|
Post by dohboy on Jul 12, 2019 8:11:29 GMT -6
I am playing a game as Russia and have been at war with the French for 16 months. I have been blockaded since day one. The cowardly French have declined at least a half dozen fleet battles, yet the blockade persists. If they decide to hide in port rather than meet me in battle should not commerce resume at least for the next month?
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jul 12, 2019 8:42:51 GMT -6
I am playing a game as Russia and have been at war with the French for 16 months. I have been blockaded since day one. The cowardly French have declined at least a half dozen fleet battles, yet the blockade persists. If they decide to hide in port rather than meet me in battle should not commerce resume at least for the next month? I think that it should not. If you take geography, Germany can easily block Russia in Baltic Sea and still has good access to blockae you in North Sea. This is simulated in game that Russia has the worst coefficient for blockade.
In real history, geography was most important. Look at the Mediterranean in WW2. British was able to send convoys through the Mediterranean only if whole Mediterranean fleet tried to protect them and even that does not mean they made it. In WW1 Germany was blockaded by UK and it was not blockaded by heavy units. The blockade itself was done by light units, heavy units were there to counter raiding and actions of enemy fleet. But even if Germany did some raid it does not change anything about blockade itself.
|
|
|
Post by dohboy on Jul 12, 2019 9:08:28 GMT -6
Ok, say the situation were reversed. Russia blockading France yet hiding in the Baltic and refusing all battles. The game would still have France blockaded regardless of geography.
|
|
|
Post by dohboy on Jul 12, 2019 9:21:14 GMT -6
Another note on this French blockade, they aren't blockading me with light units. I have a large numerical advantage in cruisers and destroyers. They have 12 pre-dreads, while I only have 4. I should be able to chase them down or chase them home.
|
|
|
Post by kaguya on Jul 12, 2019 9:51:33 GMT -6
I am playing a game as Russia and have been at war with the French for 16 months. I have been blockaded since day one. The cowardly French have declined at least a half dozen fleet battles, yet the blockade persists. If they decide to hide in port rather than meet me in battle should not commerce resume at least for the next month? I think that it should not. If you take geography, Germany can easily block Russia in Baltic Sea and still has good access to blockae you in North Sea. This is simulated in game that Russia has the worst coefficient for blockade.
In real history, geography was most important. Look at the Mediterranean in WW2. British was able to send convoys through the Mediterranean only if whole Mediterranean fleet tried to protect them and even that does not mean they made it. In WW1 Germany was blockaded by UK and it was not blockaded by heavy units. The blockade itself was done by light units, heavy units were there to counter raiding and actions of enemy fleet. But even if Germany did some raid it does not change anything about blockade itself.
The Grand Fleet certainly wouldn't just sit idly by if the High Seas Fleet attempted to break the blockade though, OP should at least get the chance to fight fleet battles.
|
|
|
Post by alsadius on Jul 12, 2019 9:53:50 GMT -6
I saw a suggestion elsewhere about blockade mechanics - basically, that instead of a simple strength comparison, you click a button to attempt a blockade. Turning down a battle will lose you the blockade bonus, and it'll open up a couple new battle types.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Jul 12, 2019 10:18:11 GMT -6
I think that it should not. If you take geography, Germany can easily block Russia in Baltic Sea and still has good access to blockae you in North Sea. This is simulated in game that Russia has the worst coefficient for blockade.
In real history, geography was most important. Look at the Mediterranean in WW2. British was able to send convoys through the Mediterranean only if whole Mediterranean fleet tried to protect them and even that does not mean they made it. In WW1 Germany was blockaded by UK and it was not blockaded by heavy units. The blockade itself was done by light units, heavy units were there to counter raiding and actions of enemy fleet. But even if Germany did some raid it does not change anything about blockade itself.
The Grand Fleet certainly wouldn't just sit idly by if the High Seas Fleet attempted to break the blockade though, OP should at least get the chance to fight fleet battles. They did not but not all raids were intercepted. And even if they just sit in port how can German end the blockade which was distant blockade?
|
|
|
Post by alsadius on Jul 12, 2019 10:37:29 GMT -6
The Grand Fleet certainly wouldn't just sit idly by if the High Seas Fleet attempted to break the blockade though, OP should at least get the chance to fight fleet battles. They did not but not all raids were intercepted. And even if they just sit in port how can German end the blockade which was distant blockade? By escorting transports through. And in terms of international law, if a blockade isn't properly enforced, it's considered a "paper blockade", which neutrals don't need to respect. That'd reduce its effectiveness substantially, in practice.
|
|
|
Post by rodentnavy on Jul 12, 2019 11:16:47 GMT -6
The Grand Fleet certainly wouldn't just sit idly by if the High Seas Fleet attempted to break the blockade though, OP should at least get the chance to fight fleet battles. They did not but not all raids were intercepted. And even if they just sit in port how can German end the blockade which was distant blockade? The point is the actions of the Grand Fleet in game would be simulated by the clicking of the accept button. The RN frequently clicked accept only for the HSF to have clicked refuse and high tail off before they got there. Even on occasions where the British had only a single battle squadron out and it would have seemed the perfect opportunity for the Germans to click accept they did not. If the RN had hit refuse battle all the time the 1st Scouting Group would have been able to sail up to the GIUK gap and scatter the AMCs enforcing the blockade with impunity.
|
|
|
Post by lukasdietrich on Jul 12, 2019 11:51:07 GMT -6
The Black Sea during that time was the only year round ice free port for the Russians. Murmansk was ice blocked for long stretches and took forever to get through and goods like grain rotted before the inefficient Russia rail network could ship them. The Russian Far East had a terrible rail network and not much could get out that way. It was completed in 1916 but still had limited bandwidth.
The left the Black Sea which is easily blockaded by mines and forts. In WW1 when the Ottomans declared war on Russia, Russian grain exports declined by 95% within 60 days due to the Dardanelles being closed to them. At any given time the Russians had up to 300,000 men without rifles or ammunition to fire because imports were blocked. That was one of the factors along with a string of loses on land that led to revolution.
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Jul 12, 2019 12:08:45 GMT -6
There is no problem with the fact that Russia is very easily blockaded. The problem is mainly that the blockaded persist even if one side may active thought battle and the blockading party actively avoiding it.
Sure, the blockade can still be maintained the moment the Russian fleet stopped sorting to drive away blockade ships. However if the fleet russian constantly sortie out, the blockade should at be disrupted as blockading ships drop the blockade to avoid the Russian fleet. (This makes even more sense when considering country other than Russia. France can probably sit off northern France and still hold up Baltic traffic, but if Russia is blockading France but refuses battle, there is no way that the blockade can hold up with Russian ship retreating back to the Baltic and then hiding thereļ¼
A "force blockade" button is a good idea but it should not lead to automatic fleet engagement. The player can always refuse an blockade breaking engagement but lose the benefit of blockade for a month or two before it can be re-organized. Furthermore, if a blockade battle is refused there is a chance where the force trying to break the blockade gets a battle where they can engage the enemy cruisers and other light ships that's enforcing the blockade.
Also I am of the opinion that ships blockade weight should be modified. You need a lot of cruisers to maintain a blockade against most country. So I believe cruisers should have a higher blockade weight, or that they have a higher weight against countries with more open sea zones around their home area. Probably quite a bit of work to code the regional specific blockade value, but I think it helps against the "Battleship Fleet in Being blockading the enemy" phenomenon we are seeing.
|
|
|
Post by tortugapower on Jul 12, 2019 16:16:37 GMT -6
There is no problem with the fact that Russia is very easily blockaded. The problem is mainly that the blockaded persist even if one side may active thought battle and the blockading party actively avoiding it. This. It's been this way (and there have been complaints about it) since RtW1.
|
|
|
Post by dohboy on Jul 12, 2019 16:20:34 GMT -6
Update- The foolish French accepted a few major battles. They are now down to 8 pre-dreads to my 4. I also have 5 CAs and 4 CLs, they don't have a singne cruiser floating. By the naval strength bar on the map I have about a 10% lead in the area. Still blockaded when they decline battle...
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on Jul 12, 2019 16:35:05 GMT -6
Update- The foolish French accepted a few major battles. They are now down to 8 pre-dreads to my 4. I also have 5 CAs and 4 CLs, they don't have a singne cruiser floating. By the naval strength bar on the map I have about a 10% lead in the area. Still blockaded when they decline battle... A 70% force ratio is enough to blockade Russia based on RTW 1 numbers. I am not against the idea that a weaker force can keep Russian bottled necked in the Baltic, but yea, at this point you should have option to strike out and beat their fleet. Even if its fair that they can keep you blockaded with a weaker force, its not realistic when they don't need to take the risk of being brought to battle in upholding the blockade.
|
|
|
Post by Blothorn on Jul 12, 2019 16:39:32 GMT -6
Russia has a pretty substantial penalty to force strength for blockade calculations, which I think is realistic. A blockade by a fleet at port is most definitely not...
In WWI, if the GF had stayed in port the HSF could have very quickly hindered the blockade by attacking the auxiliary cruisers that actually enforced it--maintaining an efficacious blockade, even with geographic advantages, requires a considerable number of ships constantly at sea. RtW2's "decline" button is not the equivalent of just keeping the battleships in port but every last ship of the navy; I think it obvious that a blockade could not proceed under those conditions.
Edit: this is, IMO, the most game-breaking aspect of the blockade mechanics, but even in the best of circumstances I think RTW's blockade calculation ignores the necessities of blockade action. Battleships aren't very useful for blockades; they are too vulnerable without escort, and a battleship+escort does not cover much more sea than a lone auxiliary cruiser. Destroyers also aren't very useful, except if you can blockade at a chokepoint with fair weather (such as the anti-submarine blockade of AH in WWI); they lack the endurance and seaworthiness for e.g. the North Sea blockade.
|
|