Naval Battles

[Morindin]

Anyone else feel naval battles are just, well, crap?

Im not asking for a 3d battlefield or anything like that, but I seem to lose about 90% of my naval battles regardless of quality or quantity of my ships.

Also the fact its near on impossible to destroy ones fleet makes naval battles for me more irritating than fun.

At least the AI builds LOTS of ships.

[Doug-Thompson]

Apparently, having troops in your ships makes a difference. The battles are calculated on number of men, not number of ships.

I really am going to have to read the maual someday. I don't know if archers or melee troops, for instance, are better for naval combat.

[Morindin]

That would make sense, but clicking on most naval fleets reveal nothing (not even ?) in the "unit" section, so I suspect they're emtpy. Ill give that a go though.

[Red Harvest]

Apparently, having troops in your ships makes a difference. The battles are calculated on number of men, not number of ships.

I really am going to have to read the maual someday. I don't know if archers or melee troops, for instance, are better for naval combat.

I thought this might be the case, but last night I destroyed a single enemy boat stacked with nearly 20 units. It fought "normally." First engagement I hit it hard with a big force, second engagement killed it with a small force of a few boats.

[Blodrast]

I thought this might be the case, but last night I destroyed a single enemy boat stacked with nearly 20 units. It fought "normally." First engagement I hit it hard with a big force, second engagement killed it with a small force of a few boats.

uhm, ok, I'm not sure I'm getting this: so if you hit it with a "big force" the first time, doesn't that imply that there were a lot of men in there as well ? Wasn't that succesful ? (i.e., does that not confirm the fact that the battles are based on the number of men rather than ships ?)

I'm just asking, because I haven't got to a conclusion as far as naval battles are concerned yet.

[Red Harvest]

Bloodrast, yes there were a lot of men on it which was part of the reason for hitting it with a large force. (That and the fact that you need a huge advantage ship-to-ship to beat the AI in naval on "very hard.") Their crew took a lot of casualties, but the army took none. I hit with a smaller force the next time (3 or 4 boats) and it went to the bottom easily with few casualties on my side. The "feel" was the same as if there had been no army on board. I knew I needed to kill this boat to prevent them from taking Sicily.

So far I'm finding it too expensive to conduct naval warfare. Part of that might be that I've got so many enemies that I run out of boats too quickly.

[desdichado]

Playing as Scipii have been fighting the carthaginians and have lost count of the Denarii that have been sucked up by my navy. I keep getting smacked but my navy has less experience than the carthaginians so for me it seems right. Also historically correct if I recall - the Romans initally lost badly at sea but finally got the upper hand through attrition - which is how I am doing it.

I agree the battles don't seem right - major engagments and not a single ship lost on either side but all ships lose men. Does not seem right but i don't think the engagments are "Bugged" like in MTW where a single ships constantly smack bigger fleets.

Also, I don't agree with being able to attack enemy fleets while there in port. From the reading I have done it seems that fleets that were outmatched by the enemy quite often took shelter in a friendly port while the enemy fleet could blockade them but was generally unable to attck them. At least this happened a lot during the Greek/Sparta war.

This gives you the option of being able to save your fleet but also unable to do anything with them if the enemy is stronger.

Still I like the new naval system much better than previous.

[Red Harvest]

Desdichado,

I've thought it was strange you could attack ships in port as well. Blockade yes, but attacking would be a challenge or prohibited. At the least one would expect to get mauled badly trying to attack them in a defended port. Perhaps it does assign some defense for the harbored vessels, I've not tried to run a test on it.

The naval autocalc in "very hard" is reminiscent of the "bad old" ship battle autocalc from MTW. It is somewhat balancing though, because it means that the AI's poor use of ships is compensated for by the engagement power of its boats. I wish it could be "tuned" a bit by picking a separate naval engagement "skill level." Right now it is economic suicide for me to engage other ships except in specific instances.

Why does it say "ships sunk" when it should say "ships lost?" I used to get excited when I saw I had sunk ships...until I figured out they were my own, :inquisitive:

At least in this autocalc, if you lose a ship, it is not necessarily your admiral's boat. That always hacked me off in MTW? You might lose one boat out of a stack, and it would always be the commander.

[andrewt]

As the Julii, I attacked the Greeks, Carthaginians, and other guys I'm at war with using my navy. The Brutii, Scipii and Senate also have lots of ships so I would travel alongside them, attack, retreat near them, etc. It helped a lot reducing my costs, destroying enemy ships and making the other Roman factions spend money on new ships and slowing down their progress.

[desdichado]

Red Harvest,

I'm playing Very Hard campaign, normal battle map (might have to change that if AI tactics are better in hard level), so I can't say if naval battle results change on this difficutly.

I agree there should be penalty for attacking a fleet in port - perhaps there is but it needs to higher imo. I have attacked fleets in port and results did not seem different.

I also don't understand the logic in fleets not being able to withdraw - sails of ships are generally visible from quite a distance which would give time for the admiral to order a withdraw order and for ships to turn. Would make naval battles far more strategic - now all you have to do is sail up and engage. Land battles have the option of falling back hopefully to reinforce etc. which I think is a great addition. not sure why it was left out on the sea.

Personally I think naval engagements should be fewer but generally a bit more bloody with ships actually sunk as opposed to just losing some men.

In the Greek/Sparta war I think there were about 5 major engagments in 30 years and mostly smaller skirmishes and the rest of the time one fleet or another hightailed it as very rarely were the odds in any way even and when they were the omens were wrong or the admiral was chicken etc. Funnily enough in this period it seems naval superiority was the deciding factor for most of the war which is why Athens could hold on as long as they did with such a small hoplite army. With a little work the naval side of RTW could be given more depth I think (and hope).

Anyway enough rambling.

[desdichado]

Red Harvest
"It is somewhat balancing though, because it means that the AI's poor use of ships is compensated for by the engagement power of its boats. I wish it could be "tuned" a bit by picking a separate naval engagement "skill level." Right now it is economic suicide for me to engage other ships except in specific instances."





Just reread this part. Geez, I would love it if the AI made poor use of their ships in my current campaign. The carthaginian fleet I've been tangling with is huge and they mostly have 1 or 2 silver chevrons. AI is not afraid too use these buggers either.

Twice senate asked me to blokcade Carthage port - I complied but suffered heavily each time. Although senate still rewarded me for blokcading the port even though I got booted before the turn ended. I think this is wrong but what the hey - got some new ships from SPQR!

My fleet repairs have run into over 6,000 denarii in a single year!

[Red Harvest]

Watch them with regards to strategic vs. tactical use. Even though they have naval superiority they don't do much with it. As Carthage I'm at war with the Roman factions, Gaul, Spain, and Numidia. Yet none of them are blockading my ports regularly. I can also put a boat in and move an army safely. If I'm at war and have naval superiority, I'm going to blockade enemy ports and make sure they can't get any boats into the water to contest it (as well as cut off trade.) I used this on the Carthaginians as Scipii and rapidly shut them down financially. It allowed me to take each of their cities in turn. They had no money to build any units.

[desdichado]

good point - theyv'e been quite defensive now that I think about it but didn't really threaten me just made my invasion harder. They paid for it of course - they're now serving tea & biscuits to my family.

they were being pressured from the Numidians (and the senate & Julii fleets) as well so maybe they never had a chance to do anything I'm not sure but you're probably right.

[Hosakawa Tito]

In my Brutii campaign, I've built a big fleet, 14 Biremes in one stack. I retrain them in Tarentum, which has a Blacksmith, enhancing their armor & weapons.
I've been kicking Greek, Macedonian, Gallic naval butt with this Grand Fleet. Most ships in this fleet have gold chevrons and I've taken on navies that are 1/3 larger and have beaten them. Definitely try retraining your fleet in a port with a Blacksmith, it gives your warships that little edge. When starting out, concentrate your fleet and attack smaller fleets and single ships to "blood" your fledgling navy, get them those "chevrons" of experience.
I don't think troops in transport on your ships have any effect on naval battles, and if you lose the battle, you seem to lose the ship the troops were on, losing the army also.

[Blodrast]

hmm, so do the "regular army" units that you put in a fleet, besides your crew, take part in the naval combat ?
Or is it just enough to have full crews, and the rest of the non-crew soldiers make no difference ?

[SpencerH]

I've been engaged with the Romanii for some time now on the high seas and its clear that naval warfare in RTW is much better than in MTW (which had no naval strategy to speak of) and I've found it possible to actually use strategy to increase your chance of victory. What a concept! Its a pity that an option for tactical combat wasnt included though.

I haven't had the 'win land battle-lose naval battle bug'. Sure, I've unexpectedly lost a few battles that I thought I should have won and vice versa but for the most part things seem fairly reasonable. I've even got a heroic victory 'crossed swords' in the middle of the med.

One bug though, the AI does seem to chase after my fleets with armies in transit.

[Adrian II]

One bug though, the AI does seem to chase after my fleets with armies in transit.Are you saying the enemy is actually trying to hurt you? Oh my God! I knew it! ~:eek: