Shore bombardment is too powerful

[sveint]

I've been testing shore bombardment and it's not only too powerful, but useful in all sorts of inappropriate cases.

Have trouble advancing in Egypt, bring in a fleet and watch the odds explode. Use the French fleet like never done in history and support a land battle one hex inland.

I'd go so far as to say it's the one last "exploit" left.

In my opinion, shore bombardment should only help invasions, and the effects should be much less.

[Flaviusx]

It might be too strong for non invasions, but I'd leave it alone so far as invasions go, especially with garrisons getting a recent buff.

[Nirosi]

That would probably be a nice compromise indeed. Nerf it for non-invasions/non-beach fighting only.

[Villain]

IMHO, I feel it's well balanced as it is and provides additional choices to the game.

The allies have one decent ability that they can use in offense and defense throughout the entire war if they don't throw away their ships needlessly.

In the early game the Axis can easily neutralise the advantage by not directing their entire blitz effort in France along the coast and using their airpower to clear ships from the channel before a real or threatened Sealion.

Ships are essentially irreplaceable and the axis should take every opportunity to sink those that they can. Researching naval air (Germany only since the italians suck [:'(]) is useful as is having strong German land and air units in North Africa. As it is its already too easy to ignore the Atlantic wall and North Africa and send everything to the east to stomp the Soviets.

Also it would be near impossible for the Allies to advance in Italy or into the Netherlands without using Naval Bombardment.

[Nirosi]

(Germany only since the italians suck )

Now now, let’s not trash poor defenseless Italy. I love to play this little country, so I take it personally! [:'(]

With Naval airplanes I have had both bad (mostly!) experiences with Germany and Italy and (some here and there) good ones.

But I still think (maybe biased) that it can make sense for Italy to do it (instead or as well as Germany) because they are one year ahead. And this compensate their lower experience (although I think 45 national XP could be better for Italian air units instead of 40XP but that is another question).

If I understand the mechanic correctly a newly arriving 1940 Italian Tactical (at 100% readiness) would have a Naval air rating of 1.2 while a German one of 1939 would be 1. For a Ground support version of the Naval air, the numbers would be respectively 1.6 to 1.5.

In 1942 (compared to Germany 1941) we can assume that Italy’s air XP is up to 45 (not such a bad assumption from my experience). So, for tactical type of planes, it would be 1.8 for Italy to 1.5 for Germany. For Ground support type it would be 2.25 to 2.

Also, I believe the opportunity cost is lower for Italy since they will have one less plane for mediocre ground support (Italy sucks even more at ground support) in exchange for an OK naval air. But for Germany, it will forfeit a very good tac probably for a mediocre, to OK, naval air.

But but but…, as I can also see the other side, this can change a lot if Germany catches up the tech on Italy or, if instead of building a naval air, they take one of their advanced tactical units at 60% XP let’s say and convert it into a 58% XP naval air. [X(] Now that is indeed clearly much more impressive...

Also, I did not calculate the defense value for each. Some year, Germany’s ones might be higher even if at lower tech.

[Nirosi]

Sorry, I have highjacked the thread of Naval support. Not on purpose, but Italy's reputation was at stake.

My bad!

[ncc1701e]

I will highjack the thread a second time to say that carrier based planes bombardment well inside France (not far from Metz) during Fall Gelb is a little unreal.
And given carrier based planes of 1939/1940, their impact on effectiveness of an infantry corps or a panzer corps are well overrated.

[Flaviusx]

I might have to start using carriers in France instead of chasing subs...

This whole business of using carriers to shadow uboats is very tedious, tbh.

[stjeand]

Carriers do some good hits in France...though they have to be kept safe or the Luftwaffe will sink them.

[ncc1701e]

They do too good hits for me and too far away from the coastline.
This is just unreal.

[Nirosi]

I do not know if the range is ok or not. But if a range is good for anti-naval, should be good for anti-land if the CVs are willing to take the risk of hugging the coast? And they are still the aircrafts with the least range of the game and from 39 to 45.

But for hits, I guess it depends how many groups are involved? Two CV groups have the same number of planes as a land based air unit.

The component of the air group might be hard to evaluate for a fair comparaison however. I seems to recall that CV air groups are 2/3 bombers and 1/3 fighters (or a single type of aircraft doing both roles, usually badly in at least one role). But then again, land-based bombers also include some intrinsic escorts in their numbers according to the manual. So maybe the number of bombers of 2 CV groups could be close, or not that far off, to a land based bomber?

Also, one thing that might play in their favor making them better than expected is the 60% experience of the Royal Navy?

[Nirosi]

PS: Thanks for highjacking the thread a second time after me. Now I feel less bad[:D]

[Flaviusx]

With 4 tactical bombers it's going to be hard to keep the luftwaffe out of range, at least once they've got airfields in Belgium.

My own German build adds two ground support, and I personally would be able to spare the 4 tactical and just use 4 ground support for the land advance. Sinking UK CVs is a high priority target if possible.

You might be able to arrange it so the German bombers have to fly out of escort range.

[Nirosi]

I'm too much of a coward with my CVs to use them to maybe slow down the fall of France by a turn. [:(] Rather keep them in a safer place and take risks only for a life or death situation (or incredible opportunities) where the risk is clearly worth it.

Of course, that is beside the obvious mistakes of jugement, of range calculation, of miss-clicks and sometimes impulsive reactions [:D]

[stjeand]

Well back to shore bombardment...

It is WAY to powerful.

I had one attack change from a 3 to 1 to a 7 to 1...

Should not be able to more than double your odds.

Perhaps double at best? Maybe it was a 3.5 to 1 which rounded down?

There has to be a limit. I don't want a 1 to 1 to go to a 5 or 6 to 1.




As for carriers...

Yes 2 carriers appear to cause more damage than a tactical wing which is WAY wrong.
You need 4 carriers to have to same number of planes as a LBA...AND CVs are a much more mixed wing...1/3 fighter 1/3 tactical 1/3 ground for the most part.

[sveint]

How big is a hex? Why should bombardment affect a land battle?

I just figured out the fleets are decicive in Egypt, forget "desert warfare", it's all about bringing in that bombardment and you can pulverize even a full-strength panzer or UK armour, turning a 1to1 into a rout, even overrun.

[sveint]

Axis example.

[Flaviusx]

Whoever brings out the fleet to play first in the Med risks getting it sunk by the other side. So there is an element of risk involved here. You might blow up one hex once, and then you've shot your wad. (Unless the UK player foolishly did not leave a substantial fleet down there. This does happen from time to time.)

So you have to be pretty selective about when you throw down that ace.

For all of that, the effect of shore bombardment is pretty wild. I wouldn't mind seeing it toned down for non invasions, as I said above.

[Flaviusx]

You can also see this on the defense, BTW. Try attacking a unit with a fleet parked next to in support. It will cost you dearly. That gives the French navy and the Baltic Sea Fleet something to do. The Baltic See fleet should probably never even sortie from base aside from the sub, as long as it sits there it is going to make taking Leningrad very difficult. The German can bomb it, but that's what flak is for.

For D Day, the allies can also take advantage of this. Keep as much of the fleet hugging the shores at all times as possible to make German counterattacks a bloody proposition.

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

You can also see this on the defense, BTW. Try attacking a unit with a fleet parked next to in support. It will cost you dearly. That gives the French navy and the Baltic Sea Fleet something to do. The Baltic See fleet should probably never even sortie from base aside from the sub, as long as it sits there it is going to make taking Leningrad very difficult. The German can bomb it, but that's what flak is for.

No more possible, no shore bombardment if fleet is in port. Otherwise, all the French fleet was in Calais and Dunkerque to stop the Panzer corps there.