Improvements to Naval Combat

[Damburger]

Lets face it - at the moment the sea is one arena where there isn't much fighting. Land and air are pretty good, but having a big navy doesn't seem to be important. I've a few ideas to change that.


1. Shipping routes

Dotted lines connecting cities that have harbours. These function as trade routes, but stop functioning as such if there is a hostile ship on any of their squares. They could also increase the movement of ships travelling down them, but that would be incidental. The point is, youve got an important part of your empire dependent on the sea, and the enemy can disrupt it.


2. Interceptors

Like fighters, ships should be able to intercept enemy ships outside of their turn. Subs in particular should be good at this.


3. Better bombard

Ships aren't that good at it to be honest. Having enemy ships off your coast should be a serious problem.


4. Defenceless transports

Self explainatory. Make escorts more important.


5. More realistic damage

Ships should lose speed when they lose hitpoints. Their high movement scores often make it too easy to escape near death

Comments Apprecaited

 

[Moss]

4. Defenceless transports

Self explainatory. Make escorts more important.

I sort of disagree. Transports are pretty defenseless as it is IMO.

I mean think about it. You have a galley of two people...that should be able to take down a transport filled with people with machine guns and gernades.

 

[Damburger]

I sort of disagree. Transports are pretty defenseless as it is IMO.

I mean think about it. You have a galley of two people...that should be able to take down a transport filled with people with machine guns and gernades.

Maybe. What do you think of the other ideas?

 

[Portuguese]

They are a serious problem. My battleships are far better than bombers or artillery: just 6 can keep all defenders with 1hp every turn...

But I generally agree on your ideas.

4 is already good. Or do you kill Battleships with transports? 1 defense is no defense!

1 & 5 are particulary good
Please note 5 would require further movement given by a late tech.
IT IS STUPID that in late game land transport is insta and naval is soooooo painfully slow. Just as replaceable parts make workers faster, radio or so could make ships faster!

 

[Damburger]

They are a serious problem. My battleships are far better than bombers or artillery: just 6 can keep all defenders with 1hp every turn...

I've found battleships fairly lame, given Carriers turn up shortly after and do much, much more.

To be fair, I've not used battleships on C3C yet.

But I generally agree on your ideas.

4 is already good. Or do you kill Battleships with transports? 1 defense is no defense!

I meant indefensible like workers, and all transporting ships not just modern ones. Maybe its not such a good idea.

1 & 5 are particulary good
Please note 5 would require further movement given by a late tech.
IT IS STUPID that in late game land transport is insta and naval is soooooo painfully slow. Just as replaceable parts make workers faster, radio or so could make ships faster!

You wouldnt nessecarily lose 1 movement point per hp, I'm sure they could work out a nice system.

 

[jonax]

Shipping lanes as in 1. would be grossly unrealistic given the (no pun intended) fluid nature of naval transport, but 2. and possibly strategic warfare (attacking trade) sounds good. Slowing down damaged ships make sense too.

 

[plarq]

May I suggest split navy in three eras:Ancient,Age of Discovery,Industrial and Modern?

Ancient:We have curragh first,then troop transporter and professional war galley.Like Greek-Persian War and Punic Wars in Mediterrain.Troop transporter needs escorts and War galley fights professionally(No bombard).Transporter with troops can fight with its soldiers on board.The A/D values are requiring further discussion.
Age of Discovery:Troop transport have self defence now,and only cannons and muskets or other gunpowder troops on board can add an additional A/B strength in naval combat.Privateer is more powerful,zero upkeep,chance to get gold from capture,morerivateer can raid enemy ports without war!!!(Only attack ships in the bay)Frigate is professional cannon ship.
Indusrial and Modern:Ironclads are simply upgrades of wooden ship.Destroyer and Cruiser have sonar to detect subs,and subs have big threats on unescorted transports and carriers,and battleships can simply destroy ship via bombard(lethal sea).

 

[sir_schwick]

2. All ships should have interdictor ability, but the effectiveness and range would be based upon MP and the ship in question. Attacking shipping means your ship is on the lane and the interdiction range is large enough.

 

[rhialto]

If the defneder is at sea (ie not adjacent to a land tile) and the attacker does not have guided missiles, it should always be possible to flee. Historially, these are the only times that major sea battles occurred.

 

[Portuguese]

I understood that 0-defense system. I disagree with it. 1 is just right. (though it makes me many don't upgrade my Port carracks... who should have bombard and not +1 defense).

ok, 1 per HP... since they increase the base value, of course. Specially in late game, when the reign of RR makes sea transport ridiculous.

 

[h4ppy]

I'd recomend making ships more resistent to air, I often don't even have to worry about defending my shores since I could kill fleets before they reach me.

 

[Albow]

I agree that ships in the Modern Age are way too slow ... I think ships sould be way faster later on.

Perhaps what Civ 4 needs is sea improvements, like land tile improvement (kind of like CTP) ... so you could have sea 'farms' which give +1 food, or sea 'mines' (perhaps oil rigs) which give extra production, and sea 'lanes' like road, the give 1 extra commerce, and make that square faster to go through (because it is well charted, perhaps not 1/3 like roads on land, but perhaps 1/2, so ships go twice as far on sea lanes than on less well charted routes).

You could even add in sea defence (like sea mines) which would slow ships down or damage them ... but this would make the square -2 to trade/food/prod

Whatchathink?

 

[Warspite2]

I am open to improvement in the naval department, but I disagree about not much naval fighting, what map types have you mostly been playing? You should see the size of the Maya's navy in my current game at Monarch! Not just Maya but Inca and others have a fairly large navy. Maya has around 30 ships, just that I have seen so they probably have more then that. Many destroyers and cruisers, few battleships too and I am pretty sure a carrier because those planes are not flying that far. So I have alot of naval fighting going on in this game. Then again, the map has alot of ocean and sea areas, it was random too. Oh I am using C3C though, I think it makes a difference. Still improvements are always good

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

In spite of the naval situation being 'fluid', there have historically been popular 'shipping lanes' around the world-popular either due to speed, relative safety or both. A player should, however, be able to change a trade-routes direction, speed and strength, perhaps deciding to lose some a little bit of their profit in order to make the route safe from harm.
As for naval combat, I still say that movement and combat should be resolved seperately-as two 'sub-turns' (i.e. everyone moves, THEN you resolve all combat)-and naval vessels should also be able to retreat from a conflict! I think that actual combat should be resolved in a seperate combat screen, with an ability to set simple tactics, based on each vessels strengths and weaknesses. It would also allow mass combat between multiple units on each side-something I wholeheartedly support. Naval bombardment should still exist OUTSIDE of normal combat, but should really be restricted to use on cities and coastal units/installations!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Ivan the Kulak]

I would like to see more accurate portrayals of modern naval units, i.e. the ability to totally melt down other navies at long range with barrages of cruise and antiship missiles, also they should pose a significant threat to stuff 3-4 tiles inland, as modern missiles can reach that far. I really hate to see a WWII class battleship roll up on an AEGIS and send it to the bottom, that is simply not very realistic. Same goes with battleship vs. carrier, when that battleship gets within 2 tiles the planes ought to go out and send it to the bottom.

 

[sir_schwick]

like before, all naval ships and carrier planes should have interdiction abilities. the attacker has teh disadvantage in who fires first except in cases of stealth or air attack without fighter resistance

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Hmmm, how about a coming together, of sorts, of mine and Sir_Schwicks idea. Basically, you have the move first THEN fight but, if a unit has an 'interdiction' flag, then even if they do not end the movement phase on the same hex as the enemy unit, they can still initiate combat if the unit is within, say, 1-2 hexes of them (remember the size of the hexes that we're talking about here !)
What I REALLY want though, is the ability to have grand naval battles between massed groups of destroyers, cruisers, battleships and carriers-something which I feel can only truly be done with a tactical battle system. The same goes for land battles too!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[JoeBas]

One word... Fleets.

They'd work the same as Armies work on land... if an elite naval unit wins a major battle, a "Great Naval Leader" will have a chance of appearing. This leader will be fixed to stay with the unit which created it until that unit reaches one of your cities, at which point the "Great Naval Leader" will be released as a separate unit. This leader would function just as a great leader does from a land battle... it can be used to hurry city production, or to create a Fleet. Fleets would work just like armies, and the victory of a fleet would also be grounds for building the heroic epic (maybe just for seafaring civ's) and a separate naval academy with the discovery of Military Tradition, which like the current military academy would be able to build additional fleets. Building of a total of 3 combination of armies and fleets would qualify for the pentagon.

 

[rhialto]

I think grerat military leaders and armies was a poor method of implementing combined arms tactics. I'd rather see something similar to CTP for stacked combat, with the same rules applying for both land and sea warfare.

At the start of the game, up to 4 units can be used in an attack. With more advanced leadership technology, this limit gradually rises.

The defender has a number of units up to his command limit chosen randomly from those in the attacked tile, with the random number generator weighting this towards those with a higher defence score.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

I believe that, even if you had a stacked combat system like CTP or any other type, you could still have an ability to build armies, fleets and airwings.
I believe, though, that they would have a different effect than they currently do. In my model I see armies, and the like, as representing a centralised 'command and control' system around which the units within it are acting. The effects of this could be a bonus to both morale and operational range, AND perhaps each unit recieving a % bonus to each stat based on the unit which is BEST in that stat. For instance, a unit that has a VERY high defense strength would grant a small % of that DS to every other unit in the group-same with AS, firepower, armour and hitpoints. The downside to these armies etc would be that they would cost you to build them AND your movement would be that of the slowest member!
Swings and roundabaouts though !

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.