Naval Combat

azum4roll

Deity
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
2,075
I like the weather idea. I have no idea how that can be implemented though.
 

Tekamthi

King
Joined
Aug 12, 2016
Messages
698
I like the weather idea. I have no idea how that can be implemented though.

I don't think it would be that hard to build the mechanism for it in-game, though having the AI make the best of it might get rather complex. Then again, maybe not: it seems to consider terrain issues rather dynamically in recent versions. Regardless, its full implementation lies somewhere beyond my modding skills.

That said, the design for this is within reach of the community here: Consider that forests (ie a terrain feature) can be added/removed via lua. This is rather trivial to implement -- ignoring the algorithm that determines if/when to add/remove them and balance concerns -- and can be set to once per turn or any other frequency desired (though with system resources penalties of course, the more frequent they become -- once per turn would probably not be noticeable).

So, theorycrafting this out fully, "weather" would just be a terrain feature, like a forest -- since there are few other features in ocean tiles, there would be few conflicts with this approach. I put some serious thought into a modmod for this idea at one point a few years ago, but came up short on finding art assets, as well as knowledge of how to get said art in-game as a terrain feature. Best I came up with was maybe recoloring and adding some transparency to the clouds that represent unexplored terrain -- there were no other suitable models in the database here, nor elsewhere that I could find. Anyway I know some of you possess knowledge beyond my own on these things; would love to see this feature, and would happily help with the lua if needed.
 
Last edited:

azum4roll

Deity
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
2,075
Maybe it can be simplified to a static permanent feature called "Stormy Seas" that appear in some areas of the ocean, that takes 1 or 2 extra movement point to move through. There can also be a coastal version.
 

2506

Warlord
Joined
Feb 23, 2020
Messages
181
Maybe it can be simplified to a static permanent feature called "Stormy Seas" that appear in some areas of the ocean, that takes 1 or 2 extra movement point to move through. There can also be a coastal version.

I don't see the point of this. A forest or a hill is a plus for some units and a minus for others. It's tactics. This just seems like a pain in the ass... oops, gotta detour around this. It also seems very arbitrary, in that "Over there it's been stormy for thousands of years. Over here, blue skies!"
 

azum4roll

Deity
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
2,075
I don't see the point of this. A forest or a hill is a plus for some units and a minus for others. It's tactics. This just seems like a pain in the ass... oops, gotta detour around this. It also seems very arbitrary, in that "Over there it's been stormy for thousands of years. Over here, blue skies!"
It's not unlike a mountain island, but this one at least can be moved through. Rough waters do exist in real life, which requires more careful traversal.
 

psparky

King
Joined
Feb 24, 2011
Messages
615
"The winds and the waves are always on the side of the ablest navigators"

Just a flight of fancy I suppose, but a movement bonus/penalty based on the prevailing winds might be interesting.
 

Stalker0

Baller Magnus
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
9,310
An idea I just had. We already have withdraw as an option on ships, especially the destroyer. What if we used the same concept but instead called it "Evasion".

Evasion: Damage taken from naval attacks reduced by 10% for every adjacent coastal/ocean hex not containing a unit.

The language could use work, but I'm basically using the similar logic to withdraw, which only works if you have available spaces to move into. Instead of forcing movement (which is a clunky mechanic in a game that requires such precision in military movement for high level combat), we provide defensive bonus in more open water.

This allows a thinner more scattered fleet some protection against a fleet bustling with ships end to end. Full fleet combat is still brutal, but as ships start to die, the remaining ships get a bit tougher, giving them some longevity.
 

2506

Warlord
Joined
Feb 23, 2020
Messages
181
An idea I just had. We already have withdraw as an option on ships, especially the destroyer. What if we used the same concept but instead called it "Evasion".

Evasion: Damage taken from naval attacks reduced by 10% for every adjacent coastal/ocean hex not containing a unit.

The language could use work, but I'm basically using the similar logic to withdraw, which only works if you have available spaces to move into. Instead of forcing movement (which is a clunky mechanic in a game that requires such precision in military movement for high level combat), we provide defensive bonus in more open water.

This allows a thinner more scattered fleet some protection against a fleet bustling with ships end to end. Full fleet combat is still brutal, but as ships start to die, the remaining ships get a bit tougher, giving them some longevity.

I like the idea, although as usual, it would seem to help the larger fleet about as much as the smaller one. But if we don't make it a basic promo that the AI automatically adds in its shipyards late game, it's the sort of edge that could help the outgunned human.
 

Stalker0

Baller Magnus
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
9,310
Just a good screenshot highlighting the problem.

Spoiler :

upload_2021-2-21_17-10-6.png



I was doing pretty well at first, I killed about 10 ships and didn't lose anything. Then this new western fleet came out of nowhere and I started losing ships and forcing a pull back. I've counted 22 ships for the aztecs that I have scouted, so probably at least a few more behind there.

My only hope is to manage a full pull back and prey I can deliver enough firepower from the land to hold him off, otherwise, this fleet is about to be crushed.

So now I've done the pull back, doing my best to create the best screen I can for my frigates. I have also rerouted land troops fighting in the east back to my coastlines for support. So we will see how this goes.

Spoiler :

upload_2021-2-21_17-18-29.png



So the pull back went well. I managed to snipe a few ships, and hold my line.

Spoiler :

upload_2021-2-21_17-28-8.png



So now the question is, do I rebuild my full fleet? And at this point, I honestly don't think a full fleet of ships would do anything. Moving out of this water means I would have to contend with aztec land, and my fleet can barely hold its on in open water, little more aztec land.

So now I'm kicking myself for making a fleet in the first place. I probably would have been much better served just having land forces and no navy, because without a truly massive navy at this point....its probably just better to have none. And that's the issue I have with naval, its all or nothing. Building a navy that could actually contend with aztec would likely require the vast majority of my supply (and with a strong Egypt to the east I can't afford that). A middle size to small size navy does nothing....I could defend better with just more land troops and a middle navy cannot project any force.

And so....the best option is....no navy.
 
Last edited:

2506

Warlord
Joined
Feb 23, 2020
Messages
181
Just a good screenshot highlighting the problem.



I was doing pretty well at first, I killed about 10 ships and didn't lose anything. Then this new western fleet came out of nowhere and I started losing ships and forcing a pull back. I've counted 22 ships for the aztecs that I have scouted, so probably at least a few more behind there.

My only hope is to manage a full pull back and prey I can deliver enough firepower from the land to hold him off, otherwise, this fleet is about to be crushed.

So now I've done the pull back, doing my best to create the best screen I can for my frigates. I have also rerouted land troops fighting in the east back to my coastlines for support. So we will see how this goes.



So the pull back went well. I managed to snipe a few ships, and hold my line.



So now the question is, do I rebuild my full fleet? And at this point, I honestly don't think a full fleet of ships would do anything. Moving out of this water means I would have to contend with aztec land, and my fleet can barely hold its on in open water, little more aztec land.

So now I'm kicking myself for making a fleet in the first place. I probably would have been much better served just having land forces and no navy, because without a truly massive navy at this point....its probably just better to have none. And that's the issue I have with naval, its all or nothing. Building a navy that could actually contend with aztec would likely require the vast majority of my supply (and with a strong Egypt to the east I can't afford that). A middle size to small size navy does nothing....I could defend better with just more land troops and a middle navy cannot project any force.

And so....the best option is....no navy.

You did great, actually. I could argue that your navy caused your enemy to lose a hell of a lot of hammers that could have been spent on an achievable VC. But playing Korea, for example, I never build a navy, even if I have a port or (gulp) two. I enjoy naval combat, but don't really have a problem with accepting the zero option. It's not too different from building a city in the center of a vast flood plain. Good luck holding against a superior enemy. That's the way it is in RL as well. Think about the Pacific theater in WW2, and how much more quickly the US ground down the Japanese navy, as compared to what it took to take those little islands.
 

youngsteve

Prince
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Messages
524
Location
England
This is why I try to play on maps with as little water as possible, as in the end it all comes down to who has the biggest navy, which is boring as you need to put most of your military force into ships to survive. The communitu maps which are really nice suffer from this due to all the water in them, so avoid them. Which is a shame. When I used to play this there never seemed to be this unbalance between naval & land, or am I imaganing that, & it has always been so. Even playing England seems to be a chore when I play them now, & I used to really enjoy playing them.
 

stii

Emperor
Joined
Oct 3, 2010
Messages
1,128
Yeah I think naval doesn't really work as half your supply. If you can build just navy then you can beat the AI but as soon as you have to split it you are better off trying to ignore the water.
 

InkAxis

King
Joined
Feb 24, 2020
Messages
755
Perhaps the navy should have a separate supply? But that seems a little too complicated, instead maybe giving a supply promotion should be more common. For example harbors (or one of the coastal buildings) could make units in the territory of that city not cost supply (probably maxing out at a certain amount per city). Or they could give the no supply promotion to the first naval unit built. It could also be a promotion you get normally through experience.
 

Stalker0

Baller Magnus
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
9,310
Perhaps the navy should have a separate supply? But that seems a little too complicated, instead maybe giving a supply promotion should be more common. For example harbors (or one of the coastal buildings) could make units in the territory of that city not cost supply (probably maxing out at a certain amount per city). Or they could give the no supply promotion to the first naval unit built. It could also be a promotion you get normally through experience.

Lighthouse + Harbor already gives 3 supply and Seaport gives 20% pop to supply....so coastal civs have tons of supply.
 

2506

Warlord
Joined
Feb 23, 2020
Messages
181
Yeah I think naval doesn't really work as half your supply. If you can build just navy then you can beat the AI but as soon as you have to split it you are better off trying to ignore the water.

This is exactly how I play. I either have no navy, or a real navy and just enough of an army to survive. The only times this doesn't work is when you have a water civ like England, Carthage, or the Dutch, and you can't avoid a long frontier with hostile neighbors. But that combination doesn't come up often for me.

This is why I try to play on maps with as little water as possible, as in the end it all comes down to who has the biggest navy, which is boring as you need to put most of your military force into ships to survive. The communitu maps which are really nice suffer from this due to all the water in them, so avoid them. Which is a shame. When I used to play this there never seemed to be this unbalance between naval & land, or am I imaganing that, & it has always been so. Even playing England seems to be a chore when I play them now, & I used to really enjoy playing them.

FWIW, I only play on Communitu, and have no problem at all playing the aforementioned water civs. I am about to start experimenting with Portugal, which I have ignored for some reason, but Stalker) has inspired me, plus they have a really interesting kit. (This is on Emperor/Immortal.)
 

stii

Emperor
Joined
Oct 3, 2010
Messages
1,128
I think it is often the right play to just move your capital off the coast and then refuse to settle any cities on the coast. I'd certainly be fine as the dutch giving up on their unit, as it isn't their big selling point. The others are getting a bit more of an issue.

If you have to settle on the coast you have to consider more awkward spot with less coastal tiles within range of your city, you can hold off an unlimited number of ships if they can't fire. Land units can poke them off but the balance is a bit weird, either the ships can't hit your land units at all or the slaughter them. The strength values seem a bit off when you compare them, even two tech levels up units are still in danger, machine guns would instantly kill muskets but vs frigates they still have somewhat a battle.

I'm tempted to try Portugal too, I realised at some point I haven't played loads of civs because their abilities aren't very exciting but it is hard to judge things without playing them, Brazil for example is a lot better than I thought they were.
 

Stalker0

Baller Magnus
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
9,310
I think it is often the right play to just move your capital off the coast and then refuse to settle any cities on the coast. I'd certainly be fine as the dutch giving up on their unit, as it isn't their big selling point. The others are getting a bit more of an issue.

You can put cities on 1 hex coast and defend very well. Just make sure you are building arsenals and military bases, while you can sometimes ignore those inland they are critical for coastal cities. But yeah 2 hex cities are hard, and 3 hex cities is just asking for a naval pounding.
 
Top Bottom