Carrier warfare discovery!

[CaesarAug]

Ok, many of you more experienced players may already know this, but I just discovered something regarding the dynamics of carrier warfare.

Borrowing on Hairog’s Naval War Mods for the SC series of games, I am tinkering with the editor and experimenting with unit stats adjustments. I have deactivated for the time being, the naval defence evasion percentages…

As it turns out, one of his ideas for more historical realism regarding naval and carrier warfare, is setting the carrier attack values for surface ships (excluding submarines and carriers, of course) to 0.

This has the effect of simulating the (historically) virtual impossibility of surface ships getting within range of carriers, actually damaging them and even sinking them, all within the parameters of the SC game system.

Furthermore, the ZoC for all ships is set to +6, and I’m experimenting with reducing the default action points for all major surface units to 12 (24 naval cruise, will test 36 naval cruise to compensate).

This makes naval ZoC more restrictive of ships just seeming to pop out of nowhere and fairly easily get within the 1-hex firing range, even against carriers, though if not properly escorted by CL and DD screens.

ZoC of +6 and naval units default action points of 12 may be too restrictive, further testing is required, but what little testing so far, looks pretty interesting. Perhaps appropriate research can increase the naval action points…

But the carrier warfare discovery I made is… COOL. Having managed to get major surface units (with carrier attack values set to 0) adjacent to enemy carriers, has the expected result of no damage being caused to the carrier itself, though with a supply point loss for the attacked carrier, and at times some readiness loss, BUT…

As the battle takes place, I notice that the surface units (with their air unit defence stats) occasionally cause strength point losses to the enemy carriers’ aircraft complement! I didn’t know this dynamic! This simulates the attacked carrier defending itself from naval surface unit attacks, with occasional aircraft complement strength point losses, BUT the carrier itself stays out of the enemy surface units’ gun range, as it were. This is awesome!

[BillRunacre]

Very cool, and it's great to see you and others getting modding!

[SittingDuck]

OK, I want to hear more about this as you go about tinkering, please.

I myself have been playing with the AT units, reducing their attack capacity and other features, such as action points. This is having the effect of the AI using them purely as defense units (mass AT complexes such as at Kursk). They are either operationally redeployed (to move distances), or they chug along. No more leading assaults. I still need to make them 'not nice' to run up against with armor. It is a hard balance, because early war AT units aren't going to be sporting incredibly more powerful guns than the medium tanks. And a network of AT guns is not going to all be made up of 88mm monsters. So having the AT units not significantly out-perform the heavy tanks is the challenge.

Carry on!

[CaesarAug]

Having been able to conduct further carrier/naval warfare in my mod, inspired by Hairog’s Naval War Mods, I’ve made additional cool discoveries which are consistent with gameplay. In fact, I was very pleasantly surprised to verify the parameters are indeed working as designed.

I have come to establish 18 Action Points as a good typical universal naval standard (troop transports 18 as well, amphibious 6, long-range amphibious 12), combined with a universal naval ZoC of +6.

All surface naval units have a default 25% attack and defence damage evasion positioning, upgradable by 5% per level, 5 levels of naval warfare doctrine, maxing out therefore at 50% attack/defence evasion. Still testing these parameters…

All surface naval units (except carriers and of course excluding submarines) have 0 carrier attack values. This means there is no possibility of damaging nor sinking enemy carriers by surface unit gunfire, historically simulating the virtual impossibility of surface units coming within range of their shipboard guns to fire at carriers. These settings seem to reflect that well enough. The most surface units can do to carriers by “attacking” them with 0 carrier attack values is reduce the carrier’s supply per attack—and likewise expend supply points—and possibly disarm the carrier by gradually reducing its aircraft strength to 0. All at the risk of being sunk by the “attacked” carrier “defending” itself with its aircraft.

However… a surface unit can of course reach an adjacent hex and technically “attack” a carrier, and the carrier will “defend” itself by using its aircraft complement to strike at the “attacking” surface unit. But in reality, the “attacking” surface unit against a carrier is actually “defending” itself from the carrier’s “attacking” aircraft that is in turn “defending” the carrier.

The new discovery this time was that the carrier’s mode, i.e., fighter CAP, bombers, or mixed fighter and bombers, DO make an impact on surface unit vs. carrier battles… EVEN WHEN a carrier is being “attacked” by surface units. It’s actually logical, but I was pleasantly surprised since I was under the mistaken impression that the 3 carrier modes only had an impact when the carrier itself was “attacking”, not when a carrier was “defending.” So yes, that’s cool… [:D]

If the “attacked” carrier’s mode is set to fighter CAP, both the carrier’s aircraft and the “attacking” surface unit will not normally take any damage, other than expending a supply point per battle.

If the “attacked” carrier’s mode is set to bombers, the carrier’s aircraft will be especially damaging to the “attacking” surface unit, but will take little or no damage from the “attacking” surface unit.

And if the carrier’s mode is set to mixed fighters/bombers, both the carrier’s aircraft and the “attacking” surface unit will more likely take on more damage.

This modding seems to provide for the historical reality of surface units not really coming within range of their guns to shoot at carriers, since these were extremely rare and isolated exceptions during World War II, as Hairog points out in his Naval War Mod notes.

This setup also provides a framework for dissuading surface unit attacks against carriers, because a carrier cannot be damaged nor sunk in this manner (because surface units cannot really close the range, as per history), and that carriers can, notwithstanding, damage and even sink “attacking” surface units, while taking little or moderate damage to its air strength, at most, or if at all, depending on the carrier’s mode setting as described above.

In other words, surface unit “attacks” against carriers can only do so much, while the “attacked” carrier can damage or even sink the “attacking” surface unit while “defending” itself with its aircraft. In this way, carriers can be damaged and/or sunk, only by other carrier-based aircraft, submarines, and land-based aircraft, as was historically the case in WW2.

What testing I have done so far seems to provide interesting battle results.

[SittingDuck]

Fascinating. This brings up some of what Elessar2 was testing in his mod and made a thread about (the ability of carrier's to whammy the attacking unit, but in this case it was the attacking carrier).

I am definitely interested to learn more. I do not like, even with Hairog's mod, the level of lethality that tends to be present. But that could be me.

So I guess a question is, with the zero carrier attack status, does the AI still attempt to attack the carriers with surface units?

One thing also I am wondering and that is, are naval units able to spot other naval units way too easily in this game? Would some level of reduction in that be historical?

IDK... I am not a naval guy, but it intrigues me, and obviously it is critical part of the puzzle.

[CaesarAug]

What testing I’ve done so far, tweaking the carrier’s naval and carrier attack & defence values, in combination with certain research modifications, I’m finding setting those default values of 2 for escort carriers and 4 for fleet carriers, both upgradeable to 4 and 6, respectively, and also with two strikes, seems to provide reasonable lethality towards enemy surface units and carriers. In both instances of carriers “attacking” & “defending” against surface units.

As for the AI attacking carriers with 0 carrier attack capability for surface units, I cannot say from my hotseat testing thus far. If it does not attack then it’s a reasonable tactic, the same, really, why a human player wouldn’t attack like this either. Or at least not normally, since it is not normally worth the risk to the surface units.

As for naval spotting in open seas, SC makes no provision for naval units avoiding spotting each other if they come within their native naval spotting range. In other words, it’s automatic. Some reduction would indeed be more historical. I have tried setting naval spotting to 0, in the hope that naval spotting can only occur if a naval unit traveled through an enemy occupied sea hex, and only then, thus reducing naval spotting overall. While the editor does allow a setting of 0, it still registers as 1 hex naval spotting in-game. At least in previous patches.

[Elessar2]

Keeping a huge fleet stealthy before the Big Attack was also an issue in my game with OCB, made worse by my confirmation that the replay saves the time spent moving all of those units around in the fog of war. As long as no stacking & auto spotting exists in this game system then that will be an issue, unless you make a huge map giving them more space to hide in. [Something I have considered despite the massive time sink it would require]

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: Elessar2

Keeping a huge fleet stealthy before the Big Attack was also an issue in my game with OCB, made worse by my confirmation that the replay saves the time spent moving all of those units around in the fog of war. As long as no stacking & auto spotting exists in this game system then that will be an issue, unless you make a huge map giving them more space to hide in. [Something I have considered despite the massive time sink it would require]

Here are some observations about this behavior in the comment section on my YT channel:

John DiFool:
I've wondered about the replay length there when the enemy is doing a ton of "invisible" moves, and this clinches it. [Yes I was as the next turn will show] I had assumed it just showed the opponent what he could see in the FOW, not dependent on the actual time the turn took to do, but had already noticed these long delays before. That I think could be an issue since it works outside of the game engine itself (a meta kind of thing). I've already decried to the devs how you can see things in the graphs and tables that shouldn't be known if FOW is turned on, but they've stuck to their guns.

If Spying & Intelligence for example told you something like "We have detected a lot of radio traffic in the Coral Sea the last turn" then it would have the same effect but still working within the game itself, and not an artifact of how the designer set up the replays.

Balthazor's Strategic Arcana:
There's more to this observation that I noticed absolutely. When playing The Colonel on YT, and then watching his series later on...at the beginning of his turn...sometimes his view would spring to a piece of oceanic real estate that was devoid of ships. Mind you..we played those turn weeks or even a month before. But curiosity had me look at my recordings of the previous turn..and viola! My ships were moving through there.

I had suspected this when playing MP SC-WW1...especially when moving ships and subs.
I had mentioned these observations to a few people I knew who were well versed in the mechanics..and they suspected this behavior as well.

Some of us think some of the so-called top players understand this, and quietly gain an edge because of this quirk. I have no idea about that.

I do know its true...also..because of the extensive hot-seat tests I have done. Weirdly..it seems to view the area with the most activity and not others. Not certain about that.

Also..I have a fast gaming computer..so the blue wheel usually only spins for a brief time as the replay is processed..but..when the number of ships moved increases..it spins longer.

You could role-play this I quess as a 'Gut Feeling', 'Whisper in the Air', or my favorite we used to use [in real life]: ''The Weird Radio"..an almost Psi feeling of the enemies new intent. This is a real thing..so, well..maybe this behavior simulates that haha!

Here's a link..just watching the replay is all that is needed. Btw..I have a Republic of Gamer's ASUS computer that processes most of these plays fast...not so here..and it gave me an indication the Elessar was moving his task forces en-mass.

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVHAt8x56-Y