Something thats always bothered me about the civ games, aside from the lack of naval warfare, is the unrealistic(in my oppinion) way its conducted. Im not saying this will definetly make it more fun, but im throwing it out there for discussion if anyones interested. I only saw the capturing ships part mentioned before. (speaking of which, can we get an option to search just this suggestion forum, please?)
My understanding of Naval combat through the ages
Ancient times: ships, for the most part, maybe threw some spears and fired some bows, but really pulled along side eachother and engaged in melee style combat. in this instance, 2 things are missing from the civ3 naval combat model.
1) Units being transported would be able to participate in the fighting, not simply go down like impotent spectators, though argueably if they weren't amphibious(ill avoid using the term marines as this can be confusing, since i mean troops of any time, even greek hoplites, who were trained in fighting on ships or on land from ships ,so amphibious will have to do) they may fight at a disadvantage, certainly heavy units were at risk of drowning under the weight of their gear and armour, and cavalry couldn't fight on their horses, etc.
2) because the weapons involved, for the most part(not including greek fire here) couldn't easily destroy a ship, there was always an oppertunity to capture it, if you could crew it, i.e. had enough survivors(might be accomplished by taking a health point from the victor and giving it to the captured unit, assuming the victor has atleast 2 health)
Age of sail : This one is closer to right I think, ships had to be close, because of limited range of the weapons of the day, and the limited accuracy meant they had to be even closer. The guns of the day could and did destroy ships, or atleast left them so damaged as to be unuseable even if still floating. Still they often did board and capture enemy vessels, so the above 2 ancient era problems come into play.
Industrial Age: Ships could hit eachother from considerable range, more over, with the use of turret based guns, they had a greater field of fire. Since ship design made boarding parties unrealistic, as did modern armourments, this tactic lost play too. In other words. captains wanted distance between them and the enemy so that they could maneuver more easily and escape if neccessary, and little was gained by closing in.
1) In relation to the Civ3 model, ships did not pull up to the tile next to the enemy ship and engage in a fight to the death, it was more akin to bombarding eachother from a distance. battles often weren't decisive, even in what was considered "decisive" victories, few ships were sunk, most just sustained damage and ran.
Modern Age: ships never see eachother, they lob missiles, or use ridiculously long range guns to blow eachother to bits, or else just leave it up to the fighters and bombers on the carriers that virtually every fleet is based around. The industrial age problem still persists, except that the weapons are so much more powerful, that if they hit, they'll probably do more damage, and the target might be too damaged to escape or be sunk on the spot, but still, with the anti air defenses on those ships, naval combat is likely to be indecisive. Even torpedoes which one tends to think of as close range weapons have been hooked up to rockets, called VLT's(vertically launched torpedoes, clever huh) so that they can be deployed long range from ships.
in short, i propose the following
1) remove attack values from all naval vessels from the industrial age on, they can either keep their defensive values, or else just be unboardable(really, whats a trireme gonna do to an aircraft carrier, the wake alone would sink it, if it could catch up to the carrier anyways). thus industrial age ships and beyond will engage in more realistic bombard warfare
2) assume all conventional(non bombard) attacks are attempts to board, and allow units being transported by either ship to participate in the combat, assuming they are combat units. and allow the victor the opertunity to take the ship, atleast under certain circumstances
My understanding of Naval combat through the ages
Ancient times: ships, for the most part, maybe threw some spears and fired some bows, but really pulled along side eachother and engaged in melee style combat. in this instance, 2 things are missing from the civ3 naval combat model.
1) Units being transported would be able to participate in the fighting, not simply go down like impotent spectators, though argueably if they weren't amphibious(ill avoid using the term marines as this can be confusing, since i mean troops of any time, even greek hoplites, who were trained in fighting on ships or on land from ships ,so amphibious will have to do) they may fight at a disadvantage, certainly heavy units were at risk of drowning under the weight of their gear and armour, and cavalry couldn't fight on their horses, etc.
2) because the weapons involved, for the most part(not including greek fire here) couldn't easily destroy a ship, there was always an oppertunity to capture it, if you could crew it, i.e. had enough survivors(might be accomplished by taking a health point from the victor and giving it to the captured unit, assuming the victor has atleast 2 health)
Age of sail : This one is closer to right I think, ships had to be close, because of limited range of the weapons of the day, and the limited accuracy meant they had to be even closer. The guns of the day could and did destroy ships, or atleast left them so damaged as to be unuseable even if still floating. Still they often did board and capture enemy vessels, so the above 2 ancient era problems come into play.
Industrial Age: Ships could hit eachother from considerable range, more over, with the use of turret based guns, they had a greater field of fire. Since ship design made boarding parties unrealistic, as did modern armourments, this tactic lost play too. In other words. captains wanted distance between them and the enemy so that they could maneuver more easily and escape if neccessary, and little was gained by closing in.
1) In relation to the Civ3 model, ships did not pull up to the tile next to the enemy ship and engage in a fight to the death, it was more akin to bombarding eachother from a distance. battles often weren't decisive, even in what was considered "decisive" victories, few ships were sunk, most just sustained damage and ran.
Modern Age: ships never see eachother, they lob missiles, or use ridiculously long range guns to blow eachother to bits, or else just leave it up to the fighters and bombers on the carriers that virtually every fleet is based around. The industrial age problem still persists, except that the weapons are so much more powerful, that if they hit, they'll probably do more damage, and the target might be too damaged to escape or be sunk on the spot, but still, with the anti air defenses on those ships, naval combat is likely to be indecisive. Even torpedoes which one tends to think of as close range weapons have been hooked up to rockets, called VLT's(vertically launched torpedoes, clever huh) so that they can be deployed long range from ships.
in short, i propose the following
1) remove attack values from all naval vessels from the industrial age on, they can either keep their defensive values, or else just be unboardable(really, whats a trireme gonna do to an aircraft carrier, the wake alone would sink it, if it could catch up to the carrier anyways). thus industrial age ships and beyond will engage in more realistic bombard warfare
2) assume all conventional(non bombard) attacks are attempts to board, and allow units being transported by either ship to participate in the combat, assuming they are combat units. and allow the victor the opertunity to take the ship, atleast under certain circumstances
