Confederate Ironclads?

[Capt Cliff]

I sent a Confederate ronclad out to clear the sea zone by New Bern and the timber clads whooped his butt, I mean sunk!! What the ..... ??? Damaged maybe but not sunk! Anybody else seen this?

[Habbaku]

Yep.  Building ironclads as the CSA is a wasted effort.  You're better off building more artillery.

[Erik Rutins]

It can happen - keep in mind that a lot of ironclads (especially Confederate) were not incredibly sea worthy and also had other design issues that could cause serious problems in an extended battle. Overall, ironclads have a huge advantage in terms of causing losses vs. taking them when it comes to fighting wooden ships in the game, but they are not completely invincible when significantly outnumbered. What were the exact parameters of the combat? What were the leaders involved on both sides?

[Berkut]

If you presume that a single cruiser in the game represents a squadron of ships, then the historical outcome of the Battle of Hampton Roads would be a damaged Confederate monitor and a damaged Union cruiser.

[Capt Cliff]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

It can happen - keep in mind that a lot of ironclads (especially Confederate) were not incredibly sea worthy and also had other design issues that could cause serious problems in an extended battle. Overall, ironclads have a huge advantage in terms of causing losses vs. taking them when it comes to fighting wooden ships in the game, but they are not completely invincible when significantly outnumbered. What were the exact parameters of the combat? What were the leaders involved on both sides?

Gee Erik I can't remember the particulars. I'll try it again and see what happens. I had the computer kick me out of the sea zone south of New Orleans with a gunboat!! Man was that embrassing!! [:D]

[Bo Rearguard]

Yeah, the same thing has happened to me. Never leave a transport fleet alone outside the Mississippi Delta. That 'lil gunboat squadron will pop out and damage it everytime. Sadly, there's no reaction phase in naval combat. [:D]

[Twotribes]

I had to send iron clads to two sea zones, the CSA built a fleet ( guess Ironclad) and kept beating my superior naval cruiser fleets. once I sent an Ironclad it quit coming out to play in both spots.

[Capt Cliff]

ORIGINAL: Bo Rearguard

Yeah, the same thing has happened to me. Never leave a transport fleet alone outside the Mississippi Delta. That 'lil gunboat squadron will pop out and damage it everytime. Sadly, there's no reaction phase in naval combat. [:D]

It wasn't a transport fleet it was a couple of cruisers!! Ergggg!

[Tempest_slith]

Speaking of Confederate ironclads:

In a naval combat with committed units of 2 Confederate ironclads vs 4 Union combat ships and 4 transports, I noticed that one ironclad fired against a transport rather than the expected Union combat ship. The rules are not clear if transports should be targets if untargeted naval combat units are available.

Was it per design intent that naval combat units not be given priority for selection as a target over transports? If so, this mechanic furthers the case of the futility of a Confederate naval response since the Union will invariably have several transport "escorts"with his naval combat units.

[Bo Rearguard]

ORIGINAL: Tempest1

Speaking of Confederate ironclads:

In a naval combat with committed units of 2 Confederate ironclads vs 4 Union combat ships and 4 transports, I noticed that one ironclad fired against a transport rather than the expected Union combat ship. The rules are not clear if transports should be targets if untargeted naval combat units are available.

Was it per design intent that naval combat units not be given priority for selection as a target over transports? If so, this mechanic furthers the case of the futility of a Confederate naval response since the Union will invariably have several transport "escorts"with his naval combat units.

Yeah...that does seem odd. You would think the cruisers, gunboats or ironclads would attempt to 'screen' the more vulnerable transports.

[JAMiAM]

ORIGINAL: Bo Rearguard

ORIGINAL: Tempest1

Speaking of Confederate ironclads:

In a naval combat with committed units of 2 Confederate ironclads vs 4 Union combat ships and 4 transports, I noticed that one ironclad fired against a transport rather than the expected Union combat ship. The rules are not clear if transports should be targets if untargeted naval combat units are available.

Was it per design intent that naval combat units not be given priority for selection as a target over transports? If so, this mechanic furthers the case of the futility of a Confederate naval response since the Union will invariably have several transport "escorts"with his naval combat units.

Yeah...that does seem odd. You would think the cruisers, gunboats or ironclads would attempt to 'screen' the more vulnerable transports.

You'd think, but then again it reminds me of that old truism. If you and your friend(s) are camping and are attacked by a bear, you don't have to be able to run faster than the bear. You only have to be able to run faster than your (slowest) friend...[;)]

That said, I agree with Tempest1 that it seems odd that the ironclads are preferring to attack transports when they are in the same region as cruisers. Especially since this gives a negative modifier to it for further engagements within the region. In my 2nd game with Erik, I built an ironclad in Mobile, sallied forth into the Gulf and my ship wasted its fire on transports instead of the cruiser squadrons and I have to say that I was pretty disappointed in this. It really should be fixed in a future update.