Entering a Port (Full Version)

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



Message

fjbn -> Entering a Port (8/27/2004 3:06:58 PM)

In my opinion, one of the greatest mistakes in EiA rules is the one about entering a port. It says that a fleet that enters a port says if it wishes to be intercepted by the blockading fleets. If it doesn't, it enters, simply. You can use that rule to join all your fleets in a port without problems and make a sortie. If it works, you have achieved a great victory.

That's absurd. Reallity shows that it was easier to escape from the blockade that entering a port. French ships used to elude the blockade just after a storm, because Brit ships had to go to a port and there was a lapse of time to recover the blockade. If the blockading ships doesn't have problems to sail (like storms) a ship that tries to enter a port will be captured or sunk.

In EiH there is automatic interception by the blockading fleets when a fleet tries to enter a port, which is more logical.



Murat -> RE: Entering a Port (8/27/2004 9:11:33 PM)

My understanding was that the EiH naval rules applied (EiH naval rules have often been deemed anti-British in our group).



Titi -> RE: Entering a Port (8/28/2004 4:32:52 AM)

IMHO the naval aspect of the game is the wort part of it. The game is build around the land conflict, so are the map scale, the turn duration, the absence of FOW ... and it's reflecting around the naval rules. The british moving his fleet out of Alexandria in reaction to the move of the russian fleet going out of St-Peterbourgh in the same month is a pure aberation.
Another one is seeing those british fleets standing all the years in the blockade boxes in front of the frenchs harbours, waiting for the frenchs corps to be five areas away, without any attrition from the weather, supply, ilness,...

EiH naval rules are a slight progress over EiA ones for the moves, interception, evading combat, counter numbers, transport capacity... but introduce greater complexity also for poor result with the naval supply rules, different unit types and naval combat system.

i've no clue how to correct this but want to know if i'm the only one here thinking that something is wrong[&:]



carnifex -> RE: Entering a Port (8/28/2004 7:21:28 AM)

no theres nothing wrong with it imho

you dont need to rotate ships or provide supply because the game doesnt model every single ship in the world just those on duty

at any time you can assume ships are rotating in and out and being supplied and replaced etc

when you as the ruler of your empire say blockade antwerp with 60 ships then your admirals take care of the details and once a month they send you a report that says yes there are 60 ships on station there



Titi -> RE: Entering a Port (8/29/2004 4:21:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: carnifex
at any time you can assume ships are rotating in and out and being supplied and replaced etc


But when as the owning player of the fleet being blockaded in Antwerp, a 60 EiA ships strong, i give the order to my fleet commander to try to breach the blockade in one month for example, i assume that every ship in the port will be prepared for combat.

So why then will the combat be at 1/1 ratio as ships normally in the rotation or replacement will fight the blocading fleet then return to port for refitting for the rotation/replacement issue?



ardilla -> RE: Entering a Port (9/1/2004 4:05:36 PM)

IMO there is not a mistake with the problem about getting into the harbour without beeing intercepted by the blocking force.

There is simply a "left over" in the naval rules as many people can apreciate from:
1)The naval combat table
2)The admirals in the game, just one, Nelson!?!?!
3)All the rest of naval rules, since there are only ships of the line and not transports, etc...

Well, I understand that this was on porpous, since the game was very complicated, and still, when it was designed.
And there is more fun in the land battles than in the naval ones for most of the people who love the napoleonic era.

But of course there I personally think that is a big mistake for the game to left so much the naval rules when the naval fighting was as much important for the whole period or even more, than the land wars.

Of course, I assume that with a better naval rules, combat, etc... the game should suffer a rise in complexity and playability (is this a new word?!?![:(])

WHY THERE IS SUCH A STUPID RULE WHERE YOU CAN ONLY BLOCK WHEN THE SHIPS COME OF THE HARBOUR BUT NOT WHEN THERE ARE COMMING TO IT.

Because, since you have to make a STACK to attack, the only way to do it was this.
Letting the freedom force to enter the harbour, create a stack and come out with the blocked ships to attack the blocking ones.

It should be more logical that the stack inside harbour (the blocked one) will come out at the same time that the stack that comes to rescue them attacks the back of the blocking force, but of course, the limited naval rules (just count the number of pages dedicated to naval combat and the ones to land combat) will have to be changed.

For the ones we love naval battles we hope this PC game, after MG gets a bit of rest, will upgrade naval rules.

Regards.



Chairman -> RE: Entering a Port (9/3/2004 9:47:55 AM)

Well about the "easy" naval combat system, there were no real "special" tactics at naval combat.

You lined up your fleet and tried to get the "weather gauge" and then you let your line move alongside the enemy ships, often there were attemts to break the enemy line in one or several places and that usaly ended the conflict with the side that broke the line as the winner... if you didnīt break the line you sent iron after iron volleys into the enemy ship(s) until someone struck the colors.

Nelson did some "cracy" attacks put managed to pull them thruu, but mostly because the english sailors were so good at fire their guns and sail the ships.

One big problem for England was manpower to man all the ships in the fleet as well as the merchant fleet.
When England run into an enemy with the same skill it usaly was a 50/50 deal who won.
When the US started to build ships they "cheated" with the arment, I think "Old Ironside" had 54 guns (BIG guns) but were rated as a 44 frigate, the same were with a 74 ship of the line, wich in fact had some 92 guns, (also BIG guns).

Two detail about Constitution class was that it was very manuerable, it out turned all but the smallest enemy ship and it had a extra layer of "iron oak" wich made some of the English iron balls to do almost no damage on its hull.



ardilla -> RE: Entering a Port (9/3/2004 10:36:56 AM)

Well, just a point out, when I meant "easy" I think is because there is only a table, small one by the way!!

Besides you are almost right, that in an naval battle there is not many tactics, just get the wind and do the line of battle and shoot as fast as you can, well, at least there could be 3 rounds, morale, etc...

I think the advanced naval rules are quite interesting, not perfect, but at least are in the way it should be.

Regards.



YohanTM2 -> RE: Entering a Port (9/3/2004 1:22:39 PM)

I think the US Frigates like Iron Sides were the precursor to the Battle Crusier. Faster than anything with real big guns and much more powerful than anything in the Frigate (Cruiser) class.



fjbn -> RE: Entering a Port (9/3/2004 3:15:14 PM)

I don't think so, I think that they were much in the line of German pocket dreadnoughts, because US frigates in fact couldn't hold the line against european ships, which in fact carry the weight of sea battles.



Chairman -> RE: Entering a Port (9/3/2004 3:20:55 PM)

quote:

quote:

Besides you are almost right, that in an naval battle there is not many tactics, just get the wind and do the line of battle and shoot as fast as you can, well, at least there could be 3 rounds, morale, etc...


Yes that would be a better way of doing combat.



YohanTM2 -> RE: Entering a Port (9/3/2004 10:14:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: fjbn

I don't think so, I think that they were much in the line of German pocket dreadnoughts, because US frigates in fact couldn't hold the line against european ships, which in fact carry the weight of sea battles.


You misread my message. US Frigates were bigger and outgunned European Frigates and were faster then Ships of the Line (which they would not fight)

German Pocket Dreadnoughts were a useless ship class.



fjbn -> RE: Entering a Port (9/3/2004 11:21:18 PM)

yes, but in fact an US frigate could not dominate the sea against a powerful navy. In fact, when napoleonic war ended in 1814 and England could use more ships in american coasts, things were more much difficult. Remember the capture of President frigate.



Forward_March -> RE: Entering a Port (9/4/2004 1:21:41 AM)

quote:

German Pocket Dreadnoughts were a useless ship class.


I think calling them useless is unfair. With their long range they were quintessential commerce raiders. They just weren't fit to be in any battle line with ships that were 3-7 knots faster than their best speed.

The Graf Spee certainly showed what it could do against a squadron of cruisers. Only an excellent ruse, and the captain's gullibility kept it from heading for home. She had only 50 salvos remaining when she docked in Montevideo harbor, had lost fifty crew, and had hits that were all above the waterline.

Admiral Scheer also stretched the British navy chasing her.

Besides...what a crafty way to get around treaty restrictions

As for the Constitution class, they were another piece of excellent work.

When dealing with the largest navy in the world, you have to use a bit of imagination, or you'll get nowhere.



YohanTM2 -> RE: Entering a Port (9/4/2004 3:50:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: fjbn

yes, but in fact an US frigate could not dominate the sea against a powerful navy. In fact, when napoleonic war ended in 1814 and England could use more ships in american coasts, things were more much difficult. Remember the capture of President frigate.


sure but neither could BCs.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.6875