Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...???

Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> Tech Support

Message

RayKinStL -> Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/24/2008 9:31:53 PM)
Look at the picture. I clearly have a Heavy bonus and a bonus for being British. Therefor I should be a +2 before I roll, meaning even if I roll a 1, it modifies to a 3 putting me on the 15% losses region. Somehow I manage to roll a 1 (sometimes I wonder about the randomness of the die rolls in this game) and it only modifies to a 2, despite even showing on the screen that I have two bonuses. What am I missing? [image]local://upfiles/29621/2D2A0DF1B0894EE6BC36137D441E994E.jpg[/image]

DCWhitworth -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/24/2008 9:37:32 PM)
Not looked at the rules, but I presume there is a maximum bonus of +1, as there is in land combat.

RayKinStL -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/24/2008 11:47:38 PM)
That can't be right. Otherwise there is no benefit to the British having a heavy advantage since they always get a +1 for being British. The rules read... Each side receives a random number of between 1 and 6, adding one if a British fleet is present on that side, adding one for having 1.5 times more heavy ships than the other, subtracting one if a side consists solely of light ships and subtracting one if a Prussian and/or an Austrian fleet is present on that side (these modifiers may cancel each other if both are present in the same stack). The random number is compared to the Naval Combat Table and the result is the percentage of that side’s number of ships, which number of ships the other side must remove as losses So there is no mention of a maximum +1 modifier. So I see no reason I should not be getting a +2 in the attack screenshot posted above. Marshall...any comment?

NeverMan -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/24/2008 11:50:52 PM)
Ray, I believe that DCWhitworth is correct, a +1 mod. is the most you can get, just like in land combat. If it doesn't say this in the manual then it's probably just an oversight on the "document maker"'s part.

RayKinStL -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 12:00:59 AM)
Well then that is a MAJOR oversight because every game I have ever played in (which, until the PBEM game I am in now, has always been AI games) I have based my set ups on having a +2 modifier in certain scenarios should the computer try something crazy. This is a major oversight that they need to correct quickly. Naval movement/combat is simple enough as it is. There is no margin for error. So this oversight could be the difference between a win and a loss. Plus if this is true, then that is dumb because since the British already get a +1 modifier automatically, the heavy bonus is only beneficial to every country BUT Britain. Which really means the rule can NEVER beenfit Britain, and in certain cases, hurt them. Given Britain's naval dominance, there should not be rules that benefit everybody but Britain...this would make no sense. In this particular scenario, I think if Britain has a heavy advantage, they should rightfully get a +2 modifier. Naval comabt and lan comabt are two different thigns and they don't have to play by the same set of rules. Either get rid of the heavy bonus modifier all together, or figure out a way Britain can benefit as well, because as it is now, if this is the case that Britain benefits none from heavy superiority, then the rule is stupid and worthless in my opinion.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 1:11:51 AM)
Actually, the GBR bonus does come in very handy when GBR simply uses nothing but light ships and attacks a stack of heavies and the odds are even, does it not?

Jimmer -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 3:22:35 AM)
While I happen to agree that one should be able to get both bonuses, that's not the way the game is written. There was a long thread when the game first came out on this subject, and the net result was that, since the table only went up to 7, you couldn't get a +2 mod. At least, that was the stated logic. Anyhow, the game gives you all the bonuses and penalties you deserve, to a max of +1 or a min of -1. You probably should rearrange your ships.

RayKinStL -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 5:47:59 AM)
Well you can just say that a 7 is the most you can get after modification...they say this with 6 being the most when determining the wind gauge. I simply see no reason there should be a naval rule that benefits everydoby but the naval power. There is no difference between 6 & 7 on the loss chart, so in a technical sense, 6 is the highest number you can get after modification (getting a 7 makes no difference). So if 7 and 6 are the same, then there is no reason that 8 can't be the same as 6 as well. I am sorry, but I simply disagree with what others have said. Britain is the naval power in this game, and that is really her only advantage. Yes, there is the high morale, but the army size is a joke. As a result, there shuld not be rules benefitting other navies that Britain can not take advantage of. I guess this is a fight I will lose, but I simply don'y agree with it. Britain was a naval force and I agree with her natural +1 modifier. Further, given the heavy vs lights nature of EiANW, I think the +1 bonus for having 1.5 heavies is an excellent rule. My problem is that Britain can NEVER take advantage of that rule, because of her natural modifier, which simply is not fair. If you ask me, Britain should have the ability to modify +2. And if you think about that, it makes sense. If you are going against the BRITISH navy, AND they have 50% more heavy ships than you, you should definitely have the odds stacked against you big time. It seems natural to me.

delatbabel -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 7:49:31 AM)
The naval rules are pretty consistent with the land rules. If you have +1 for leadership (or an Austrian commander in Echelon vs Cordon for example) and a +1 for cavalry superiority then the max modifier you get is +1. Same as with the Naval rules -- you can get +1 for being British and a +1 for superior heavy ship numbers, but the max you can get is +1.

delatbabel -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 7:57:52 AM)
Also I can't say I agree with the heavy ships / light ships distinctions as applied to EiANW. Basically, all of the ships that fought in major engagements, except the odd few, were heavy ships. 4th and lower rate ships didn't stand in the line of battle. The problem you have with a "heavy" vs "light" ships as per EiANW is that the typical "heavy" ship (say around 80-100 guns in the Trafalgar period), not only outclassed the smaller (30 - 36 gun) frigates but they also had larger guns (typically 24 pounders vs 12 pounders) plus much more heavily armoured hulls. With the exception of some of the american 40 gun frigates, you could throw 4 or 5 30 gun frigates at a 96 gun first rate ship, and they'd all be blown out of the water pretty much before they even got into close enough range to score any significant amount of damage to it. Unless one of the lighter ships got lucky and managed to stern rake the first-rate ship, the heavier ship would come away with very little damage, wheras a single broadside from 48 or so 24 pound guns would obliterate a light ship. Look at the lines of battle at the major engagements such as Aboukir Bay, Trafalgar, 1st June, etc, etc -- they were all heavy ships on each side, with perhaps 4-5 smaller ships as "escorts" or hangers on to run around the lines, do signaling duties, etc. The smaller ships never really got into battle, except with each other.

bresh -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 10:40:47 AM)
I think max is +1 yes. Though the benefit comes also in a pure light ship force including GB lights. Then dont get the normal -1 malus since its +1&-1= 0 quote: Actually, the GBR bonus does come in very handy when GBR simply uses nothing but light ships and attacks a stack of heavies and the odds are even, does it not? Well combat would give GB 0 bonus while his opponent has +1, Regards Bresh

RayKinStL -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 1:57:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bresh I think max is +1 yes. Though the benefit comes also in a pure light ship force including GB lights. Then dont get the normal -1 malus since its +1&-1= 0 quote: Actually, the GBR bonus does come in very handy when GBR simply uses nothing but light ships and attacks a stack of heavies and the odds are even, does it not? Well combat would give GB 0 bonus while his opponent has +1, Regards Bresh Well GB's natural +1 modifier for being British would cancel out his oppoent's +1 for a heavy superiority, but this begs the question once again as to why every country get's a bonus for heavy superiority EXCEPT the British who are the naval power. Seems wrong and stupid to me.

bresh -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 3:16:20 PM)
I really dont see this as a big issue. GB has default +1. Yes he can not gain +1 from heavy ships, but he can easy prevent anyone from gaining +1 against him, who are fighting GB navies, all it takes is some planning, he has change moveorder ability also. So what you want is really GB, having possible +2 in his battles, while his opponents seldom gets +1 unless GB is making mistakes. There is no naval evasion, GB is having a blast on the sea atm. Even without +2. Regards Bresh

RayKinStL -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 4:42:55 PM)
My problem is a naval rule that benefits everyone but Britain. It makes no sense. If everyone else can get a modifier for having 1.5 heavies, then the same should apply to Britain. You may not see it as a big issue, but I do. Either take the Heavy modifier out of the game, or make it fair that everyone can take advantage of it. Just because Britain gets a +1 modifier for being British does not mean she should be excluded from the modifier for bringing more heavies into a battle than who she is facing. If a rule is that 1.5 heavies means you have the opponent so outnumbered that you should get a +1 in battle, then Britain should be able to take advantage of it as well if she is willing to shift around her fleet in such a way that she would have said advantage in a naval battle. It's all about consistency.

AresMars -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 4:54:52 PM)
Yes, lets take the 1.5x Heavies rules out, and the Lights ships and return to Classic EiA; the British getting +1 and the Autrian/Prussians getting -1 in Naval battles....

RayKinStL -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 4:56:44 PM)
I would be absolutely fine with that Ares...I would have no arguement at all. My problem is simply with a rule that is very general (simply bringing heavies into battle) that benefits everyone but the major naval country in the game. It makes no sense. That rule can only hurt Britain and never help her.

bresh -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 5:04:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RayKinStL I would be absolutely fine with that Ares...I would have no arguement at all. My problem is simply with a rule that is very general (simply bringing heavies into battle) that benefits everyone but the major naval country in the game. It makes no sense. That rule can only hurt Britain and never help her. Thats untrue. Parden me, but you would only gain that advantage for your minor fleets who contained no GB ships. So its not like it could never happen. Regards Bresh

RayKinStL -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 5:22:21 PM)
That is a minor free state and not Britain. This is a major logical inconsistency. Either 1.5 times heavies means you have such an advantage that it warrants a +1 on the resolution table or it doesn't. There is no, well it does for everyone but Britain because Britain is already +1 because her navy is historical better trained, managed, and lead. Either throw out the rule or make it consistent. There is no reason that the naval combat resolution chart can't say "6-8 = 25% damage". No reason at all. This is a major inconsistency that no one has been able to provide an intelligible answer as to why it exists!

NeverMan -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 5:26:10 PM)
Ray, In all fairness this is the case for a land combat where one party has the better leader (getting a +1) and also has Cav Superiority, correct? Personally, I don't really see this as a big issue, but I understand what you're saying.

RayKinStL -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/25/2008 5:50:39 PM)
Well, except that naval combat is much more simplistic than land combat. All you have are these modifiers and ONE die roll. Land combat ultimately comes down to 3 rounds, and morale, and etc. etc. etc. (although I would be in favor of allowing a +2 if someone rolled in with a better leader and cavalry superioirty!). Plus every country can take advantage of both modifiers. The problem with heavy superiority is that it will never benefit Britain, since she gets an automatic +1 modifier. So the rule can only help everyone else, and it seems silly to have a naval rule, especially one in regard to heavy vs ligth ships, that beenfits everyone but the country who relies on the naval aspect for her advantage in the game. I say either get rid of it, or make an exception in naval combat that if Britain rolls into a battle with heavy superiority, she can get a +2. If you ask me, the second suggestion makes the most logical sense, since a country going againt the british navy, where it I jsut want some consistency is is outgunned in heavies by more than a 1.5:1 margin should be at a major disadvantage. I just want consistency, and Britain having a rule about heavies that it has no way of taking advantage of is not consistent at all.

bresh -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/26/2008 11:33:31 AM)
Ray belive me, GB does not need that bonus, currently there are no evasion rules. So GB is the still the favorite naval nation with or without Heavy ship bonus. This is why i dont see this as a big issue, not even when i played GB in a pbm game. Regards Bresh

RayKinStL -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/26/2008 2:07:40 PM)
Because it is not consistent Bresh. I don't know how many times I have to say this. It is not consistent. Either it goes or everyone takes advantage. That simple. Either bringing extra heavies means you get a +1 or it doesn't. Make it consistent!

bresh -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/26/2008 4:48:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RayKinStL Because it is not consistent Bresh. I don't know how many times I have to say this. It is not consistent. Either it goes or everyone takes advantage. That simple. Either bringing extra heavies means you get a +1 or it doesn't. Make it consistent! To repeat myself... Ray GB doesnt need it. GB is overfavored on the naval side compared to EIA. Bring in naval evasion and we can talk about it. So we dont count minors ok, Then its 76 Heavy British ships, vs 114 total for all other MPs, so noone should expect to be able to get a +1 dice vs GB. Unless all fleets join up ? The +1 heavy shíp bonus can mostly just be used for all the other MP's vs each other, or vs minors. Regards Bresh

RayKinStL -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/26/2008 8:53:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bresh quote: ORIGINAL: RayKinStL Because it is not consistent Bresh. I don't know how many times I have to say this. It is not consistent. Either it goes or everyone takes advantage. That simple. Either bringing extra heavies means you get a +1 or it doesn't. Make it consistent! To repeat myself... Ray GB doesnt need it. GB is overfavored on the naval side compared to EIA. Bring in naval evasion and we can talk about it. So we dont count minors ok, Then its 76 Heavy British ships, vs 114 total for all other MPs, so noone should expect to be able to get a +1 dice vs GB. Unless all fleets join up ? The +1 heavy shíp bonus can mostly just be used for all the other MP's vs each other, or vs minors. Regards Bresh Yea, in your fairy tale world, those 76 ships just get to sail around free. In the real world, over 75% of the British fleet is already spoken for before the game starts. Britain getting the heavy bonus would have huge implications on strategy for how he blockades each French port (something he MUST do), and with what forces. There is no point in continuing this arguement because you don't agree with me and I don't agree with you. I understand your point, but I believe that logically it makes no sense. SO while I will agree to disagree with you, I still say to you, Marhsall, that I am of the opinion that either a 1.5 heavy rule benefits ALL countries, or it benefits none. It really should be that simple and consistent.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/26/2008 11:03:54 PM)
Ray: I hear ya. I would like to see the classic scenario address this. Most of the threats I receive are about all of the non-EiA changes that we introduced :-)

RayKinStL -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/26/2008 11:39:54 PM)
Marshall, the classic scenario wouldn't have to address this since there is no heavy/light distinction. This is peculiar to the EiANW rules.

Jimmer -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/27/2008 12:43:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RayKinStL Well GB's natural +1 modifier for being British would cancel out his oppoent's +1 for a heavy superiority, but this begs the question once again as to why every country get's a bonus for heavy superiority EXCEPT the British who are the naval power. Seems wrong and stupid to me. The way you are phrasing this was not tried in the earlier go-around on this. It's possible your argument may carry the day after all. (IMO, it SHOULD win, but I've given up this fight. What I do is make sure I have enough heavies so that the enemy does not get the +1, and then blast them into toothpicks. :))

Jimmer -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/27/2008 12:46:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bresh I really dont see this as a big issue. GB has default +1. Yes he can not gain +1 from heavy ships, but he can easy prevent anyone from gaining +1 against him, who are fighting GB navies, all it takes is some planning, he has change moveorder ability also. So what you want is really GB, having possible +2 in his battles, while his opponents seldom gets +1 unless GB is making mistakes. There is no naval evasion, GB is having a blast on the sea atm. Even without +2. Regards Bresh You're missing his point. The main point is that there is a single rule that benefits all naval forces EXCEPT the British navy. Seeing as GB was THE dominant naval power of the era, it doesn't make sense that a rule would exist that would give a benefit to all powers EXCEPT GB. The rule still APPLIES to GB, but she can never benefit from it. Only other major powers can benefit from it.

Jimmer -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/27/2008 12:49:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AresMars Yes, lets take the 1.5x Heavies rules out, and the Lights ships and return to Classic EiA; the British getting +1 and the Autrian/Prussians getting -1 in Naval battles.... The only problem with this is that nobody should every buy heavy ships under it. The EiH people saw this problem, and thus created a rule to give players a reason to buy heavy ships. At least, that's my guess as to how it played out.

Jimmer -> RE: Can anyone who knows the naval rules explain this...??? (8/27/2008 12:56:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan Ray, In all fairness this is the case for a land combat where one party has the better leader (getting a +1) and also has Cav Superiority, correct? Personally, I don't really see this as a big issue, but I understand what you're saying. And, if they have both, they get both (to a maximum of +1). You need to think of leaders who have a 0/-1 advantage over their foes. They still have a "+1" (0 is one greater than -1). Then, cav superiority makes it +1/-1. The rules, however are quite different. In Naval, the bonus is a bonus or penalty to ones own forces only. In land battles, the bonus or penalty for leadership changes things for both players. The only way to make them similar would be to have (say) 6 attacker tactical ratings and 6 defender, and THEN apply the GB +1 bonus. (NO! I'm NOT lobbying for that. I just want to point it out.)

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.722656