Naval game -- much better.

**Doug-Thompson** · 09-27-2004, 16:48

I did a fair amount of moaning about how there wasn't going to be a detailed naval game before RTW came out.

I must admit now that the way navies are handled in RTW is much better.

So, Capt. Fishpants and company, you done good as we say around here.

**Red Harvest** · 09-27-2004, 17:02

I agree it is better. The AI will group ships to attack. It will also pincer. The AI has some troubles with strategy though. Plus I can never tell if my admirals have any command stars? I'm getting swept from the seas by the AI since it is currently 6 factions attacking me. I kick butt on the battlefield, but at sea my losses are huge even when I heavily outnumber my enemy ("very hard" though.)

The AI won't blockade ports consistently when it has naval superiority (allowing me a lot of cash.) That's OK, on "very hard" it is me vs. the world since everyone attacks and nobody wants peace or trade. I never get an alliance unless I play a Roman faction. That aspect of the AI is disappointing and familiar. As Carthage the Numidians wouldn't ally with me, and attacked me with inferior numbers to destroy their own trade (I had arranged an agreement.) Then the Greeks wouldn't ally even though they were also at war with Rome and we would both benefit.

**Blodrast** · 09-27-2004, 17:09

well, i'm still a bit skeptical. I haven't had enough naval battles yet, but from what I've seen they still appear quite a bit random... for instance, I had 3 biremes (2 + 1) vs one single AI ship (bireme, no-stars admiral). I reloaded the game for more than a dozen times, but in no combination or way was I able to defeat the AI - not even once.
All ships were full crew (mine and AI's) in the beginning, nobody had any stars.
But I lost consistently (although sometimes it was a close defeat, sometimes a clear defeat, etc).

What gives ? It looked to me like the same "pity" algorithm from MTW was implemented in Rome as well - kick AI's butt on land, you lose naval battles; lose on land, you get really lucky at sea... (because I had had 2 battles that turn, both crushing the AI).

**Red Harvest** · 09-27-2004, 17:13

Originally Posted by Blodrast

well, i'm still a bit skeptical. I haven't had enough naval battles yet, but from what I've seen they still appear quite a bit random... for instance, I had 3 biremes (2 + 1) vs one single AI ship (bireme, no-stars admiral). I reloaded the game for more than a dozen times, but in no combination or way was I able to defeat the AI - not even once.
All ships were full crew (mine and AI's) in the beginning, nobody had any stars.
But I lost consistently (although sometimes it was a close defeat, sometimes a clear defeat, etc).

What gives ? It looked to me like the same "pity" algorithm from MTW was implemented in Rome as well - kick AI's butt on land, you lose naval battles; lose on land, you get really lucky at sea... (because I had had 2 battles that turn, both crushing the AI).

I agree. I think the core naval combat engine is the same as MTW. I think that applies to many other parts of the game as well. Some of the newer stuff works very well, but the old stuff still haunts us. Mixed bag.

**Hamburglar** · 09-27-2004, 17:32

I think the Naval game is a lot better. Why?

1. Ships can survive a battle and retreat

2. No need to set up military ships in every ocean zone to make a trade route. I like how the civilians do it on their own - it's just up to you to protect the trade by not getting blockaded.

3. I also like how you have to transport troops. While it gets kind of tedious sometimes it is good in the sense that you can't instantly send troops from England to Egypt in one turn while it would take about 20 years to march there on foot like in Medieval. Much more realistic.

**Dorkus** · 09-27-2004, 18:43

Playing on very hard in campaign mode, I lose almost every naval battle that is not overwhelmingly in my favor. I sent two second level ships and 1 first level ship against a single first level greek ship, and I lost the battle.

This is incredibly annoying. I assumed very hard increased enemy resources and AI. Did not know that it would make their ships near invulnerable.

**Thoros of Myr** · 09-27-2004, 19:46

Originally Posted by Hamburglar

I think the Naval game is a lot better. Why?

1. Ships can survive a battle and retreat

2. No need to set up military ships in every ocean zone to make a trade route. I like how the civilians do it on their own - it's just up to you to protect the trade by not getting blockaded.

3. I also like how you have to transport troops. While it gets kind of tedious sometimes it is good in the sense that you can't instantly send troops from England to Egypt in one turn while it would take about 20 years to march there on foot like in Medieval. Much more realistic.

Agree, all those points make it much better. I hope the first patch includes something to fix the issue with battles though so things like Blodrast's problem do not happen.

**Red Harvest** · 09-27-2004, 19:51

Originally Posted by Dorkus

Playing on very hard in campaign mode, I lose almost every naval battle that is not overwhelmingly in my favor. I sent two second level ships and 1 first level ship against a single first level greek ship, and I lost the battle.

This is incredibly annoying. I assumed very hard increased enemy resources and AI. Did not know that it would make their ships near invulnerable.

Exactly. In MTW, building powerful fleets was a quick way to win. In RTW the opposite is true. Build ports, but avoid fleet warfare. I found that I couldn't build fast enough to make up the losses. Even when I won, I usually had more crew losses than the AI--effectively losing the economic war of attrition. It was a huge waste of money.

IDEA: They need a separate setting for naval AI difficulty. Right now it feels like it is about 4:1 on very hard.

**Kraellin** · 09-27-2004, 19:54

the whole sea aspect of the game is MUCH improved! no more 10,000 mile trips in one turn or transporting troops 10,000 miles in one turn. i'd still like to see a tactical side to the sea battles, even if it was as simplistic as the old sid meier's Pirates game, but yes, the sea game is vastly improved. the 'blocked' thing is a bit weird at times, since why would you be blocked from moving by neutral factions on the open sea, but at the same time, i like the zones of control when encountering an enemy ship.

and on a side note to this, i sorta liked having some control over sea trade in mtw. this is all automated now and the only control you have now is making trading partners or not. but this is fairly minor to the scope and focus of the game, so ok.

K.

**Kraxis** · 09-27-2004, 20:04

Originally Posted by Kraellin

no more 10,000 mile trips in one turn or transporting troops 10,000 miles in one turn.

Yeah well... For MTW it was actually completely ok. A turn was a full year.
A lazy captain could most likely sail from Antioch to Lübeck in the space of 3 months, a determined fleet could do the same at the very least.
Agreed it is far from as fun as actually transporting the army around yourself as opposed to just dropping it in foreign lands.