make a force of 1 x 18 kt and 2 x 20 kt B's three times, instead of 3 x 18 kt + 3 x 20 kt twice, and I am certain EVERY Admiral chose the later if possible !
I am very much for having an ability to organize fleets. I dont need it to be followed strictly by the battle generator, as the "happened in real life" does "explain why in 2 separate Destroyer Engagements i had 7 DD's and the enemy had 2 CL's + 7 DD's and then 2BB's and 7 DD's." -> Aka battle of Samar, and argubly some night battle at guadalcanal as well. You dont just send fleet out with prior information of what the enemy has, except in surprise attack like Peral Harbor. The game is trying to represent the fact that ships send out may not ultimately be suited for the event that transpired, taffy 3 can bump into the entire japanese center fleet, zuikaku and shokaku can get jumped by american CV in what was otherwise a land invasion support, things like this happen. Many action in Guadalcanal are escort missions where fleet bumped into each other. Taffy 3 likewise is organized as it was because it did not expect to bump into a big japanese surface fleet, and indeed in that case there is no CLAA with them. I suppose a window that gives you some vague info regarding mission type and very rough estimate of enemy force (granted, thats one way in making espionage spending more useful), select your task force from available ships with random ones being unavailable to account for other missions/repair/etc, and then set sail ready to accept whatever happens can be cool, but I feel people will still complain they dont have enough agency over the battle. What I do agree is the ships you DO have in a particular mission should be organized in a manner that makes sense. It is fine that sometime you may have a mix of new or older BBs because resource limitations, like UK did with their older BBs in the mediterrean, but in those cases it makes no sense to organize them in mixed squadron if the alternative is possible. In those scenarios I think the battle generator can be made more reasonable by either priortizing group ships in player designated squadrons, or a chance is given to the player to reorganize the fleet squadrons before battle start. This allows for grouping CLAA with carrier if they are available, and avoid the mix-up with BBs of differing speed in the same unit if the player wishes.
|
|
|
Post by cuthalin on Oct 25, 2020 14:25:18 GMT -6
Reading what has been said in reply, i have a suggestion. Additional Status choices. Coastal Patrol, for local M/S ASW and counter enemy coastal raid / raider ships. ( would only be used for Counter raider / coastal raid)
Escort, Used as a pool for escort ships and convoy protection
Interceptor Used for Counter Raider and Anti-convoy
Any ship on active fleet can be drawn for use in all missions, but those in any other status is only drawn for those mission types.
This would encourage the building of more specific ship types, as opposed to a single "everything at a lower level" class. ( Coastal Cruiser, CLAA, Fast interception Cruiser etc )
And give the player responsibility for some ship allocation.
My point for the, you rarely knew what enemy fleet you were up against in real life.... nor did they, so why do i never get a destroyer engagement with 3 cl's and 8 dd's against 6 dd's ? It feels that every engagement is weighted in numerical or strength favour of the AI. Perhaps the Intel function could assist with this, the US knew about Midway, the British of Bismarks' sortie, so it should have some effect.
Lastly, love the updated ship screen during battles, helps having this extra info
|
|