|
Post by dorn on Jun 13, 2019 7:04:49 GMT -6
Is there any difference between setting cruiser to TP (Trade Protection) and AF (Active duty) in foreign stations?
I have checked that ship as TP on foreign station count towards fullfilment FS requirements.
I have quite issue intercepting raiders. In RTW I regurarly intercepts radiers by cruisers on AF or have report that they thwart enemy raider, but in RTW2 I have very rare interception missions and reports of my cruisers thwart enemy raider. It is quite strange as I usually use a large number of light cruisers.
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Jun 13, 2019 7:15:47 GMT -6
I have quite issue intercepting raiders. In RTW I regurarly intercepts radiers by cruisers on AF or have report that they thwart enemy raider, but in RTW2 I have very rare interception missions and reports of my cruisers thwart enemy raider. It is quite strange as I usually use a large number of light cruisers. For this reason, while my (or the AI's for that matter) late-game subs get massacred in a matter of months, almost no matter how much of them are available at the beginning, my limited experience with raiders is fairly excellent. They operate longer than they have any right to do, and do so in areas where if I would accept a fleet battle, with actual CAP, AA cover etc., it would be a struggle for survival due to the land-based air. ...but when everything is gloomy and doomy, a handful of raiders come and save the day! One instance, I can't recall exactly unfortunately, but as A-H probably in a mid-size game against UK-ITA I started building 10 AMCs, but sadly, they yielded before I could finish those in four months, out of the blue, for no observable reason. I guess they realized that I am about to put some guns on some civilian vessels and that frightened them like no other.
|
|
|
Post by srndacful on Jun 13, 2019 20:58:47 GMT -6
Is there any difference between setting cruiser to TP (Trade Protection) and AF (Active duty) in foreign stations?
I have checked that ship as TP on foreign station count towards fullfilment FS requirements.
I have quite issue intercepting raiders. In RTW I regurarly intercepts radiers by cruisers on AF or have report that they thwart enemy raider, but in RTW2 I have very rare interception missions and reports of my cruisers thwart enemy raider. It is quite strange as I usually use a large number of light cruisers.
Looks like you've got to put your cruisers in TP (Trade Protection) for them to start thwarting raiders in RtW2. I also wondered why my cruisers didn't seem to intercept any raiders, until I browsed the manual and it mentioned setting cruisers on TP - so I tried it out and, lo and behold, the number of merchants lost dropped from nearly a dozen to just a couple max. Come to think of it, I do believe all of those are being lost in colonies, too. So I'll have to try placing cruisers on TP there, as well.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jun 13, 2019 23:30:50 GMT -6
Is there any difference between setting cruiser to TP (Trade Protection) and AF (Active duty) in foreign stations?
I have checked that ship as TP on foreign station count towards fullfilment FS requirements.
I have quite issue intercepting raiders. In RTW I regurarly intercepts radiers by cruisers on AF or have report that they thwart enemy raider, but in RTW2 I have very rare interception missions and reports of my cruisers thwart enemy raider. It is quite strange as I usually use a large number of light cruisers.
Looks like you've got to put your cruisers in TP (Trade Protection) for them to start thwarting raiders in RtW2. I also wondered why my cruisers didn't seem to intercept any raiders, until I browsed the manual and it mentioned setting cruisers on TP - so I tried it out and, lo and behold, the number of merchants lost dropped from nearly a dozen to just a couple max. Come to think of it, I do believe all of those are being lost in colonies, too. So I'll have to try placing cruisers on TP there, as well. I came to similar conclusion which means there is difference from RTW when all ships on active duty are sometimes used to hunt raiders or protect convoys. It is pitty that this important thing is not stated in manual separately because from "Trade protection" section is not easy to know that there is such a change.
|
|
|
Post by brygun on Jun 14, 2019 11:08:33 GMT -6
I came to similar conclusion which means there is difference from RTW when all ships on active duty are sometimes used to hunt raiders or protect convoys. It is pitty that this important thing is not stated in manual separately because from "Trade protection" section is not easy to know that there is such a change. OOf Well that may explain a few things PS... Going AV for raiders. With a minimal 3 floatplane group and similiar guns to an AMC, but no mines, they cost twice as much but can get used in many wars. Makes them the more economical long term solution. Take ~12 months to build so AMC still have a use an emergency or replacement system midwar.
|
|
|
Post by JagdFlanker on Jun 14, 2019 11:58:47 GMT -6
interesting concept using AVs as raiders - will try it out in the future
i made a design that's my normal AMC design except i gave it 25kts speed instead if 21kts (25kts costs $5.2mil instead of $4.4mil for 21kts), which is likely unnecessary since AMCs seem to do ok at 21kts even late game
and i mounted F/A guns instead of 1/2/3/4 since you can with AVs
as brygun points out AVs can't carry mines though so that (might be) a minus
however building raider AVs instead of AMCs at best works out to be a wash in the long run - they cost double to build, but after 15 years every ship's monthly maintenance goes way up so you'l likely only get 2 wars out of them before they start really costing you
also you get the best results with raiders if you have 30+ so you need to build a lot for them to be most effective, and you have to pay for them during peacetime
still, it's fun trying a different approach - just to see how it works out
|
|
|
Post by arminpfano on Jun 14, 2019 12:11:17 GMT -6
In my recent game I tried AV as a substitution for CLs on foreign stations. Works well, they even get the 25% bonus for a colony build. I build 6000 ts AV with 16 knots, 5 planes, and two 6" guns only. They cost about half the price and the maintenance of a regular CL, anf if you like to stack posessions with every won war (like me), you need a lot of cheap ships to fulfull the FS requirements without burning all your budget.
Interestingly up to now (1915 - 1940) no single AV was attacked by an enemy cruiser, only one sunk by a sub. Ok, I send them in remote areas, but with FS on they also wander around a little. Im not sure if this game behaviour is intended, or some kind of exploit.
|
|
|
Post by brygun on Jun 14, 2019 13:39:35 GMT -6
The AVR (Aviation ship raider) designs we talked a lot about in a recent thread here: nws-online.proboards.com/thread/2568/using-float-planesThe AV choice for a raider means = you don't have to put in any armor (pros and cons there for sure) which mostly benefits on the cost per raider = can be built at any speed so is free of the AMC speed limit, means running away on a tactical battle more likely = can't take mines which I take as a minus as dropping mines in enemy trade lanes ought to help a raider = AMC takes 4 months to build and about 1/2 the price, the AVR will take ~12 months to build but doesnt get sold off at the end of each war Prior to having the floatplane tech I did use small CL for pre-positioned raiders. Once floatplanes are a thing they of course got a refit to have one. Having at least one floatplane on a ship is a bonus to raiding or counter-raiding. Pre-positioned raiding puts 1-2 on sea zones which is generally within the "free" ship support limit. AT the out break of a way they immediately start raiding vs the AMCs having to take at least 4 months to build plus if you allow a few months of working up. 8-12 raiders CLR or AVR can really bust up the enemy merchant state so that they give up quickly. Basics are: = 3 float planes (IIRC the minimum to be an AV ship) in a hanger, cause well it should be in a hanger. More than 1 means one can be broken needing maintenance and you still have an air scout. = Main guns: 5" guns as 1 x forward A, 2 x aft as singles in #3 and #4. torpedoes are a yes, either submerged in the early game or 2-3 racks on the deck later. (torps give some minor chance of messing up a big enemy interceptor if you happen to run into each other at night time short ranges) = Speed: High 24, 26 or 28 knots (better odds at choosing on the tactical map whether to fight or not and possibly affects raider odds) = Torpedo protection when available, if nothing else reprsenting filling the ship's hold with self containted air bubbles like ping pong balls (yes thats a thing) to individually sealed barrels.
|
|
|
Post by brygun on Jun 14, 2019 13:47:30 GMT -6
however building raider AVs instead of AMCs at best works out to be a wash in the long run - they cost double to build, but after 15 years every ship's monthly maintenance goes way up so you'l likely only get 2 wars out of them before they start really costing you
also you get the best results with raiders if you have 30+ so you need to build a lot for them to be most effective, and you have to pay for them during peacetime
still, it's fun trying a different approach - just to see how it works out
There is that initial build (or build and work up) gap for making AMCs where the pre-positioned raiders are already collapsing the enemy's economy. (though Im repeating that point) Another point of debate on the AMC-AVR (or AVC) is that to be ready to make many AMCs I need huge on hand cash. Seeing that Im far more likely put the funds into permament ships. There is the possibility of deploying a "core" of prepositioned raiders and then adding more AMCs at the outbreak of war. As to how frequently the wars occur as I'm playing Japan and ending with near-UK level peacetime economy I don't wait very long to be fighting somebody. 15 years Id probably have had 3-5 wars with minor powers yielding a colony or so each time. I have used the core AVR + AMC boost though never upto 30 raiders at once.
|
|
|
Post by brygun on Jun 14, 2019 14:12:17 GMT -6
Apparently Im building AVR much bigger than JagdFlanker. This is a late war one with a few bells and whistles like Torpedo Protection. I do find the main gun layout A, 3, 4 useful for having 2 guns to rear or side when retreating from an interceptor Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by JagdFlanker on Jun 14, 2019 15:16:33 GMT -6
Apparently Im building AVR much bigger than JagdFlanker. This is a late war one with a few bells and whistles like Torpedo Protection. I do find the main gun layout A, 3, 4 useful for having 2 guns to rear or side when retreating from an interceptor if you are manually resolving the battles then yes, bells and whistles can come in handy lol
you honestly don't need the catapults, (hanger), fire control, or anything more than basic of armament to be a successful raider. cheap is the best since you can auto-resolve and not care if it sinks. you generally don't lose more than 1 per turn and if you have 30+ then you'r good for a while
raiders are the 2nd best way to collapse an enemy after blockading, when blockading isn't an option. if you don't have a port in your enemy's home area then you have to use raiders to get them to collapse - if you want to acquire territory by invasion and not care if they collapse then you don't need blockade or raiders, and the war will end eventually, more likely in a comprimise
if you are going the raider route you need to budget for it. this is why i prune my navy and keep them AF in peace - wars starts and now i have all that extra war cash to immediately buy AMCs with, and none of it is taken by ships just out of mothballs and now costing a ton more than they were during peace taking up all your war bonus cash
|
|