naval combat improvement

[generalfdog]

2 things I think would improve naval combat: 1 it seems like very often even when cvs are involved it becomes a surface combat, it seems like that should be less likely, and 2 I think larger fleets are too easy to spot, they should be easier to spot than small ones for sure but harder than they are now. imho

[generalfdog]

The other issue with naval combat is that small forces in fleet mode will interdict much larger forces causing them to be destroyed but if they are in raider mode they can't attack anything So what about a no interdict button or allowing attacks in raider mode? maybe with a reduced chance of spotting kinda like night moves

[AlvaroSousa]

CV forces are 1/2 as likely to get a surface combat. On top of that the CVs are the least likely to be targeted when in surface combat.

It was a simple solution. You should keep CVs back from any land. You should also have 2 escort ships + 4 CVs in the small fleet not just 6 CVs. While the counter does have escorts intrinsically 4 CVs should be the default force.

Larger fleets are slightly easier to spot. If I remember +1% per group.

That added button is somewhere on the wishlist.

[generalfdog]

Thanks Alvaro. Good info. Glad to hear the no interdict button is in the works that is awesome!

[ncc1701e]

Few things that could help naval combat to get out of its lethargy not in WP2 but in WPP next patch.

1. Change the range of Naval Attack

Since the fleets are limited by two operation points, I would suggest to increase the range of Naval Attack for surface fleets.

Today, subs can perfectly perform Sub Attack at a distance of 3 hexes.

---

Sub Attack - 3 hexes.JPG (59.68 KiB) Viewed 2044 times

---

However, surface ships are limited to a Naval Attack at a distance of 1 hex. My suggestion would be to allow performing a Naval Attack at a distance of two hexes. Two hexes distance because it is allowing to attack, each turn, enemy ships that are trying to perform Port Blockade. This, without fearing a carrier / surface interdiction the next turn...

---

Naval Attack - only 1 hex possible.JPG (71.16 KiB) Viewed 2044 times

---

Naval Attack - 2 hexes impossible.JPG (68.05 KiB) Viewed 2044 times

[ncc1701e]

2. Add a limit on the numbers of CV in a task force

Looking at several OOB of Japanese and US task forces during the war, even in 1944, it was very unusual to see 6 CVs in one task force.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippin ... k_Force_58
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_ ... _Force_38)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okinawa_n ... _Force_58)

Hence to limit the destruction power of the ignominious carrier interdiction, I would suggest to add a limit on the numbers of CV in a given task force.

For Small Fleet scenarios only:
. 4 Fleet Carriers i.e. 4 CV max in a given naval stack.
. 5 CV in a given naval stack can be achieved ONLY with the usage of 4 CV and 1 CVL/CVE.

Something like this would represent the maximum number of CV in a task force. For Japan in the early war, they have enough CV and CVL/CVE to form two task forces of this type.

---

CV stack 1.JPG (80.07 KiB) Viewed 2035 times

---

CV stack 2.JPG (120.06 KiB) Viewed 2035 times

[ncc1701e]

3. Saving bottomed ships

Today, if a ship is bottomed in a port level that can't be repaired. They are lost for the whole duration of the game. Like what is done for Airfield building, I would suggest to allow a land unit with Engineers to have a 10-25% of chance, each turn, to raise the bottomed ships in any given port, without repairing their damages of course.

---

Bottomed 1.JPG (69.59 KiB) Viewed 2030 times

---

Bottomed 2.JPG (95.91 KiB) Viewed 2030 times

---

Bottomed 3.JPG (98.91 KiB) Viewed 2030 times

[generalfdog]

I agree, I have been thinking that ever since we went to small fleet that 6 cvs was a bit much

[AlvaroSousa]

Players should.... have 4x CV + 2x escorting ships to take blows.

Putting 6x CV in a force means it is a guaranteed sink or damage on a CV.

In effect both fleets are equal. a 6x CV fleet does 50% more damage but the 4x CV fleet is 1/3rd less likely for the CVs to be damaged. Those values are equal. Except that the smaller CV fleet can put 2 cheaper naval unit to absorb the damage.

At least that is the mathematical theory behind it.

The 2 hex range naval ships I can't do. I also don't understand the reasoning why you need 2 hexes for a naval attack.

But in WP2 all missions are based on points. So if a fleet has 24 operation points a move is 1 per hex an action might be 6 operation points. I forgot the exact number. So a player can move, attack, retreat. But if they move too far and attack their retreat might not be as far or none at all.

[AlvaroSousa]

As for bottomed naval groups in small ports. I'd have to see if I could code that and research it.

[ncc1701e]

Players should.... have 4x CV + 2x escorting ships to take blows.

Putting 6x CV in a force means it is a guaranteed sink or damage on a CV.

In effect both fleets are equal. a 6x CV fleet does 50% more damage but the 4x CV fleet is 1/3rd less likely for the CVs to be damaged. Those values are equal. Except that the smaller CV fleet can put 2 cheaper naval unit to absorb the damage.

At least that is the mathematical theory behind it.

Interesting, I will try this in hotseat. Because in Carrier Interdiction, CV are the first targeted for me.

[ncc1701e]

The 2 hex range naval ships I can't do. I also don't understand the reasoning why you need 2 hexes for a naval attack.

Well, today a fleet has two operation points. Imagine the enemy is blocking my port and I am not near them. I use one operation point to be at one hex of the enemy. I use one operation point to attack it. And I have leaving my naval stack in Fleet mode. As such, the next turn, I am sure of a Surface / Carrier interdiction that will destroy my forces.

Now, imagine a small island that is subject to Port Blockade. I move my naval stack in Raider mode night move in position near the port. If I can attack at 2 hex range, I am sure that the enemy fleet that will do Port Blockade the next turn is in range of my naval stack (whatever its position around the port). As such, I use one operation point to attack it. And, I use one operation point to escape the Surface / Carrier interdiction.

But in WP2 all missions are based on points. So if a fleet has 24 operation points a move is 1 per hex an action might be 6 operation points. I forgot the exact number. So a player can move, attack, retreat. But if they move too far and attack their retreat might not be as far or none at all.

Excellent system, I'll just have to wait then.

[Grotius]

The Japanese had six fleet carriers in the same task force during the attack on Pearl Harbor, didn't they? Or maybe it wasn't strictly one task force? Either way, I suppose that was the exception to the general rule. It was a surprise attack, so Japan didn't have to worry about stumbling into a surface engagement.

There were, of course, a lot of American CVs at the Battle of the Philippines Sea. But they were split into many task forces, or task groups, or some such, and each group did have fewer than 6 CVs. I think.

Anyway, I don't feel strongly about whether to limit fleets to 4 CVs. As Alvaro says, given the chance of a surface combat, it makes sense to use fewer than 6 anyway, so that you can escort them with a couple BBs or CAs.

[ncc1701e]

The Japanese had six fleet carriers in the same task force during the attack on Pearl Harbor, didn't they? Or maybe it wasn't strictly one task force? Either way, I suppose that was the exception to the general rule. It was a surprise attack, so Japan didn't have to worry about stumbling into a surface engagement.

There were, of course, a lot of American CVs at the Battle of the Philippines Sea. But they were split into many task forces, or task groups, or some such, and each group did have fewer than 6 CVs. I think.

Anyway, I don't feel strongly about whether to limit fleets to 4 CVs. As Alvaro says, given the chance of a surface combat, it makes sense to use fewer than 6 anyway, so that you can escort them with a couple BBs or CAs.

I have tried several times in hotseat. 6 CVs stack vs 4 CVs, 1 BB, 1 CA stack. The 6 CV stack always win in carrier interdiction. The protection of BB, CA counts for nothing.

[Grotius]

Yes, that's my experience in CV-vs-CV battles. But what about the danger of a surface battle? Isn't that the reason to include a couple BBs? I don't have enough experience with the game to be sure.

[ncc1701e]

Yes, that's my experience in CV-vs-CV battles. But what about the danger of a surface battle? Isn't that the reason to include a couple BBs? I don't have enough experience with the game to be sure.

I have made several posts on the subject of naval engagement. But surface battle isn't a risk for me. A BB fleet approaching a CV fleet is dead imo. The best is that you make your own experience.

[ncc1701e]

There were, of course, a lot of American CVs at the Battle of the Philippines Sea. But they were split into many task forces, or task groups, or some such, and each group did have fewer than 6 CVs. I think.

If you are interested by this subject, I recommend this book by the way:

---

book.JPG (60.64 KiB) Viewed 1600 times