Naval War

[ringhloth]

As it stands, the naval war seems heavily biased towards the CP. In a PBEM I have going with another player, I've managed to devastate the British/French fleet which has around 5-10k more combat power. The shifts in NM are huge as well. Minor skirmishes resulting in few ship losses are more influential than a complete collapse of a battle line. I think the WE lost around 20NM between this and another battle and only a single full unit was destroyed in either of them. I didn't see the final ship count for either, but my opponent says the capital ships weren't heavily damaged at all.

How do other PBEMs feel the naval war is?

[loki100]

just looking at that combat outcome its pretty clear most of his fleet didn't engage, so you basically isolated and damaged a small portion.

did he have his ships in different stacks?

sometimes the results can look misleading as the totals will show everyone who *could* have been engaged rather than those who were actually in the battle

[ringhloth]

just looking at that combat outcome its pretty clear most of his fleet didn't engage, so you basically isolated and damaged a small portion.

did he have his ships in different stacks?

sometimes the results can look misleading as the totals will show everyone who *could* have been engaged rather than those who were actually in the battle

Yeah, there was one stack of 15k and two stacks of 5k. If the combined French/British navy can't defeat the German one, though (the Austrian ships aren't making a difference in CP), the naval game seems really off.

[RGA]

sometimes the results can look misleading as the totals will show everyone who *could* have been engaged rather than those who were actually in the battle

The same happens for land battles. I would rather see who was actually involved in the battle.

[Kensai]

In a PBEM game it is impossible as the CP to do something similar unless the WE player really risks by sending most of his powerful ships to hunt down raiders in the overseas oceans, leaving few in the North Sea to shadow the High Fleet. The CP can actually score a spectacular victory by risking a major naval battle with the Grand Fleet (ie combining its fleet divisions and sending them as one powerful flotilla).

However, if you lose then consider all bets off as without a High Fleet the blockade will be devastating and the rest of the Entente Fleet can even attempt to escort troopships for a land invasion of Germany and Austria-Hungary (if one does not fear the mines)...

[loki100]

Yeah, there was one stack of 15k and two stacks of 5k. If the combined French/British navy can't defeat the German one, though (the Austrian ships aren't making a difference in CP), the naval game seems really off.

aye, but it looks like only 1 of those stacks was involved in the battle. There is a real trade off sometimes between splitting up your stacks (to minimise the CP penalty) and keeping them together to avoid the stack targetting algorithm.

So thats your answer, in practical terms your fleet took advantage of conditions/surprise/poor communication to isolate and hit a small element of the allied fleet, the rest then fell back in confusion and unsure as to the real strength and intention of the German fleet. To me, its one of the ways the AGE game system models the 'shit-happens' aspect of warfare.

The naval game isn't biased to either side (I'll leave others far more knowledgeable than me to discuss the overall OOB), but here, by luck or judgement the game mechanics came down on your side. You'll see this stack targetting routine happen a lot in land battles too.

[ringhloth]

In a PBEM game it is impossible as the CP to do something similar unless the WE player really risks by sending most of his powerful ships to hunt down raiders in the overseas oceans, leaving few in the North Sea to shadow the High Fleet. The CP can actually score a spectacular victory by risking a major naval battle with the Grand Fleet (ie combining its fleet divisions and sending them as one powerful flotilla).

However, if you lose then consider all bets off as without a High Fleet the blockade will be devastating and the rest of the Entente Fleet can even attempt to escort troopships for a land invasion of Germany and Austria-Hungary (if one does not fear the mines)...

I disagree. The Entente has enough naval power for 3 stacks. A French one of about 9,000. While it can hold its own against its Austrians, if the German fleet comes, there's no way it's going to stand against it; even if the combat power were roughly equal because of weather, the French don't have enough modern battleships to hold its own. The British can only make one fleet of fleet 18k, and the other has to have outdated battleships and mostly lighter ships and cruisers, and of those, generally half full, high command:combat power ratio. Because of the way cohesion losses work, the 18k will have to go to port eventually, and either there's no blockade going on and the Germans have full command of the seas, or the British and the French stick their neck out. The Germans can know exactly when this will happen, because they can just place a sub in the blockade boxes and it'll very rarely get engaged.

[Kensai]

The thing is, war is all about deception as Sun Tzu said. For example, the Entente Blockade can actually be applied with older previous generation elements. Also, even if the Germans send their Zeppelins to recon the situation in a blockade box, they can only see as much. Remember that you can have a full stack in a nearby sea region with the intercept button pressed. If this happens, in case your blockade box lesser fleet is attacked, the nearby powerful fleet will come to its rescue. This is how it was happening in PON at least.

• No need to be in offensive posture unless you want to start the attack yourself. Being in defensive with intercept mode ON your fleets in nearby regions should collaborate while losing relatively less cohesion per turn.
• A year has 24 turns but consider that winter months may have bad weather which makes operations futile, especially for the larger-caliber battleships that take advantage of opening fire at long range. The technological and numerical advantage of a side can be negated if the player carefully chooses his battles. In theory in a very foul weather situation the distance will be so close that actually submarines can wreak havoc! (check out their stats close range)

In any case, unless the naval OOB is horribly off, I find that a good West Entente player will have a fair amount of opportunities to lure the Central Powers player to a confrontation. Of course it works the other way around as well, but if I were the Germans I would not risk my High Fleet unless I was more than certain that I can win. Simply uniting the fleets and going after the Grand Fleet might work against the AI but could be a disaster in a PBEM against a cunning WE player. The NM and ships lost might compromise the entire Central Powers game if that happens.

• The blockades would not be challenged anymore.
• The WE player might send the rest of his fleet to hunt down the German raiders overseas.
• The WE player can use Troopships to ferry units to distant German colonies.
• The naval NM penalty is usually horrible for the losing side. It will compromise operations in land as well for the entire losing coalition.

That said, risk only if you are audacious enough!

[ringhloth]

The thing is, war is all about deception as Sun Tzu said. For example, the Entente Blockade can actually be applied with older previous generation elements. Also, even if the Germans send their Zeppelins to recon the situation in a blockade box, they can only see as much. Remember that you can have a full stack in a nearby sea region with the intercept button pressed. If this happens, in case your blockade box lesser fleet is attacked, the nearby powerful fleet will come to its rescue. This is how it was happening in PON at least.

• No need to be in offensive posture unless you want to start the attack yourself. Being in defensive with intercept mode ON your fleets in nearby regions should collaborate while losing relatively less cohesion per turn.
• A year has 24 turns but consider that winter months may have bad weather which makes operations futile, especially for the larger-caliber battleships that take advantage of opening fire at long range. The technological and numerical advantage of a side can be negated if the player carefully chooses his battles. In theory in a very foul weather situation the distance will be so close that actually submarines can wreak havoc! (check out their stats close range)

In any case, unless the naval OOB is horribly off, I find that a good West Entente player will have a fair amount of opportunities to lure the Central Powers player to a confrontation. Of course it works the other way around as well, but if I were the Germans I would not risk my High Fleet unless I was more than certain that I can win. Simply uniting the fleets and going after the Grand Fleet might work against the AI but could be a disaster in a PBEM against a cunning WE player. The NM and ships lost might compromise the entire Central Powers game if that happens.

• The blockades would not be challenged anymore.
• The WE player might send the rest of his fleet to hunt down the German raiders overseas.
• The WE player can use Troopships to ferry units to distant German colonies.
• The naval NM penalty is usually horrible for the losing side. It will compromise operations in land as well for the entire losing coalition.

That said, risk only if you are audacious enough!

Sure, the Entente can have their fleets in defensive, but that doesn't completely stop cohesion loss, especially in those bad weather months. The CP can bide their time, and eventually the Entente will either have to completely withdraw if they don't want to face a stronger fleet. It also should be mentioned that the best admirals have much better offensive than defensive abilities. Miklos Horthy is something like a 4-6-2, and the Entente admiral with the highest stats is something like a 4-5-0. Sure, the Entente can appear to have a much weaker fleet than they actually do, but there's a significant risk that the larger fleet won't engage in time. In both combats where the Entente brought more ships in besides the ones in the box in this PBEM, the second fleet didn't have a strong impact, and the CP managed to engage, cause significant enough losses for 10NM (19 ships sunk, by the way, shouldn't cause such a huge NM penalty; I can see a big naval battle where one sides combat power is severely impacted would cause a 10 or 15NM loss, but very often these 10NM battles result from the loss of some completely insignificant ships). The CP player can also put a single torpedo boat or submarine in the box, and it's unlikely that they'll get engaged on B/G/Evade, and no significant loss if they do. They'll see the deception coming a mile away.

I have a couple suggestions to fix this. First, increase the hiding penalty for large fleets. A fleet with a command requirement of 48 shouldn't be able to evade anything with regularity. Second, introduce a zone connecting the German ports with the rest of the seas which doesn't cause a cohesion loss to put a fleet in.

[Kensai]

The Entente fleet is twice the size of the Central Powers one. When half of your fleet is at port resting, the other half can roam the seas and enforce blockades, hunt raiders, bombard colonies. There is no need to fix something that is so obvious and accurate as far as naval OOB goes. Of course the German game is a waiting-lurking one. As it historically happened. But as the Germans you have only one chance, if you blow it, it is almost game over. You could even be invaded with marines in Hamburg!

[ringhloth]

I just ran a test, where I put 48 command points worth of battleships and all of the destroyers and torpedo boats I could into one fleet, as well as combining the best British admirals. For the Germans, I shuffled the Austrian fleet in with the German ones, and took out the weakest ships until I got 48 or so CP. The British fleet 21k, and the Germans 18k. The Brits went forward in defensive, the Germans offensive, and the Germans walked away with enough damage to wait in port for a turn or two with the Brits losing a couple of battleship elements. Most of the British ships didn't even engage. However, the British also lost 10NM from losing barely any combat capability. I ran it another two times, switching the commanding admiral from a 4-5-0 to a 3-2-3 with school of defensive, and even when the British fleet engaged the Germans much closer to home, the results persisted. I switched the British to offensive (and took out the 3-2-3 admiral), and the entire British fleet engaged, wrecking the Germans. I don't think putting large fleets in defensive is a good idea.

[Bismarck1940]

Questions:

1. If as the Entente you want to bottle up the CP fleet in the N Sea, do you need your ships at sea? If so, where should you put them each turn?
2. Or, is it sufficient to have them in a port/box and simple have intercept on?
3. Or something else?

How far ships will move to engage in combat is a mystery to me.

[caranorn]

I just ran a test, where I put 48 command points worth of battleships and all of the destroyers and torpedo boats I could into one fleet, as well as combining the best British admirals. For the Germans, I shuffled the Austrian fleet in with the German ones, and took out the weakest ships until I got 48 or so CP. The British fleet 21k, and the Germans 18k. The Brits went forward in defensive, the Germans offensive, and the Germans walked away with enough damage to wait in port for a turn or two with the Brits losing a couple of battleship elements. Most of the British ships didn't even engage. However, the British also lost 10NM from losing barely any combat capability. I ran it another two times, switching the commanding admiral from a 4-5-0 to a 3-2-3 with school of defensive, and even when the British fleet engaged the Germans much closer to home, the results persisted. I switched the British to offensive (and took out the 3-2-3 admiral), and the entire British fleet engaged, wrecking the Germans. I don't think putting large fleets in defensive is a good idea.

Any example where you united the German and Austrian fleets assumes a big Western Entente blunder. It should be easy to bottle the Austrians up in the Mediterranean...

For the rest I agree, it's better to have the Home Fleet on offensive. I've only played against the ai so far so not sure what a human player could do, but I've never kept the Home Fleet at sea for more than a turn, carefully planning the route from Scapa to wherever I wish to place my close blockade and back so I'd most likely catch the German High Seas Fleet were it keen on sortying.

One thing I'm not sure about is whether march to the sound of the guns works at sea. I'm certainly been using the battlecruisers under such an assumption to widen my patrol screen in the north sea with the plan never to stray more than one sea region from the Home Fleet. And yes, it's a calculated risk that the battlecruisers (I wonder whether the Queen Elisabeth's are fast enough in EAW to sail with them as they did historically as that would give the scouts a nice punch) might get themselves battered (as they did historically), but if it serves to catch the High Seas Fleet they did their job...

[Kensai]

If I were the WE player I would have my powerful Grand Fleet ready in Scapa Flow and some older generation ships in the blockades in passive/defensive. The presence of the ships is enough to blockade the Central Powers. Now, if the High Fleet indeed ventured, probably it would beat that fleet. But unless it did a really fast and risky sortie (to the blocking box and back to Willhemshaven in one quick turn) it would be quite exposed. Next turn the WE could send the Grand Fleet in offensive with intercept mode on (hitting nearby sea regions as well) in a sweeping movement to completely obliterate the High Fleet.

As I said earlier, there are ways to lure the High Fleet out and still score a victory. In this aspect I think the game is quite good and accurate cause both sides know their strengths and weaknesses and need to find the ideal opportunity to engage. As it happened in real life. It's no coincidence that we had only 2-3 major naval confrontations in the entire duration of the First World War. If the Germans risk they can gain a lot, but they can also love everything. Without a fleet even the Russians would be able to come out for sorties in the Baltic!

[ringhloth]

Any example where you united the German and Austrian fleets assumes a big Western Entente blunder. It should be easy to bottle the Austrians up in the Mediterranean...

First, the Austrian ships don't contribute that much to the fleets power. The Austrian admirals are what is important, so if you really wanted to, you could just take a sub, load the admirals on there, and send it to Germany. Second, what do you propose an Entente player do to stop the Austrians? B/G/Evade will almost always avoid encounters when I've tried it. When I ran a test with the British 12k fleet sent immediately to the blockade box, and the Austrians sent straight to Germany, I didn't have any troubles.

If I were the WE player I would have my powerful Grand Fleet ready in Scapa Flow and some older generation ships in the blockades in passive/defensive. The presence of the ships is enough to blockade the Central Powers. Now, if the High Fleet indeed ventured, probably it would beat that fleet. But unless it did a really fast and risky sortie (to the blocking box and back to Willhemshaven in one quick turn) it would be quite exposed. Next turn the WE could send the Grand Fleet in offensive with intercept mode on (hitting nearby sea regions as well) in a sweeping movement to completely obliterate the High Fleet.

As I said earlier, there are ways to lure the High Fleet out and still score a victory. In this aspect I think the game is quite good and accurate cause both sides know their strengths and weaknesses and need to find the ideal opportunity to engage. As it happened in real life. It's no coincidence that we had only 2-3 major naval confrontations in the entire duration of the First World War. If the Germans risk they can gain a lot, but they can also love everything. Without a fleet even the Russians would be able to come out for sorties in the Baltic!

I've never had a fleet catch a B/G/Evade. There's no way to reliably attack a fleet that's running away. The Germans could go to a countless amount of ports, and you're unlikely to actually catch them. Have you ever actually had the German fleet attack the blockade box, try to run away the next turn, and then be caught by a larger British fleet?

[Kensai]

I had all kinds of games in early beta testing. My High Fleet sometimes destroyed and some other was destroyed by the Grand Fleet. These permutations are really normal. On paper and how the game is designed, I am telling you there are ways to create the perfect trap for the High Fleet if they try to lift the blockade with a huge force. The Atlantic blockade is just two regions away from Scapa Flow. Just keep the cohesion up by alternating the fleets that you want to use to engage and be ready to strike when the weather is nice.

As the Germans against the WE AI I have done such a strike. The CP AI usually tries other tactics with mixed results.

[Jarkko]

If anybody is interested in learning what is wrong with naval warfare in TEAW, here is a short essay on the matter.



1) Only an idiot is in defensive (or passive) posture when you have an admiral leading the fleet

In TEAW admirals have average to excellent offensive values, and essentially zero in defensive value. One could argue this is intended, because on defense you get other excellent boosts, like terrain modifiers, entrenchments and fortifications. Except navies get none of that. In naval battles you essentially line up your ships, roll a dice for each ship and add to each dice roll the admirals offensive value (if the fleet is offensive posture) or defensive value (if in defensive or passive posture). Now if you have an admiral with OFF value of 5 and DEF value of 0, which one should you choose? That is right, you are an absolute retard if you choose defensive (or passive) posture.



2) Only an idiot is in offensive posture when blockading

In AGEOD games being in offensive posture eats up your cohesion real fast. So if you are out there blockading with your fleets, you never ever leave the fleet in offensive posture. You just are a retard if you do. "Err... Jarkko, didn't you just say you are a retard if you are in anything else but offensive posture?" I can hear you say. Yes, that is exactly correct. You are a retard if you have your fleet in anything but offensive posture, and you are a retard if you have your blockading fleet in offensive posture. In short, you are an absolute retard if you play Entente (because they need to be blockading), because what ever you choose you are doing it wrong in a horrible way.



3) The hide values for large fleets are way off the charts

TEAW has some of the sneakest ships ever encountered in human history. If they don't want to fight, then you can never force them to fight (except by extreme luck). It doesn't matter how big the fleet is, they are sneaker than a ninja during a moonless foggy night. The whole Austrian fleet can sail to Bremen, through Gibraltar and English Channel, and the Entente never see anything. Yes, that really is true, you can go and try it yourself.




What needs to be done to fix these issues?
1) Admirals need their Defensive value be pumped to *AT LEAST* their Offensive value. Admirals who historically were leading blockades need to have *VERY* high Defensive value.
2) Cohesion loss for TEAW fleets need to be cut by lots. Not 10% reduction if the stars are aligned correctly, I am talking of a 99% reduction of fleet cohesion loss during TEAW period.
3) Hide values for fleets should be in the negatives. Seriously. They should *NEVER* be able to dodge past a fleet spesifically looking for them. Never. As a start, each Battleship should give a -1 to the Hide level of the fleet, if that is not enough then each Cruiser shoud give -1 to Hide too.

[Kensai]

You can even blockade with destroyers and minesweepers if you want. It is the element number that counts, not the quality of the ship. With this in mind (more generally: sending older designs for the blockade) the WE can alternate two fleets of almost equal size in and out of Scapa Flow in offensive while waiting the right moment the High Fleet is lurking to destroy it. It can be done. In good weather the cohesion does not fall so fast when not moving, even in offensive.

There is no way in hell you can send the entire Austrian Fleet to Bremen without being stopped IF there is a WE fleet in offensive/intercept mode somewhere in its path or one region away from it, good weather withstanding. If the AI is not doing it, perhaps there is something off with its "visibility" in the seas.

I agree about upping the defensive abilities of certain Admirals, but perhaps it was a design implementation.

[Jarkko]

Kensai, dont make a fool of yourself please. Lord knows this forum has enough of these "experts" who have strong opionions about stuff, when they actually never even tested the matter at hand. Go and test, and then come back. You are seemingly a beta tester, so you shoud know the drill.

Also, sorry to say this, but your advice to have a blockading fleet in offensive posture with orders to intercept is absolutely pure idiocy -> you will have so low cohesion after a few turns your fleet is no good for anything. You can *NOT* keep your blockaders on offensive posture for ever, while the breaking fleet has the option to wait, and wait, and wait, and wait, and then strike. To stay on offensive posture is plain stupid, please don't give such advice because there are lots of newer players on this forum and they might actually believe your advice.

Another thing. I don't play AGEOD games anymore in SP. These games are simply too much for the AI. As such, please dont come and tell me how things will be different when you play with humans. I play only with humans.

[Bismarck1940]

Posts like the last one makes one want to leave these Forums. ;-(

[vaalen]

Kensai, I deeply appreciate the help you given me and so many others in this forum, both in PON and this game. I have always found your comments to be helpful, and I have always found your advice to be solid. I also appreciate the immense amount of time and effort you have been giving to beta testing this game, and the work and effort you have put into sharing what you know with us. Your advice on this naval issue is most helpful, and I will follow it.

I also appreciate the many times you have answered difficult questions, and you are always willing to help.

Thank you so much for all you give this forum.

[Kensai]

Jarrko, relax. I am "strongly opinionated" because I have tested. Of course I may be wrong, but most of the stuff I am writing here comes out of hard-earned experience in test-playing and reading the logs.

I never said that you have to be in Offensive mode IN the Blockade. You probably misread me. What I said was this:

...the Entente Blockade can actually be applied with older previous generation elements. Also, even if the Germans send their Zeppelins to recon the situation in a blockade box, they can only see as much. Remember that you can have a full stack in a nearby sea region with the intercept button pressed. If this happens, in case your blockade box lesser fleet is attacked, the nearby powerful fleet will come to its rescue. This is how it was happening in PON at least.

This responds to most of your questions except for the one that Admirals have a very low defensive value (which I agreed). The West Entente has the numbers and quality of ships to keep one fleet resting in Scapa Flow while the other is in a nearby sea region in Offensive/Intercept mode for a couple of months (4 turns) in good weather. When the patrolling one is tired you can swap it with the one in port. From Scapa Flow the Atlantic Blockade is just a sea region away. Your fleet does not even have to move far to lose cohesion. The actual blockade can be made by older generation ships of lesser value or Battlecruisers in Defensive or even Passive. Technically (game-wise) it does not matter. You can even put gunboats. The blockade maintains and rises through an algorithm that counts elements, not their type. The Germans have only one chance to do it right. They have to unite their fleet divisions and prey it all goes well. Otherwise, they are toast.

Regarding the rest of design decisions (about Admirals, hiding values, etc) you can ask the Philippes. Anyway, we will be starting a PBEM with Merlin once v1.01 is out. If you care to play the EE with us it will be cool: no major fleet action there to frustrate you!

[Haresus]

I was able to send the Austrian navy, on passive/retreat/evade, to Germany in a game versus the AI. I got "caught" once in the Mediterranean and hurt a British fleet severely for no significant casualties. This could just be the stupid AI, or it could be that navies are pretty good at evading anything they don't want to attack. It should be noted that my navy was sitting in the Channel at the end of a turn, and a French fleet was sitting in a province next to it, so the AI had no real excuse to let me pass by like that without at least trying to intercept me. I'm sure that this is harder to do in a PBEM game, but it is still interesting to note the flaws of the AI.

As for the rest of the discussion, I can only base my naval experience on reading a TEAW PBEM AAR made by others. The Germans were able to move out, crush a British fleet in the Atlantic blockade box and then escape the exasperated Royal Navy without getting caught on the way back. Twice. The Germans appear able to attack whenever they feel like they can win, while the British are forced to rely on a desperate dash to intercept the Hochseeflotte that doesn't appear all that likely to succeed. The massive NM losses back and forth also appear a little random in their appearance. A small defeat for the Ottoman navy with only two outdated smaller ships being sunk led to 8 NM being lost by the Central Powers.

It would be interesting to see some proper testing on this subject, with real players attempting to escape/catch each other on the seas and the success rate of various methods of interception, instead of relying on various opinions.

[Jarkko]

This responds to most of your questions except for the one that Admirals have a very low defensive value (which I agreed). The West Entente has the numbers and quality of ships to keep one fleet resting in Scapa Flow while the other is in a nearby sea region in Offensive/Intercept mode for a couple of months (4 turns) in good weather. When the patrolling one is tired you can swap it with the one in port. From Scapa Flow the Atlantic Blockade is just a sea region away. Your fleet does not even have to move far to lose cohesion. The actual blockade can be made by older generation ships of lesser value or Battlecruisers in Defensive or even Passive. Technically (game-wise) it does not matter. You can even put gunboats. The blockade maintains and rises through an algorithm that counts elements, not their type. The Germans have only one chance to do it right. They have to unite their fleet divisions and prey it all goes well. Otherwise, they are toast.

This is wrong in so many ways it hurts Have you actually played navies against a half-competent players? Because, no offense, I get the feeling from your posts you have not.

Also, I think I pretty well know how the game engine works. You very well are a loveable person, like vaalen so deeply proclaims, and you certainly have helped many people with their questions, but I fail to see whatever that has to do with how navies work in TEAW. What I have written in this thread have been tested and verified, and you could do that yourself simply by launching the game. But sadly this forum has the tendency to have people who burst out "THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE!!!!!" when represented by cold hard facts about how the game works. This, sadly, seems to again be such a case.

I don't even want to go to forts and navies, because that is even more screwed up (when I brought up the matter years ago here for AACW1 it was fixed, but now the fort fixes have been reverted and even made worse...). No point, because even if hard numbers are represented, the reaction from the usual suspects would be so predictable...

[Kensai]

Where are the hard numbers, Jarkko? Did you post a save game that I didn't see?! Most of my tests are done in SP and MP (where I play both sides myself thus I control ALL fighting parameters) as well as reading the results in the battle logs. This setup is much MUCH more objective than simply playing a PBEM as you probably do. And no, I did not get the pessimistic results you are so furious about.

The only way the German player can have the edge is if he unites all the ships in Wilhelmhaven with those in Kiel and goes against the Grand Fleet. You can test this by selecting the aforementioned fleets, unite them in two stacks and let them move in Offensive/Intercept to the North Sea sea region. Do the same with the Grand Fleet. In my tests the Grand Fleet lost more times than it won, but very few ships went down, so no disaster except for the NM of the lost battle. So we had the entire German armada (including every little gunboat I could muster) going against ONE STACK of the British Navy. Now imagine if I had used other British fleets (such as the Battlecruiser one). Imagine if I had used the French Atlantic Fleet as well. Come on.

The blockade can be maintained with very few ship elements and their quality does not matter. Every element gives 4% of blockade probability. With 20-25 old ships (elements) you can effectively blockade the Germans and be almost certain the counter goes up each turn. Of course you will need 20 turns (10 if Neutral Blockading as well) for each level. The same goes for the Mediterranean blockade.

The only thing I give you right (and I said from the very first moment) is the fact that the naval battle results seem to be skewed towards the most "audacious tactics" (ie a fleet in offensive). I repeat I don't know if this was made as a design decision, but it does not matter so much after all. The attacking player risks a lot in doing an empty sortie and losing a lot of cohesion as he moves across the sea.

[Kensai]

I was able to send the Austrian navy, on passive/retreat/evade, to Germany in a game versus the AI. I got "caught" once in the Mediterranean and hurt a British fleet severely for no significant casualties. This could just be the stupid AI, or it could be that navies are pretty good at evading anything they don't want to attack. It should be noted that my navy was sitting in the Channel at the end of a turn, and a French fleet was sitting in a province next to it, so the AI had no real excuse to let me pass by like that without at least trying to intercept me. I'm sure that this is harder to do in a PBEM game, but it is still interesting to note the flaws of the AI.

Yes, the AI is not always on offensive/intercept mode. But this can happen to a human player.

As for the rest of the discussion, I can only base my naval experience on reading a TEAW PBEM AAR made by others. The Germans were able to move out, crush a British fleet in the Atlantic blockade box and then escape the exasperated Royal Navy without getting caught on the way back. Twice. The Germans appear able to attack whenever they feel like they can win, while the British are forced to rely on a desperate dash to intercept the Hochseeflotte that doesn't appear all that likely to succeed. The massive NM losses back and forth also appear a little random in their appearance. A small defeat for the Ottoman navy with only two outdated smaller ships being sunk led to 8 NM being lost by the Central Powers.

You only need 25 elements (6-8 units if we consider each naval unit having 3-4 elements, not necessarily your most advanced) to completely blockade the Atlantic. And you don't need to blockade it all 100%, even 60-70% is high enough. If the WE player sends the entire Grand Fleet sitting on the Atlantic blockade box then... he probably hasn't read the manual or understood how to do it in the most efficient way. As the German player does sorties the British player can do as well. Scapa Flow to Scapa Flow, each damn turn. If you are not bored of the micromanagement, eventually you will get them. And since you are finishing at a port each turn the loss of cohesion will be minimal.

Small thoughts, I am not following that AAR. Regarding the huge NM loss/gain in naval battles: this is a design decision in all modern-era AGEOD games. It is kind of historically accurate. Naval battles were much rarer but their effect in morale was probably much higher. That's the most I can say about the design decisions. I happen to like them and consider them realistic though, yes, even if only few Ottoman ships went down.

It would be interesting to see some proper testing on this subject, with real players attempting to escape/catch each other on the seas and the success rate of various methods of interception, instead of relying on various opinions.

What do you mean REAL players? Am I not real enough? Tell me what you want to test exactly and I will test it. I told you already that I play both sides and have literally made dozens of possible engagement permutations. Of course I know where to move, but I also planned trajectories that were less efficient.

Trust me, there are ways to get the German fleet and hurt him bad.

[Haresus]

Small thoughts, I am not following that AAR. Regarding the huge NM loss/gain in naval battles: this is a design decision in all modern-era AGEOD games. It is kind of historically accurate. Naval battles were much rarer but their effect in morale was probably much higher. That's the most I can say about the design decisions. I happen to like them and consider them realistic though, yes, even if only few Ottoman ships went down.

What do you mean REAL players? Am I not real enough? Tell me what you want to test exactly and I will test it. I told you already that I play both sides and have literally made dozens of possible engagement permutations. Of course I know where to move, but I also planned trajectories that were less efficient.

I had a longer response written up, but the forum swallowed it because it doesn't like links or pictures:
The current NM loss system works for decisive Atlantic battles such as Jutland. It does, however, not really work for smaller engagements like the one witnessed in the Mediterranean during the war. No one was outraged in Italy because the Battle of the Strait of Otranto was a defeat for them, it was generally a very unimportant and minor battle. In TEAW, a battle such as that would be worth a very good amount of NM and have a decisive effect on the outcome of the war in the end. The system needs tweaking in order to fit more than one kind of battle. I imagine that a simple system that counts the amount of capital ships sunk would work fairly well, since those are the ones that the public and press will notice the most.

And no, I'm not doubting that you are real. I meant real opponents, not AI ones. I was expressing doubt regarding my own test with the Austrian navy against the AI interception attempts, as well as any other tests made against the AI. Since you offer to test something that I'm curious about, I would be very interested in seeing an approximate success rate for an Austrian attempt to reach the German harbours without getting shot to pieces, with the Entente acting in a reasonable way. It would also be interesting to watch the same results without the British joining the war early, for example with a German Moltke plan. I imagine it might be harder for the French to do it alone. I would appreciate if you could test that out for me and for anyone else who is interested, if you have the time.

Also, I have heard and seen and noticed that splitting the navy might be a good way to avoid detection. Would that be a factor that could make a German escape from the Atlantic trading box significantly easier? It seems to me that it would make it a lot harder for the Entente to effectively catch and destroy a significant amount of the Hochseeflotte if they are split up and use different routes. No need to test that, just want to know your previous experience regarding that.

[ringhloth]

Small thoughts, I am not following that AAR. Regarding the huge NM loss/gain in naval battles: this is a design decision in all modern-era AGEOD games. It is kind of historically accurate. Naval battles were much rarer but their effect in morale was probably much higher. That's the most I can say about the design decisions. I happen to like them and consider them realistic though, yes, even if only few Ottoman ships went down.

What's not realistic is having engagements where the British lose absolutely 0 combat elements, and then lose 10NM for it. That happens when you throw the full British fleet in defensive against the full German fleet.

Fleets cannot be in defensive and expect to win combat against even a foe 30% weaker. For whatever reason, the full fleet won't engage, and they'll lose 10NM for their efforts. So a single fleet in defensive in the blockade box is going to get your NM eviscerated. Any fleet in offensive is painfully vulnerable to just being singled out for staying in the box too long. Even 2 months is pushing it. The secondary fleet also cannot stand against the Germans. It's mathematically impossible.

As for stopping the Austrians and the Germans from reuniting, I'd be interested if someone could show me that it was possible. I really don't think it is. There's not much more you can do than put your fleet in O/O/Intercept, and that's never caught a B/G/Evade fleet for me. It's definitely impossible to keep Miklos (who I believe is the best admiral in the game, or at least tied for it) out of the German fleet, which is the only really important part of the Austrian fleet, and the rest is just gravy.

[Ace]

We heard many theories why it is better to keep fleet in offense than defense, but the truth is there is soon to be corrected bug that gives fleet on defense combat penalty. So until next RC patch, keep fleets in offense

[Kensai]

I had a longer response written up, but the forum swallowed it because it doesn't like links or pictures:
The current NM loss system works for decisive Atlantic battles such as Jutland. It does, however, not really work for smaller engagements like the one witnessed in the Mediterranean during the war. No one was outraged in Italy because the Battle of the Strait of Otranto was a defeat for them, it was generally a very unimportant and minor battle. In TEAW, a battle such as that would be worth a very good amount of NM and have a decisive effect on the outcome of the war in the end. The system needs tweaking in order to fit more than one kind of battle. I imagine that a simple system that counts the amount of capital ships sunk would work fairly well, since those are the ones that the public and press will notice the most.

Fair enough, but I think this is an engine limitation. I don't think the engine can consider some battles less important than others. Since naval battles are quite rare in respect to land battles, this is not such a bad compromise. Naval battles should make more resonance anyway. Even if few ships are lost or only damaged, I want to imagine the "losing" side feeling desperate and the "winning" side confident for more that may come. Remember that naval battles were important as gateways for the respecting blockades/food imports. If you hear that you cannot beat the enemy in the sea and no food is coming this month due to the blockade, your morale may go down. And vice versa. In the end, we cannot quantify how a -6 NM really feels, we just accept it.

And no, I'm not doubting that you are real. I meant real opponents, not AI ones. I was expressing doubt regarding my own test with the Austrian navy against the AI interception attempts, as well as any other tests made against the AI. Since you offer to test something that I'm curious about, I would be very interested in seeing an approximate success rate for an Austrian attempt to reach the German harbours without getting shot to pieces, with the Entente acting in a reasonable way. It would also be interesting to watch the same results without the British joining the war early, for example with a German Moltke plan. I imagine it might be harder for the French to do it alone. I would appreciate if you could test that out for me and for anyone else who is interested, if you have the time.

Are you implying that the OOBs are not done accurately? I am pretty sure Philippe Thibaut has researched this part extensively. I personally think that the French Navy alone cannot go 1:1 against the German, so if the Royal Navy is not in soon, it is trouble for France. This kind of historically accurate. The French cannot go against Germany and Austria-Hungary alone. The Russian Navy is much smaller anyway.

Also, I have heard and seen and noticed that splitting the navy might be a good way to avoid detection. Would that be a factor that could make a German escape from the Atlantic trading box significantly easier? It seems to me that it would make it a lot harder for the Entente to effectively catch and destroy a significant amount of the Hochseeflotte if they are split up and use different routes. No need to test that, just want to know your previous experience regarding that.

This should not be some kind of corridor rumor. This is happening and is a well-known mechanism. It is in most AGEOD games manuals and the AGE Wiki as well. Smaller units, both in land and sea, should have a higher hide value. The first thing you should do as CP in the Pacific is to divide the Pacific Fleet and other German cruiser raiders in smaller independent units so their hiding value goes up to 5. This will make finding them by the enemy not impossible, but harder. One small improvement that could be done here is to adjust the penalties for larger fleets (armadas) to be higher so if a player moves for example the Austrian Fleet to Bremen it is easier to spot and counter.

Anyway, what I want to stress is this: the game is not perfect, we are still waiting for the first patch (see how many CW2 got!), but it is far from the unbalanced disaster many suggest...