|
Post by oldpop2000 on Aug 16, 2016 9:44:53 GMT -6
Personally I find some battles are...Silly? I mean, why is my battlefleet attacking 2000 or less ton merchants, and why are these merchants being guarded by THEIR fleet!? ARE THEY TRANSPORTING GOLD OR SOMETHING!? In actual practice, older battleships like ours escorted convoys to England and to the Fiji Islands all the time. The British did the same thing when escorting their convoys to the Med or the Far East. It isn't too far fetched although sometimes it really doesn't make any sense.
|
|
|
Post by thatzenoguy on Aug 16, 2016 10:55:28 GMT -6
In actual practice, older battleships like ours escorted convoys to England and to the Fiji Islands all the time. The British did the same thing when escorting their convoys to the Med or the Far East. It isn't too far fetched although sometimes it really doesn't make any sense. No no no no. This was 20 bloody brand new dreadnoughts and battlecruisers escorting 4-6 tiny merchant vessels.
|
|
|
Post by Fredrik W on Aug 16, 2016 11:59:07 GMT -6
Some of the larger battles in the Mediterranean in WW2 were fought over smallish convoys. For example the Second battle of Sirte had far more warships than merchantmen participating.
|
|
|
Post by joebob73 on Aug 16, 2016 12:38:59 GMT -6
In actual practice, older battleships like ours escorted convoys to England and to the Fiji Islands all the time. The British did the same thing when escorting their convoys to the Med or the Far East. It isn't too far fetched although sometimes it really doesn't make any sense. No no no no. This was 20 bloody brand new dreadnoughts and battlecruisers escorting 4-6 tiny merchant vessels. That seems to be a side effect of the scripted quantity of merchant ships. Some of the larger battles in the Mediterranean in WW2 were fought over smallish convoys. For example the Second battle of Sirte had far more warships than merchantmen participating. Would it be possible to implement larger convoys that can show up towards the end of the game? With a major point reward if you manage to sink them all, but a significant point loss if the convoy escapes? Maybe even tie the "our forces have invaded/enemy forces have invaded" event to a successful defense of the convoy, as if the convoy was part of an amphibious assault force?
|
|
|
Post by jwsmith26 on Aug 16, 2016 13:22:39 GMT -6
I really like the idea of tying the fate of a convoy to the success of an invasion. It would make you feel like you are actually trying to accomplish a specific goal that could influence the course of the war. I wouldn't expect this to happen often in the game but when it did happen it would really ramp up the importance and intensity of the battle. Similarly, bombardment missions could also have an influence on invasions with a commensurate increase in the emotional involvement for the player. As it stands now most battles feel more like exercises in naval tactics. I feel that having a battle actually have a direct discernible influence on a specific event in the game would really increase player involvement.
|
|
|
Post by Fredrik W on Aug 16, 2016 13:33:38 GMT -6
I really like the idea of tying the fate of a convoy to the success of an invasion. It would make you feel like you are actually trying to accomplish a specific goal that could influence the course of the war. I wouldn't expect this to happen often in the game but when it did happen it would really ramp up the importance and intensity of the battle. Similarly, bombardment missions could also have an influence on invasions with a commensurate increase in the emotional involvement for the player. As it stands now most battles feel more like exercises in naval tactics. I feel that having a battle actually have a direct discernible influence on a specific event in the game would really increase player involvement. It is a good idea, not all that easily implemented however, but we'll see...
|
|
|
Post by joebob73 on Aug 16, 2016 13:36:56 GMT -6
I really like the idea of tying the fate of a convoy to the success of an invasion. It would make you feel like you are actually trying to accomplish a specific goal that could influence the course of the war. I wouldn't expect this to happen often in the game but when it did happen it would really ramp up the importance and intensity of the battle. Similarly, bombardment missions could also have an influence on invasions with a commensurate increase in the emotional involvement for the player. As it stands now most battles feel more like exercises in naval tactics. I feel that having a battle actually have a direct discernible influence on a specific event in the game would really increase player involvement. It is a good idea, not all that easily implemented however, but we'll see... It sounds hard enough to me, and I don't even program.
|
|
|
Post by jwsmith26 on Aug 16, 2016 14:50:09 GMT -6
I don't think it needs to be complex. Make sure the battle location is appropriate. Change the intro text to indicate that this convoy has been sent to help defend or implement the invasion. If you succeed in the battle it would provide a modifier to the invasion "die roll" either positive or negative. Same for bombardment mission with probably less of an impact.
Of course no programming task is impossible if you're not the one doing the programming. :-)
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Aug 16, 2016 20:40:56 GMT -6
In actual practice, older battleships like ours escorted convoys to England and to the Fiji Islands all the time. The British did the same thing when escorting their convoys to the Med or the Far East. It isn't too far fetched although sometimes it really doesn't make any sense. No no no no. This was 20 bloody brand new dreadnoughts and battlecruisers escorting 4-6 tiny merchant vessels. Well, that never happened, that I remember reading so yes, that is a bit much. Heck of waste of ships and fuel.
|
|
|
Post by rockmedic109 on Aug 16, 2016 22:34:00 GMT -6
Personally I find some battles are...Silly? I mean, why is my battlefleet attacking 2000 or less ton merchants, and why are these merchants being guarded by THEIR fleet!? ARE THEY TRANSPORTING GOLD OR SOMETHING!? Nope. The Admiral's mistress or his wife's vicious Pomeranian.
|
|
|
Post by srndacful on Aug 17, 2016 5:46:12 GMT -6
Well, the first thing that they might be carrying - to my mind - are supplies: food, water (with 1 litre extra if 'pasta rule' applies), troop replacements, spare parts, ammo, torpedoes, oil, paint, lubricant, top secret communications (too secret to be sent over the radio), general mail (letters to/from wives and/or girlfriends - except for the 'dear john' ones - those fuckers can get sunk anytime) - in other words, everything a healthy base of several tens of thousand of people needs to keep on functioning away from home.
Now, currently the system has the 'Naval Base Capacity' in an area which represents the amount of ships that can be 'serviced' there. However, it never gives a hint about what they are being serviced with. All the goods required are not produced in a base, but at home - which is tens of thousands (nautical) miles away - and they have to be shipped in (in most cases). Sure, there are things readily acquired from the area that base covers - but not everything.
And please note that it's not just a matter of bringing stuff over to the base from homeland - it's also a matter of bringing stuff to homeland. England in WW1 and WW2 was completely dependent on imported food which it needed just to survive. And that's not even mentioning everything else it needed to fight the war.
This, IMHO, is what those escorted convoys represent.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Aug 17, 2016 10:38:33 GMT -6
It's not hard for me to imagine that the escort started out smaller but after the other side committed to the attack, both navies called up reinforcements after evaluating radio or other intelligence until at the time the scenario starts both navies have sortied their entire main battle fleet. Jutland was not originally planned as a battle between Britain's and Germany's entire available battlefleets either if I recall correctly.
|
|
|
Post by thatzenoguy on Aug 17, 2016 10:51:15 GMT -6
It's not hard for me to imagine that the escort started out smaller but after the other side committed to the attack, both navies called up reinforcements after evaluating radio or other intelligence until at the time the scenario starts both navies have sortied their entire main battle fleet. Jutland was not originally planned as a battle between Britain's and Germany's entire available battlefleets either if I recall correctly. Nope. This wasn't 'after a day of fighting, reinforcments arrived'. This was '20 capital ships smashed against 20 capital ships who were defending some fishing boats'.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Aug 17, 2016 20:05:52 GMT -6
The turn is a month long and the scenario is only the final moments prior to the forces engaging each other. There are all kinds of scenarios where multiple capital ships could end up fighting around and over a small group of merchants. But if you have a problem with the idea that's fine. I don't share your concern. Pretty much any excuse for a fleet battle works for me.
|
|
|
Post by thatzenoguy on Aug 17, 2016 22:14:17 GMT -6
In the hypothetical RtW2....
I would REALLY like more army action.
I don't want to control it, but I want to know its there.
In some RtW games, my army literally does nothing, it apparently wins some battles, and loses them (at random...I want my armies to actually win when I have the naval advantage...).
Why can't I shell the crap out of a stupidly outnumbered enemy? Land troops, and take the place over?
It happens, SOMETIMES, at random, but again, I'd like some way of actually taking places over, suggest orders or something.
|
|