Modern Naval Strategy for Beyond the Sword

[axident]

It may depend on map type. I'm playing mostly on hemispheres/Immortal, and have got hit by a very substantial enemy navy in the late phase of the game on several occasions. On no less than three occasions the best AI has slung everything it has at me immediately that I launch a spaceship and, since I don't like sharing a continent, they've all been naval invasions. Nukes I agree are rarely that relevant - if there are other AI's at a tech level to build these, nukes are so easy to ban with the UN that they're never really an issue. There's at least one random event that lets you ban them without worrying about the UN as well. I've certainly never had to worry about a nuclear strike.

The AI is very fond though of sending literally hundreds of guided missles into your terrain improvements from subs and cruisers, so it is worth keeping a few scouts out - but only attack subs, and I usually find it easier to watch the ports of my enemies (assisted by espionage) than to stretch forces across my whole coastline. The cost of a defensive net as you suggest in your article is horrendous, and the classic AI naval stack (30+ missle cruisers, 40+ destroyers, 30 odd subs with missles and assorted carriers and transports) will punch through it like tissue paper.

The trick is to look for enemy stacks while you're at peace and they're in port. Then when war comes you've got a good idea of the direction they'll come from, and how long you've got to intercept. You have a couple of stacks positioned so they can reach any part of your coastline within a turn or two, and have a handful of attack subs as an early warning system out at sea. I think it's your focus on stealth destroyers which is the main problem. While I agree modern naval warfare is now important, I've yet to see stealth destroyers be relevant, for the simple reason that Stealth is invariably the last tech to be researched. Also, it isn't a problem if they do get through to your coastline - they can't carry missles or troops and they can't escort transports because of their broken behaviour. At worst I lose some fishing boats, and I assume that will happen anyway. It's a SoD you've got to worry about and a thin layer of Stealth destroyers isn't necessary to spot it, and won't even scratch it.

That's an excellent point, and I think navy is probably tops in water-heavy maps or instances of full-scale intercontinental invasion. Nevertheless my first instinct is the same as Invis's post--if you have that many hammers, you are better off using them proactively rather than in an passive force. Meaning, load up the transports, boys!

 

[Plato90s]

The cost of a defensive net as you suggest in your article is horrendous, and the classic AI naval stack (30+ missle cruisers, 40+ destroyers, 30 odd subs with missles and assorted carriers and transports) will punch through it like tissue paper.

The trick is to look for enemy stacks while you're at peace and they're in port. Then when war comes you've got a good idea of the direction they'll come from, and how long you've got to intercept. You have a couple of stacks positioned so they can reach any part of your coastline within a turn or two, and have a handful of attack subs as an early warning system out at sea. I think it's your focus on stealth destroyers which is the main problem. While I agree modern naval warfare is now important, I've yet to see stealth destroyers be relevant, for the simple reason that Stealth is invariably the last tech to be researched. Also, it isn't a problem if they do get through to your coastline - they can't carry missles or troops and they can't escort transports because of their broken behaviour. At worst I lose some fishing boats, and I assume that will happen anyway. It's a SoD you've got to worry about and a thin layer of Stealth destroyers isn't necessary to spot it, and won't even scratch it.

It's not a defense net at all - just surveillance. Of course it's tissue thin. The whole purpose is to just identify the enemy fleet locations.

Also, in a game where the AI has hundreds of ships, you're not going to see only 1 fleet nor will you be able to match the AI in production. The point of the surveillance net is to allow you to have a fleet 1/4th the size of the enemy and still whittle him down to size in order to insert your own attack forces.

It should be re-iterated that this is a guide for fighting a large and extended naval battle against an enemy fleet in huge numbers. It's a valid point that a successful game would preclude such things from existing at all, but there's plenty of other guides for that.

This is for people who enjoy the warfare aspects of BTS.

 

[Plato90s]

Augustus and his allies against Pacal (me) and vassals.

HUGE enemy army/navy. I've replayed a couple of times with different approaches - sometimes with extended war at sea and other times with a pre-emptive landing of ~100 units in the opening move.

With the pre-emptive landing, the naval casualties by Augustus and allies were

66 Transports
72 Destroyers
99 Missile Cruisers
28 Submarines
39 Stealth Destroyers
37 Attack Submarines
18 Carriers

Total of 293 non-transport modern naval units destroyed, and the enemy navy was still in business at this point.

In the iteration where I didn't land a substantial land force in order to invite a naval engagement, the enemy losses were

130 Transports
145 Destroyers and Stealth Destroyers
107 Missile Cruisers
35 Submarines
16 Attack Submarines
25 Carriers

Significantly more transports and destroyers, although total fleet destruction (not including transports) is only 10% higher than the land-attack version.

In both scenarios, my navy was less than 1/3rd of the enemy navy in size, but still killed the enemy in large numbers by efficient utilization of air strikes and missile strikes.

BTW, check out the island to the northwest of the Mayan continent. The shape makes the use of forts quite useful.

 

[axident]

It's not a defense net at all - just surveillance. Of course it's tissue thin. The whole purpose is to just identify the enemy fleet locations.

Also, in a game where the AI has hundreds of ships, you're not going to see only 1 fleet nor will you be able to match the AI in production. The point of the surveillance net is to allow you to have a fleet 1/4th the size of the enemy and still whittle him down to size in order to insert your own attack forces.

It should be re-iterated that this is a guide for fighting a large and extended naval battle against an enemy fleet in huge numbers. It's a valid point that a successful game would preclude such things from existing at all, but there's plenty of other guides for that.

This is for people who enjoy the warfare aspects of BTS.

I enjoy massive engagements too. Rise of Rome, Road to War, etc. I also enjoy heaping pain on the enemy... collateral damage from battleships/MC can annihilate entire troops movements. Unfortunately the enemy can also collateral your own ship stacks. Combining a picket like you described, with a heavy concentration of your own ships, can result in identifying and destroying an enemy fleet in a single turn.

 

[InvisibleStalke]

For a picket though surely all you need are destroyers/subs in sufficient number / distance that they can see any sub or missile cruiser closer than the AI can launch. A single line of destroyers between their coast and yours is sufficient.

Stealth ships aren't much use in this because they can't see subs and aren't powerful enough to kill missile cruisers. I would see the role of stealth destroyers as pillagers and to keep an eye on the enemy mainland so you can forecast the attack. Can they blockade? That would be cool.

Other than that I like what I read in the OP and love the changes to the navy in BTS. The way I see it - naval war in BTS is about three things mainly:

- Can you secure your coastal cities from nukes? A ring of destroyers and strong battlefleets is needed for this. You may not need this security - banning nukes with the UN might be safer. But if you have this security you may be able to use nukes yourself and prevent their counteruse.

- Can you secure your coast from invasion? The same destroyers / attack subs for early warning and a strong battlefleet plus aircover is needed. You can do without this by investing in a strong defensive army instead and killing the invaders on land. But killing invaders at sea is very efficient as sunk transports kill five units at once.

- Can you deploy sea power to weaken your opponent? This gets most interesting to me. As others have noted taking out your opponents oil and uranium can be crippling - whatever the cost in planes. Coastal cities can be easily captured and razed. Blockades reduce their income. Pillaging sea tiles reduce their health and food.

 

[Plato90s]

For a picket though surely all you need are destroyers/subs in sufficient number / distance that they can see any sub or missile cruiser closer than the AI can launch. A single line of destroyers between their coast and yours is sufficient.

Stealth ships aren't much use in this because they can't see subs and aren't powerful enough to kill missile cruisers. I would see the role of stealth destroyers as pillagers and to keep an eye on the enemy mainland so you can forecast the attack. Can they blockade? That would be cool.

The SD can indeed be used as pillagers and also bombard cities as well as blockade.

But a single line isn't enough, because the enemy stealth destroyers can easily move past your line and disappear into the deep ocean. That's also why you need 2 lines of sub pickets - to make sure there's no place an enemy sub can hide.

 

[bardolph]

What's the big deal with SD's slipping past your net? Who cares? The point of surveillance is to find the ships that can actually do damage to you, and I don't see what kind of damage a rogue Stealth Destroyer can do, other than pillaging a few sea resources, and once that happens, it should be trivial to sail your own SD close enough to the pillaged resource to spot the rogue SD, kill it, and replace the lost workboat.

I'd imagine that a small, mobile net of 1/4 the numbers you describe would be just as effective.

 

[MrCynical]

I too find it far cheaper to ignore stealth destroyers. OK they can pillage fishing boats, but it a major naval engagement they'll go anyway, and a dozen work boats is a lot cheaper than a double row of stealth destroyers round my whole continent. Yes the can bombard, but that's irrelevant unless they have troop transports with them, which I'll be able to see and they can't escort. Yes they can blockade - but then I can see exactly where they are, which rather negates their stealth aspect, and lifespan.

 

[Elfdemon]

SD early warning is not needed, to prevent them from pillaging all you need to do is to station a few MCs on each fishingnet/oil platform, preferably with strength promotions as they are for guarding the tile against possible SD pillage but not for major naval engagement.

Sub early warning is needed if enemy uses tacticle nukes as this will threaten your coastal cities, otherwise it's not.

And i think it's not wise to put many ships closely. In an engagement of merely 3 incan MCs, i had one of my biggest navy fleet wiped out enitirely by a tacticle nuke launched, this sucks. It seems if you are significantly stronger than an AI, he will use nukes against you, otherwise they will avoid using nukes as long as you do not strike them with them first. How do you counter nukes? Both MC and Sub can carry them, and it's extremly devasting.

 

[Melior Traiano]

Building and deploying however many stealth destroyers to form a picket line across the ocean seems like overkill to me. A smaller number of airships stationed in strategic locations can fly recon missions to cover all seaborne approaches to a continent and spot them from a far enough distance to deploy a friendly fleet in a point defense role. The trick is to never upgrade the recon airships, as only they can see submerged units too. I have never had an enemy fleet sneak up to my home cities once enough airships are deployed to provide recon over the oceans. For a two-ocean defense, only 6 airships are needed. If the AI were smart and sailed along the polar ice until the last possible minute, it'd be a slightly different story, but even that can be defeated with enough airships. You just need to be vigilant about checking if somebody's up to no good with WHEOOH and if there's a possibility they can be coming after you, send up the recon flights every turn.

Also, the AI tends to accumulate all of their surface ships in one or two port cities. I like to park a caravel (or submarine) right next to those embarkation points and check them each turn if I notice the AI is in WHEOOH mode. If the AI fleet puts to sea, shadow their ships as much as possible and deploy available units in case of possible invasion.

 

[TheDS]

Airships can't see stealth DDs.

My strategy so far has been to mate a Stealth DD with an Attack SS and a Missile CC. Whe I want to cross foreign territory without OB, I omit the CC. This trio can see AND attack anything. Useful as the basis for patrol groups and escort groups. As to aircraft, that can be managed with regular DDs and CVs with their planes set to guard.

Putting several of these groups together, with extras for whatever threat I'm expecting or needing firepower for, is easy.

It goes without saying that you must be wary of nukes; if you're facing them, you need to spread out a little and hit them before they hit you - nuke them before they nuke you.

 

[Seaman Sample]

Post deleted.

 

[Rizwan8012]

How to load MC with missile in the submarine, in the sea

 

[pesh120]

I liked your post it is was informative. I will argue thought that instead of using S.D. as an ocean surveillance, what about airships. Build enough to blanket the ocean and you will always know when the enemy is coming. The only negative to that is if the airship gets shot down. Just a thought.

 

[Wejer]

I have had this idea for some time now and I don't think you guys mind if I share it with you.

Since Submarines have an inherent 50% withdrawal, it may be a fun idea to attach a GG to it and give Tactics and Flanking I+II, resulting in 110% withdrawal chance (and Immunity to First Strikes, but that's just a bonus). Thing is you could basically attack any vessel, no matter the odds, and still always survive the attack, as well as gaining 1 xp if your target doesn't sink.

As long as you have that Battleship around protecting your butt, you should be fine.

 

[TheDS]

How to load MC with missile in the submarine, in the sea

If this is a question on how to do it, it should work the same as swapping troops between transports: Make sure both units are in the same space, select the cargo, then click the LOAD button and it should transfer. If you're wondering how to load cruisers and subs while at sea, you can't. They have to come into port, and then you load them like cargo on a transport. If you're asking something else, try again.

I liked your post it is was informative. I will argue thought that instead of using S.D. as an ocean surveillance, what about airships. Build enough to blanket the ocean and you will always know when the enemy is coming. The only negative to that is if the airship gets shot down. Just a thought.

Two problems: first, they don't see Stealth Destroyers. Second, it's a HUGE PAIN IN THE BUTT to send them out scouting each turn. Civ needs some sort of auto-scout function for them so you can tell them to do this; otherwise, you get bored with doing it after a few turns. I usually use airships when I think/know war is imminent, or if I see a fishing boat disappear unexpectedly.

Since Submarines have an inherent 50% withdrawal, it may be a fun idea to attach a GG to it and give Tactics and Flanking I+II, resulting in 110% withdrawal chance (and Immunity to First Strikes, but that's just a bonus). Thing is you could basically attack any vessel, no matter the odds, and still always survive the attack, as well as gaining 1 xp if your target doesn't sink.

As long as you have that Battleship around protecting your butt, you should be fine.

As "a fun thing to try", okay, but otherwise, a Sub is too weak to waste a Warlord on just to let it withdraw. And as you note, you still need another ship to keep with him.

I occasionally put one on a Privateer or Battleship, though, to give it Blitz. Usually by the time I have Combustion, though, there's not a lot of enemy navy left to fight, or the jerks just stay in hiding while I crunch their cities. More often than not, a warship with a Warlord is wasted.

 

[Gooblah]

Hmm, interesting Idea.

I've never managed to get an AI to build so many units, so it seems like a waste of hammers.

I personally prefer the stealth line - Submarines about a turn away from your land, ringing it so that their LOSs touch (give them Sentry). Have a 'fleet' on each side of your land to respond quickly to enemies. Having a Stealth Destroyer or two on every other Submarine helps as well.

 

[URSExelcior]

Too expensive.

 

[TheRealCzar]

Good thread, so often these naval threads deteriorate into flame wars between the no-navy-needed-because-I-pwn-everybody-in-the-first-fifty-turns brigade and the I-play-for-fun-so-don't-need-to-justify-the-cost/benefit-of-any-decision-to-you brigade.

I agree with some of the posters that the naval screening forces described by the OP are perhaps a little too hammer extensive for the benefit. However, with the long movement range of modern naval units, and the strikes-first-strikes-last paradigm nature of combat in civ means that advanced knowledge of the enemy is vital assuming parity of forces. Fighters-on-carriers within a naval SoD is the best way to accomplish it.

In SP its easy enough, since I don't believe the AI is clever enough to take advantage if it knows where your stack is. They'll either continue to sail to their objective on your coast if they're bringing transports or zero on your stack even if they don't reach in that turn. Also, I believe they will always go in a straight line, no oblique lines like human opponents use.

In MP, naval battles are the business. Far more interesting than land wars IMO, as all players must play a game of cat and mouse, trying to manoeuvre to a position where they can strike first. Add a few tiny island bases for some terrific WW2 pacific style engagements, for my money the best fun that can be had in civ.

 

[Luigiii2]

In my opinion, it seems better to carry out missile attacks with submarines, at least in online games. When playing online against a skillful opponent in the modern age, any ship you send for missile bombardments is virtually guaranteed to be a lost ship, and subs are expendable. For defense, stealth destroyers (or, failing that, attack subs) are excellent for spotting and tailing the enemy. With luck, they won't even know they have been detected until carriers pour planes in on them, then you can end the fight with your own stealth destroyers. Just my thoughts.