Naval woes

[Random]

No issues with the naval routines in the contested seas, the North Sea and the Med. So far, given the level of abstraction all the results to date seem entirely reasonable to me.

Raiders on the other hand...

Several German ships remain on the loose in the South Atlantic. All Germany's colonies are taken and these ships have no friendly ports. However, for over two years they have successfully disengaged from every encounter with the combined Franco-British Atlantic forces (including battle-cruisers which should be faster than any of them) and now they are evading the American Navy as well. Every turn I catch them, every turn they escape unscathed and without action.

They should have been interned or sunk years ago, it's now May 1918 and chasing them is becoming tiresome in the extreme.

Is this working as designed?

Just wondering, Thanks in advance.

[calvinus]

Indeed there was no rule in the original boardgame that forced fleets to take refuge in port, unless successfully trapped in battle and then defeated (in such a case you have a mandatory retreat to nearest friendly port).
So it's now working as designed. Consider also that fleets can be regarded as "pirates" (they ideally take refuge in neutral ports).

[Random]

So it's now working as designed. Consider also that fleets can be regarded as "pirates" (they ideally take refuge in neutral ports).

Ok, thanks.

Of course international laws of the day prevented belligerant warships from operating out of neutral harbours but I suppose this way gives the Entente Atlantic squadrons something to fill their days.

[Random]

Rather than start a new thread about naval woes, decided just to recycle this one.

September 1918, large fleet action in the North Sea, HSF on Sea Control mission, RN on patrol. HSF heavily outnumbered but still victor sinking four ships and one squadron losing only three and no squadrons.

After sorting through some 200 enteries in the battle log discovered that German battleship torpedoes scored 19-hits across the 14-battle rounds where RN destroyers and light cruisers scored only six in return and the superior force of RN battleships none at all.

I find it difficult to believe that this is a statistical fluke and see it as solid evidence that there seems to be a definite bias towards the German surface navy in the WW1G naval game.

In naval history it is almost impossible to find a single instance where any capital ship torpedoed another likewise it is inconcievable that 4 pre-dreadnaught battleships could wipe out attacking destroyers without damage to themselves using torpedoes. Indeed, one cannot find a single reliable account of any battleship torpedoing anything throughout the entire Great War.

Historically of course the Kaiser's surface forces achieved only one unambiguous combat victory against the RN during the entire war, Coronel on 1 November 1914.* They might have sunk more ships at Jutland although by every other yardstick that battle was a significant defeat but in the game the HSF appears consistantly undefeatable.

Is this working as designed?

*For obvious reasons SMS Konigsberg vs. HMS Pegasus and SMS Bremse and Brummer vs. HMS Mary Rose and a handful of effective Channel sweeps by light forces should not count. None were strategically significant and in all cases the Germans had material superiority, something which does not seem to matter in the game if you're the RN.

[calvinus]

Rather than start a new thread about naval woes, decided just to recycle this one.

September 1918, large fleet action in the North Sea, HSF on Sea Control mission, RN on patrol. HSF heavily outnumbered but still victor sinking four ships and one squadron losing only three and no squadrons.

After sorting through some 200 enteries in the battle log discovered that German battleship torpedoes scored 19-hits across the 14-battle rounds where RN destroyers and light cruisers scored only six in return and the superior force of RN battleships none at all.

I find it difficult to believe that this is a statistical fluke and see it as solid evidence that there seems to be a definite bias towards the German surface navy in the WW1G naval game.

In naval history it is almost impossible to find a single instance where any capital ship torpedoed another likewise it is inconcievable that 4 pre-dreadnaught battleships could wipe out attacking destroyers without damage to themselves using torpedoes. Indeed, one cannot find a single reliable account of any battleship torpedoing anything throughout the entire Great War.

Historically of course the Kaiser's surface forces achieved only one unambiguous combat victory against the RN during the entire war, Coronel on 1 November 1914.* They might have sunk more ships at Jutland although by every other yardstick that battle was a significant defeat but in the game the HSF appears consistantly undefeatable.

Is this working as designed?

*For obvious reasons SMS Konigsberg vs. HMS Pegasus and SMS Bremse and Brummer vs. HMS Mary Rose and a handful of effective Channel sweeps by light forces should not count. None were strategically significant and in all cases the Germans had material superiority, something which does not seem to matter in the game if you're the RN.

Have you noticed wrong die roll modifier calculations in battle logs?
Or you simply believe something should be changed to improve game balance?

[Random]

Have you noticed wrong die roll modifier calculations in battle logs?
Or you simply believe something should be changed to improve game balance?

Am not entirely sure about the die roll modifiers, this was a big battle with 14-combat rounds and when the BB launched torpedo hits started coming in fast and furious they absorbed my attention.

I suppose that the entire issue is with the presence of effective battleship torpedoes. At short range they were, in this case anyway, really decisive whereas in real life they were entirely ineffective and eventually omitted from capial ships because they posed more of a danger to the launching ship than to the enemy.

This capability means that the weapon of choice in a short-range engagement is the battleship and not the destroyer, again a situation not bourne out by historical events or doctrine.

Including battleship torpedoes was obviously a conscious design choice and I assume is a component carried over from the boardgame. However, it makes the battleship entirely too powerful in a world where dreadnaughts typically fled from torpedo craft for very good reasons.

Certainly not game-breaking but a bit irritating none the less and I think the naval game would be greatly improved if the capability of battleships to launch torpedoes was removed entirely but am probably a lone voice on that subject.

Cheers

[rattlesnake]

Navy war is not so important during the WW1.