Matrix Games Forums

After playing several games, I was wondering why I was so limited with my fleets. And, finally, my conclusion is that the problem comes from the way ship movements are implemented in this game.

Two operation points are limiting tactics:
1. One move, one attack.
2. Two moves. Not really needed since fleets are not intercepted on their path. So what's the goal to avoid an enemy island?
3. Two attacks.

But, taking 1 and 3, you are ending in Fleet mode so exposed to a backhand blow. So, at the end of the day, my fleets are staying at port. I am protecting them. It is so easy to lose them.

Where is the risk taking?

Hence my question, why ships can't be moved like my infantry corps?

I have XX operation points for a given ship or carrier; X spent by movement from one hex to another, Y spent by attack.
Or, I have X spent by movement and two attacks max.

This would open up far more tactics. A CV fleet going near an objective, but not too close to avoid detection on a given turn, most probably in Raider mode. The next turn, this fleet would approach a given island, would launch an airfield attack, and then with the remaining movement points would retreat still in Fleet mode, risking an interception or a pursuit if detected.

Is it not more the feeling of the battles of the Pacific?

WP2 system changes naval opts to move points with attacks costing move points.

It also has interception along the way. I am already testing it. It gives the chance to move out, be intercepted, then move back if you took too much of a beating. There is also the naval retreat as well.

The other issue is your ships efficiency...

I drops so much you can't be out of port for more than a turn or 2 at most, especially if you are in combat.

Then it will take your fleets months to recover.
Ships are constantly sitting which is boring.

Then again there were not 100s of ship battles in the Pacific....most were pretty sparse because they could never find each other.




Things I am not sure about...
1) Ship Damage
Does damage to a BB cause it to be weaker fighting?
It should...as well as it should effect its defense.
When a turrent has been disabled or there is a hole in the side of the ship from a torpedo...they can often still operate but at a much greater risk.
They have less firepower as well as their hull has been weakened...
Does damage to a ship cause it to be "slower"...absolutely...that should somehow be addressed.
Perhaps % of damage means movement is lowered by that %...

2) Is a larger fleet easier to find?
Should be...10 ships are easier to spot than 1...also ship size has a huge effect.
Not so easy to find a single DD floating around but 3 CVs are much easier to spot.



Basically some small bits of flavor that could be added and possible reasons to split up your fleet.

6 CVs easier to find than 2 groups of 3.

I am curious to see Alvaro's answer for the damaged ships. However I was under the impression that everything fighting in WP does so "by strength points". A 28 strength corps will fire all its weapons (in the specifier order; artillery first etc.)... 28 time, while a 22 strength corps will do so 22 time only. I only assumed that ships would work the same way? But true,it is not specified clearly for ships.

For the number of ships in a fleet, the spotting matrix does indicate the extra chances (+1%) to recon for each naval unit in the fleet.

Nirosi wrote: ↑Thu Apr 06, 2023 8:26 pm I am curious to see Alvaro's answer for the damaged ships. However I was under the impression that everything fighting in WP does so "by strength points". A 28 strength corps will fire all its weapons (in the specifier order; artillery first etc.)... 28 time, while a 22 strength corps will do so 22 time only. I only assumed that ships would work the same way? But true,it is not specified clearly for ships.

For the number of ships in a fleet, the spotting matrix does indicate the extra chances (+1%) to recon for each naval unit in the fleet.

Spotting wise...I would like to see a bit more. A CV is easier to spot than a BB due to size and CAP...if you see fighters in the middle of the Pacific you can make a good guess something big is nearby...
Ad so on down the chain.

So when you have a fleet of say a DD...should be near impossible to find...as soon as you have 2...you have more than doubled the chance as they can't sail next to each other...NOW you get a huge fleet where ships are half a mile apart...and larger...with huge smoke stacks...much easier.

Also I would like to see more options for fleets. Raider and Fleet mode? I think there should be a few more...
For example...raider mode should limit the damage of the raider fleet a bit as they are trying to "avoid" combat and are not ready to direct action.

Perhaps things like...
Spread Fleet...meant to perform a stronger search for enemy ships but this limits combat as your ships are so far apart. Example a fleet of 4 DD and 2 BB if found by air, maybe they only see 1 ship...or 2 and it could be just a DD or just a BB...when they encounter the enemy the same...they only encounter with a single or even two ships rather than the entire fleet.

Just a few ideas...really trying to come up with something to make naval a bit more interesting.
Perhaps just a waste of time.





Regarding damage...I will see if it changes their surface in a quick test...but for me it should effect multiple things.



NOW regarding damage I would LOVE to see a huge chart with a lot of random effects for flavor.
Why?
Honestly land combat for me is pretty good...naval is just plain boring.
So add some spice.
Make up a chart of flavor text and when a ship is hit pick a random number up to 100%.
Every 10 or so there is something bad that can happen...
Say you get a 5...could be the ship loses a movement.
But 1-4 and 6 - 10 are just normal...
Now say a 99 is rolled so that magazine gets hit and ship explodes...

Could come up with flavor text for each number rolled.

Something like rear turret destroyed so ship loses 1/3rd of its "surface" value.
Radar struck, spotting limited as well as combat.
Torpedo hits midship causing ship to not be able to move.
Captain killed experience drops by 5%.

I know sounds boring or a waste but naval needs something.
Could even use the same process for air and land if desired.

Maybe I just just crazy.
Well that is more likely than not.

Make the flavor suggestion in the WP2 requests post.

As for ship damage...... all sorts of crap can go wrong on a shit. It isn't like World of Warships where you can be at 1% of your strength and still be firing full guns.

Ships get turrets KOed, fires going on that require attention, secondaries that get KOed, they have escorts, formations, speed issues (which aren't in WP1 but will be in WP2).

A BB going out alone? It's just asking to be sunk by a group of DDs. Trying to remember which German ship that happened to in 1944, One of the battlecruisers got caught out in the Arctic and 4 DDs took it out.

Thus why capital ship counters automatically have escorts.

Then there is quality of the ship. Italian ships had great guns crappy ammo.
The Fuso couldn't stand up to an Iowa class BB.

All sorts of little details. But I try to average it out to make the game fun. It's not easy. I studied many Pacific and North Atlantic battles to figure out spotting and naval systems. It's almost random how ships get damaged or sunk. Radar has a fair bit to do with positioning as the Italians learned in the Med. UK had radar, Italians didn't.

If I made the game as realistic as possible Italian Navy wouldn't stand a chance in a head up fleet battle of equal ships. The UK player would be spreading his fleet out very thin defending here or there. German BBs and BCs would be spending a lot of time in port. Italian fleets would almost never sail due to oil constraints.

What I am considering doing is having a capital ship just a capital ship and other groups be attached to it. It would increase the # of counters by some. The smaller groups would be 2 CAs, 4 DDs that you would sail with the capital ship that prevents negative things happening. I thought about individual CAs but there are too many of them in the war. There would be ~90 counters. I also thought about CA and DD points assigned.

AlvaroSousa wrote: ↑Thu Apr 06, 2023 1:44 pm WP2 system changes naval opts to move points with attacks costing move points.

It also has interception along the way. I am already testing it. It gives the chance to move out, be intercepted, then move back if you took too much of a beating. There is also the naval retreat as well.

Excellent, a welcome addition.

stjeand wrote: ↑Fri Apr 07, 2023 12:16 pm
Maybe I just just crazy.
Well that is more likely than not.

No. I like all what you are saying.

AlvaroSousa wrote: ↑Fri Apr 07, 2023 12:58 pm
A BB going out alone? It's just asking to be sunk by a group of DDs. Trying to remember which German ship that happened to in 1944, One of the battlecruisers got caught out in the Arctic and 4 DDs took it out.

Thus why capital ship counters automatically have escorts.

There are few other examples:
1. HMS Glorious escorted by 2 DD, Acasta and Ardent, was sunk by the German battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau.
2. HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Repulse were sunk by land-based bombers and torpedo bombers of the Imperial Japanese Navy.

AlvaroSousa wrote: ↑Fri Apr 07, 2023 12:58 pm
What I am considering doing is having a capital ship just a capital ship and other groups be attached to it. It would increase the # of counters by some. The smaller groups would be 2 CAs, 4 DDs that you would sail with the capital ship that prevents negative things happening. I thought about individual CAs but there are too many of them in the war. There would be ~90 counters. I also thought about CA and DD points assigned.

I prefer a clear split between CA and DD. Individual CA would be great too, otherwise there will be always the problem to distinguish the name and the class.

I really hope too that you will make a clear distinction between a CVL and a CVE. CVL were attack carriers. Although smaller than their CV brethern they carry aircraft that are meant to duke it out with other carriers or provide air support. CVE were smaller carriers usually attached to convoys and used for ASW or for conveying aircraft.

AlvaroSousa wrote: ↑Fri Apr 07, 2023 12:58 pm Make the flavor suggestion in the WP2 requests post.

As for ship damage...... all sorts of crap can go wrong on a shit. It isn't like World of Warships where you can be at 1% of your strength and still be firing full guns.

Ships get turrets KOed, fires going on that require attention, secondaries that get KOed, they have escorts, formations, speed issues (which aren't in WP1 but will be in WP2).

...

Radar has a fair bit to do with positioning as the Italians learned in the Med. UK had radar, Italians didn't.

Hope Ship Damage control will be a technology that could be researched. USA was better than Japan to save their carriers.
Hope Radar will be also a technology that could be researched to improve ships, subs, on ground radar stations to better intercept bombers.

Too many CAs to be individual. Way too many.

CV and CVL is easy but CVE? Probably be abstracted. Too many were built by the US, 144 in total. Most were CVEs. You want to Micromanage ~100 CAs and 100 CVEs?

ncc1701e wrote: ↑Fri Apr 07, 2023 7:11 pm Hope Ship Damage control will be a technology that could be researched. USA was better than Japan to save their carriers.
Hope Radar will be also a technology that could be researched to improve ships, subs, on ground radar stations to better intercept bombers.

I read a few bits about this...and a lot of this was due to subordinates have to wait for the leaders orders.

They would not act on their own like the US seamen would.

I was reading, and I forget which carrier, that the fire control team did not even try to put the fire out as they waited for orders yet their leader had been killed so...guess what...they did little if anything.

For me right now the biggest issue is the naval options.

Raider is pretty straight forward and okay...would like some minor changes but overall I can handle that.

Fleet move...THIS is the issue.

It is too abstract. When your CVs go to sea if they stay at sea...they are likely sunk if they are in enemy waters.
Yes they can't attack if they are not at sea in fleet mode.

Let me explain.

The Japanese have a fleet in the Solomons.
The US see the fleet want to attack it.
So they move into range. The Japanese fleet is in Raider mode so it does not react.
The US CVs then launch an attack...and honestly what they do does not matter.
NOW the CVs are stuck at sea...in Fleet mode so they will react to anything.
They are also down to 92% efficiency and probably lost a few air units.

The Japanese see them and they have high recon.

Japan attacks the fleet with an air unit, wearing down their air defense and unit efficiency.

NOW what I do is send in the Japanese CVs...moving them into air range. The US fleet reacts and likely takes a beating...
Then the Japanese fleet moves back into port, with little to no recourse.


I would like to see a new mode...say Attack Fleet mode where they are in Fleet mode but do not react to fleets moving into range.

Then the Japanese fleet would have to stay at sea...rather than move in and move out back to safety and repair.

WP2 can add that.

Realize that island hopping is the proper strategy not marching the deathstar across the Pacific and KOing the Japanese fleet in 1 turn.

Correct...but hard to island hop if you lose the entire US navy.

To island hop you have to own the seas basically...if you don't it will not go well.

Well that feature will be added. Put it on the wishlist plz

AlvaroSousa wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 9:05 pm Well that feature will be added. Put it on the wishlist plz

I will do so...pondering starting threads for WP2 for each thing...

1) Production
2) Repair
3) Supply
4) Naval
5) Air
6) Land

Just trying to decide what to write about first and get thoughts and impressions.

Have to find the time to just start writing.

If you want to message me the summary of the ideas. Keep in mind that sometimes ideas are great on paper but implementing them is difficult, time consuming for the player, or sometimes just plain boring once it is tested.

I have already had to change some mechanics for my new game because it was just booooooring to put in.

AlvaroSousa wrote: ↑Wed Apr 12, 2023 1:10 pm If you want to message me the summary of the ideas. Keep in mind that sometimes ideas are great on paper but implementing them is difficult, time consuming for the player, or sometimes just plain boring once it is tested.

I have already had to change some mechanics for my new game because it was just booooooring to put in.

Sure I can do that.

OH I understand. Some parts of creation are the most boring...others more fun.

Okay this may take me a bit. I guess I will start a document and put together some thoughts.