Naval combat short

[Zaarin]

I can wait for 4th age expansion.

I just hope it's toggleable. GS's fourth age changed the late game from a slog through mud to a slog through cornstarch slurry.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

balloon -> drone (scout/extra range for arty)
biplane -> fighter -> jet fighter
zepplin -> bomber -> BIG jet bomber.

light cav turns to choppers (which is the goal, get to da choppa!)

I never liked the missile cruisers in 6. BB were much cooler looking, and more fun to watch in combat.

and dammit, nuke subs better be able to go UNDER the damned icepacks! sheesh!

IF the game needs an 'aerial recon' progression independent of fighters and bombers, I suggest that balloon - drone bridges too wide a gap: 1918 to the `1970s - 80s.

Instead, may I suggest:
Balloon - graphic the drachen 'sausage' tethered balloon of WWI (actually invented in 1898), which extends the range of artillery through aerial observation and extends the sight range of ground units rather like the Scout Unit can in "lookout Mode".

FAO (Forward Air Observer) - graphic a light aircraft like the American 'Piper Cub' or German Fieseler Storch, both commonly used from 1940 - 1942 on. Does everything the balloon could do, but can do them instantly, with no loss of movement (both aircraft could land or take off in a cow pasture, so needed no ext ensive preparation to use)

UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) - Drones for short - graphic of a 'Predator' like large drone, can extend artillery range, also extends vision of ground units by 2 tiles, not 1, and can attack ground targets within 2 tiles - but is destroyed if it does so. This does not really represent the capabilities of the most modern Unmanned Vehicles, but I suggest that the most modern approach Near Future systems, since everyone is trying to develop them as Autonomous aerial weapons with aircraft-like ranges.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

There's an Aircraft Carrier in the Charlemagne FL. Looks WW2 era. Straight deck, no offset landing area

 

[gdr_willter]

View attachment 709973
There's an Aircraft Carrier in the Charlemagne FL. Looks WW2 era. Straight deck, no offset landing area

Classic. And we really need it especially in Civ 7 which seems mainly focused on the period until WW2.

 

[tedhebert]

Well I'm okay with it. I can wait for 4th age expansion. I'm just hating the ironclad which is not a general ironclad.

I just hope it's toggleable. GS's fourth age changed the late game from a slog through mud to a slog through cornstarch slurry.

Once again, let's wait and see how tedious having to continually get through 3 ages and 2 crises in each and every game really is before wishing for another age !!!

 

[The Fanatical]

Fleet commanders existed, or at least some are listed, going back to the Classical Era,

Yes, they are, and I would assume that even the navies of the Bronze Age were commanded by a supreme commander at sea. I doubt the vessels just attacked enemy ships head-on at the very first sight without any form of signal sent by a commander.

but they didn't command much in any 'fleet' battle. Once the battle started, nobody commanded much of anybody who was more than shouting distance away and in direct line-of-sight of the 'Flagship'.

That isn't true. The tactic used during the naval engagement at the Battle of Cynossema by Thrasybulus where the sudden attack of his wing while the navies were already engaged brought Athenian victory or the defensive circle used by the Peloponnesian fleet and the subsequent brilliant tactic used by Phormio to gain victory at the Battle of Rhium where he encircled the enemy fleet in order to create confusion and lack of manoeuvrability before his coordinated sudden attack say otherwise.

It's actually pretty appropriate that the in-game Naval Commanders are relegated to the Exploration Age, when presumably they could (in theory) take advantage of the Fleet Instructions issued by various navies in the 17th and 18th centuries and the flag systems developed in the 18th and 19th centuries to actually Command a Fleet.

I think, it is appropriate only for gameplay reasons, but it isn't true to history. Fleets and naval commanders existed probably since the Bronze Age (if not before). Signals systems existed in some form in Antiquity. For example, the raising of a shield or the specific sounds made by trumpeters etc.

 

[The Fanatical]

Restriction in Antiquity to coastal hexes dramatically limits the opportunities for fleet-on-fleet action, so the limitation of admirals to Exploration Age seems to be a practical one. With the scale of Civilization, you really need deep water access to have significant fleet actions.

It's similar to religion in that, sure historically they existed earlier, but the mechanics as represented in the game didn't come into play until later.

A mod can easily fix this. After all, ancient navies sailed deep oceans, but they were susceptible to storms, so coastal waters and calm weather were preferred in order for battles to take place.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

A mod can easily fix this. After all, ancient navies sailed deep oceans, but they were susceptible to storms, so coastal waters and calm weather were preferred in order for battles to take place.

Also, because most of what we know abut naval movement and warfare is from the Mediterranean galley tradition, our view of what was possible is warped by the fact that the galleys had to put to shore every few days to feed and water their enormous crews. Even the largest polyremes couldn't carry enough supplies to feed crews that all numbered in the hundreds for more than a few days, which meant they were virtually tied to the land by a very short supply line. Moving along a hostile shore was practically impossible unless the galleys were accompanied by large collecttions of freight-carrying ships with food and water for the crews.

The problem here is not whether ancient ships could sail deep water - they could. The depth of the water wasn't a limitation, it was the distance from land when you had few reference poiints to navigate by. While experienced sailors knew the waters by color and even taste, and knew enough about the stars to follow them, there were serious limitations on how well that worked, and the methods only really worked in waters that had already been traveled. Sailing into unknown waters with no land to sight by and no references for the stars was simply too dangerous to try very often: you risked both ship and crew every time you did it.

The problem is, how to provide the same limitations in the game when gamers are notoriously unwilling to risk losing a ship Unit to Chance. Especially when, at least up to now, In-game ancient ships were rare and required some time to build in place of anything else you were building in your coastal cities, and losing one meant losing an appreciable amount of resources and, frequently, a large part of your existing Navy.

Civ has 'defaulted' to Coastal versus Ocean water tiles to manage the difference between various seafaring technologies. It is not accurate, but it has the great advantage of being Simple and easily understood and easily shown on a map. I would love to see more granularity in the mechanic - like, allowing a ship to cross Ocean tiles to Coastal tiles in view from the starting point, which alone would reduce considerably the frustration factor in early sea movement. Right now, the Ocean/Non-Ocean travel distinction divides the entire game into Before Oceanic Ships and After, and warps all exploration and sea activity around that dichotomy.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Yes, they are, and I would assume that even the navies of the Bronze Age were commanded by a supreme commander at sea. I doubt the vessels just attacked enemy ships head-on at the very first sight without any form of signal sent by a commander.

I don't say that groups of military vessels did not have some kind of commander at sea, simply that those commanders - like the commanders on land - very rarely had much control in Battle.

For every example you cite of a commander managing to direct some ships in a 'decisive' maneuver at sea, you leave out their hapless opponent who could not react to the maneuver because they did not have adequate control over their ships.

The most I would consider appropriate and 'realistic' for the game would be a return to Civ VI's Great Admirals, where a sea-oriented Civ could gain an early Naval Commander (or even hire a Mercenary from a Minor Power?) with the benefits that came with him (or her). A general ability to command fleets like they were chessmen is simply fantasy - just like any similar ability on land right up to the present day. To quote the German Troop Leadership Manual in effect during World War Two:

"War is the province of Uncertainty"

Or, even better, one of von Moltke's comments:

"In war, anything that Can go wrong, Will go wrong."

 

[The Fanatical]

For every example you cite of a commander managing to direct some ships in a 'decisive' maneuver at sea, you leave out their hapless opponent who could not react to the maneuver because they did not have adequate control over their ships.

But they could react. They could flee when the situation seemed unfavorable as the enemy's ships attacked, they could form a defensive tight circle with the sterns on the inside, they could form a threatening circle around the enemy's defensive circular formation to terrorize their formation, or they could try the diekplous and the periplous as the ships came close. At Rhium when Phormio trapped the enemy's formation, the Peloponnesians could easily counterattack and hit the Athenian ships on the vulnerable sides, but they were afraid and inexperienced to try such a thing.

All I'm trying to prove is that commanding at sea didn't differ that much from later eras, and the absence of Fleet Commanders in Antiquity doesn't feel right.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

But they could react. They could flee when the situation seemed unfavorable as the enemy's ships attacked, they could form a defensive tight circle with the sterns on the inside, they could form a threatening circle around the enemy's defensive circular formation to terrorize their formation, or they could try the diekplous and the periplous as the ships came close. At Rhium when Phormio trapped the enemy's formation, the Peloponnesians could easily counterattack and hit the Athenian ships on the vulnerable sides, but they were afraid and inexperienced to try such a thing.

All I'm trying to prove is that commanding at sea didn't differ that much from later eras, and the absence of Fleet Commanders in Antiquity doesn't feel right.

But what is the in-game purpose of antiquity Fleet Commanders?

To use them, you will have to build Fleets. That takes away a massive amount of resources from your coastal cities unless they have changed the resources/unit ratio dramatically from previous Civs.

Then, what can you realistically do with a Fleet in antiquity? Historically, you could support an army marching along the coast (prime example: Xerxes's invasion of Greece) - but since Civ has never required Supply for army movement, this is immaterial in-game.

You could attack pirates/barbarians or other Civs from the sea, but fleets had a very poor track record at attacking coastal, walled cities: Alexander's siege of Tyre was probably the most successful, and it took major efforts by both the fleet and a large army on land. Other coastal attacks, like Demetrius on Rhodes, failed utterly. And Pompey's great campaign against the pirates was largely won by attacking from the land and destroying the pirate ports, without which no antiquity fleet could survive for long.

I understand wanting all the military marbles to play with, but antiquity Fleet Commanders just seems like a lot of work to provide another chance to get yourself into trouble in the game, by using resources better spent elsewhere. I could, of course, be Utterly Wrong, since we haven't really seen figures on what the cost/benefit ratio is for units, fleets, commanders, and resources from the 'average' City and Civ in-game.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I can see any Antiquity Fleet Commander being of value on an Archipelago map for conquest and defense, but any map where you're going to have to fight away from water, it's superfluous to have a fleet in addition to an army. Just build your army commanders and float your armies if you need to move them over water. The bonus is that you only need a single ship escort per army commander loaded with units. The Antiquity naval commander doesn't make sense within the context of the game.

Plus, unlocking it in Exploration gives you a sense of leveling up in the Commander department.

 

[The Fanatical]

But what is the in-game purpose of antiquity Fleet Commanders?

To use them, you will have to build Fleets. That takes away a massive amount of resources from your coastal cities unless they have changed the resources/unit ratio dramatically from previous Civs.

Then, what can you realistically do with a Fleet in antiquity? Historically, you could support an army marching along the coast (prime example: Xerxes's invasion of Greece) - but since Civ has never required Supply for army movement, this is immaterial in-game.

You could attack pirates/barbarians or other Civs from the sea, but fleets had a very poor track record at attacking coastal, walled cities: Alexander's siege of Tyre was probably the most successful, and it took major efforts by both the fleet and a large army on land. Other coastal attacks, like Demetrius on Rhodes, failed utterly. And Pompey's great campaign against the pirates was largely won by attacking from the land and destroying the pirate ports, without which no antiquity fleet could survive for long.

I understand wanting all the military marbles to play with, but antiquity Fleet Commanders just seems like a lot of work to provide another chance to get yourself into trouble in the game, by using resources better spent elsewhere. I could, of course, be Utterly Wrong, since we haven't really seen figures on what the cost/benefit ratio is for units, fleets, commanders, and resources from the 'average' City and Civ in-game.

I can see any Antiquity Fleet Commander being of value on an Archipelago map for conquest and defense, but any map where you're going to have to fight away from water, it's superfluous to have a fleet in addition to an army. Just build your army commanders and float your armies if you need to move them over water. The bonus is that you only need a single ship escort per army commander loaded with units. The Antiquity naval commander doesn't make sense within the context of the game.

Plus, unlocking it in Exploration gives you a sense of leveling up in the Commander department.

I remembered that the full map can't be explored in the Antiquity Age. Perhaps it's better that they aren't unlocked earlier, because If you can't reach a specific part of the sea, what would even be the point of a more emphasised naval gameplay?

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

Have it been mentioned if land units can embark? I thought the reason for allowing units to embark rather join a ship was AI not being able to handle it. I'm rooting for units having to catch a ride with a ship again.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

I remembered that the full map can't be explored in the Antiquity Age. Perhaps it's better that they aren't unlocked earlier, because If you can't reach a specific part of the sea, what would even be the point of a more emphasised naval gameplay?

The could give Commanders a few appropriate minor naval promotions to pick from, as well as giving a few Air promotions to naval commanders. Perhaps some Rocketry promotions to Air Commanders?

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I remembered that the full map can't be explored in the Antiquity Age. Perhaps it's better that they aren't unlocked earlier, because If you can't reach a specific part of the sea, what would even be the point of a more emphasised naval gameplay?

An additional consideration.

As posted, I think Fleet Commanders, if in Antiquity at all, should be a 'special case', perhaps only available under very special circumstances (like an Antiquity Polynesian Civ? or Archapeligo-style map) rather than generally available.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

The could give Commanders a few appropriate minor naval promotions to pick from, as well as giving a few Air promotions to naval commanders. Perhaps some Rocketry promotions to Air Commanders?

Or give a Rocketry Promotion to an Army Commander - the commander of the Soviet rocket brigades deployed to Cuba in 1962 was General Pliev, whose previous command had been the 1st Guards Cavalry-Mechanized Group in 1945. Switching from horse cavalry to rockets was one of the more inspired career moves in history!

 

[gdr_willter]

Have it been mentioned if land units can embark? I thought the reason for allowing units to embark rather join a ship was AI not being able to handle it. I'm rooting for units having to catch a ride with a ship again.

They can. FXS already showed the unit embarking.

 

[Core Imposter]

The final Age doesn't have to have a fixed end date; if the final victory conditions take a form similar to the Crises, it may also be variable. There may be a fixed Time Victory date, but that's kind of arbitrary. They've shown the Apollo Moon landing, which was 1969.

I was 12 years old. Zero accomplishments since then. Nothing. Nada. Zip.

 

[TheGhostEnthusiast]

They can. FXS already showed the unit embarking.

It's not really important, but I think our earliest conformation of this was the Norman ability in the Antiquity stream.