|
Larry Reese -> Question regarding PBEM and naval combat, and more (bugs?) (10/28/2009 7:44:00 PM)
|
Hello all,
Now playing a BPEM game with latest updates. I'm sure this has already been mentioned, but when a naval battle occurs in the replay, the replay hangs, and jumps to the player turn. You can still go back to the "Events" button and read what happened, but still this is a bit annoying.
Also, and this happens continually, both PBEM and regular games: when a Runner or other naval unit suffers serious casualties, say 8 out of 10 ships sunk, when the player turn comes around, the unit is simply gone. Did the remaining two ships disappear in the Bermuda Triangle? Did battle damage sink them later? It would be nice to know what happned.
On the subject of naval battles, I have some concerns with the accuracy of naval battles involving iron clads versus all wood squadrons. My concern is that in all combat involving regular wooden hulls versus full iron clads, the steel hulls either had to disengage or be sunk. I am aware of only one wooden hulled, unarmored ship that survived a prolonged encounter with ironclads (the Austrian Kaiser, at Lissa). In every other case, the iron clads swept the wooden hulls with no armor from the sea. In the Civil War, most iron clads were lost to weather, heavy shore batteries, or mines. I mention this because I found a battle of 10 iron clads versus 40 wooden hulls in FoF to come off urealistically, at least in my opinion. Eight iron clads sunk (and the other two "vaporized" - see comment above) and perhaps 12 wooden ships. This is patently ridiculous in my opinion. The only conceivable way for this to have occurred would have been through ramming of the iron clads, the possiblity of which shoudl be minscule (on the only occassion I am aware of this actually succeeding, again at Lissa, this one success started a mania in Europer for rams as the only successful weapon against iron clads). Ramming was nearly impossible. Witness the repeated maneuvering by Monitor and Merrimack at Hampton Roads, the entire day spent trying to ram one another and never once succeeding, even in a restricted, shallow, inlet. On the open sea, I think the successful chance should be very small. Unless there is evidence I'm overlooking (which is possible) I think iron clads should be almost impervious to wooden hull ships, as in reality; this will also promote both sides having to utilize them or give up control of the waterways and seas to the ironclad equipped enemy. However, ironclads should be more susceptible to losses from bad weather than wooden hulled, high-free board ships when on the open sea.
I reported on this elsewhere once before, but noticed it again. The last instance was one of my large armies repeatedly combating a smaller army (say 6 to 8) times in the same province, one after the other. This time, it was a large computer army attacking a smaller player army. The swords class, quick combat opens, the smaller forces stay in the route area, no casualties occur, screen appears and says combat avoided or what have you. Immediately, swords clash, and the process repeated. This happened three times in a row. I don't have a problem with it as long as this is an intended feature (e.g. the smaller army having a harder time breaking off and disengaging) but wanted to make sure others have seen this as well and that it is not a bug.
I had some other commentary too, but I think I've bored you enough at this point. Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
