|
Post by hardlec on Dec 15, 2018 11:34:25 GMT -6
Ruthless Aggressive Conservative Cautious
There is a choice of how submarines are used (i.e. unrestricted)
A country's stance on naval war should be taken into account. In WWI most nations we're cautious or conservative, not taking big risks with expensive assets. In WWII Pacific theater, the belligerents were aggressive or ruthless. (US submarine warfare was Ruthless in the Pacific. Even compared to Rader.)
Example: The CSA in in a war with Russia. The CSA adopts a cautious stance. Russia has to take the war to them. Suddenly the CSAs Battleships, with short range and cramped quarters, become formidable because they never leave home waters. The CSA won't win territory, but it won't get Tshushima'ed.
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on Dec 15, 2018 14:58:44 GMT -6
Interesting. I think that there is already some element of that in deciding to move one's fleet or not but perhaps this could be an added option, weighting battles towards fleet battles or to isolated skirmishes. Probably difficult to implement at the moment though.
|
|