More on Naval Combat (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Crown of Glory >> The War Room



Message

Ralegh -> More on Naval Combat (9/7/2005 3:29:39 AM)

1) The big impacts on naval combat are the morale of the ships (mainly intrinsic national morale and the level of the BARRACKS in the port where the ship is built - changing in 1.2), naval upgrades, type of ships, strength of each ship (see below) and the wind guage.

2) Don't go into battle with ships with a strength of 3 or less - they should be detached and sent to home ports to recover. Why? Ships with a strength of 3 or less have to make a morale role every round, not just when they take significant casulties - they are unlikely to stand and fight.

3) When the fleet has taken some damage, it can be better to fill up some ships and send some others home to repair - this reduces the likelihood of the partially damaged ships falling under strength 3 in the battle.

4) Once a naval combat starts, make an assessment: do you WANT to fight? Wind guage is random (2/3 of the time in favour of the attacker, I think), and provides a HUGE impact on the battle. If I have any concerns about the battle at all, then if I don't get the wind guage I will withdraw. (To withdraw from Quick Combat, leave all your units in the routed area and press DONE. The enemy may get a pursuit, but at least you are out of there. Half the time they wont get a pursuit at all.)

5) IMPORTANT NOTE: Mainly think of frigates the same way you would think of merchants or transports - not much use in combat. However, they contribute to enemy pursuit losses and preventing your pursuit losses, so having them is useful. Accordingly, I will often rejig my fleets to have "combat fleets" as opposed to fleets for ferry duty and blockading ports. Combat fleets want some frigates, but no transports or merchants - and all the HS /S I have.

6) Final victory in naval battle is based on having 4 times as many unrouted ships in the battle as your enemy.

7) Therefore, STRATEGY 1 is try to protect your weak ships. for example: this diagram shows a pretty good deployment for a major battle:

<the enemy>
_ S S H - - - -
_ _ S S - - - -
T T F F - - - -
T T F F - - - -

Note that my front 3 combat ships will be the only ones firing or being fired upon at first. The transports and frigates are at the rear, where they get defensive bonuses, and the combat ships positioned to both do the fighting and shield the others. The frigates will prevent the transports moving starboard into the way of enemy fire.

8. With more combat vessels, I might try:
<the enemy>
_ S S H - - - -
F F S S - - - -
T T F S - - - -
T T F S - - - -

Since my starboard flank are combat ships, the frigates and Transports will be kept out of battle a bit longer.

9. Since I set up only over half the battle grid, half of the enemies ships wont be able to fire on me, while my ships should be able to find ample targets.

10. STRATEGY2: alternatively, in some situations you want particular ships to get a few licks in before they rout (ie. they start weak) - put them towards the front. Sometimes, my whole fleet is weak, and I will put them all in melee, because I know that if I don't get some licks in fast, I will lose the battle. And I probably will lose the battle, but occasionally can get an upset win.



Ralegh -> Ralegh on Food (9/27/2005 3:57:42 AM)

Ralegh on Food
Minor food fluctionations affect everyone and aren't something to worry about unless you get into super-micro management. One turn a point of pop dies, then next one is created - ignore it.

Major fluctionations can happen too, and this you probably want to manage. Please note that in most games most countries can't afford to feed their starting armies, although it is particularly bad for France. Some countries can, but would rather devote that labour to other things (Britain for example). Eric - we should alert the player when a major shortfall is about to occur I reckon: it can slip under the radar too easily!

(a) This is most commonly caused by supply: troops take their food before the population gets a chance, and suddenly providing depot supply for a couple of armies may kill a dozen population - cf. my guide section on "how supply killed my economy"

IMPORTANT: Every unit inside a city in COG 1.1 is automatically being supplied - and forage settings and the presence/absence of depots is irrelevent. If they are indoors, you are feeding them. So in COG 1.1, any province that is too far away from the enemy to be possibly occupied, I put the garrison outdoors so they can forage. [In COG 1.2 - currently in beta - this is fixed.]

Other serious fluctions are caused by:
(b) Tax rate: - changing your tax rate from 0 to 30% will reduce production by 30%. Since tax rate changes gradually, this isn't as obvious as you might think, but it is very real.

(c) NML changes: lets say you lose a big battle, and hence 1000NML, dropping from +1000 NML down to zero. This will reduce food production by 10% across your nation! (Yes it is a smooth movement, and from zero down to -1000NML is another 10%).

(d) Although this one is localised rather than nation-wide, is may be important if it is impacting the key food-producing provinces - Weather - bad weather drops crop production by 50%. My Turkish empire at the moment is producing 227 food a month. The biggest province for food is Nish, producing 31 - so getting bad weather would reduce that by 15 - about 8% of my national total: and that is just one province. Imagine what the Russian winter snowstorms across half a dozen provinces does to their food production!

(e) Ya know how having roads lets you build population over the normal maximum for the province? DONT LET THEM. Those pesky extra population points eat dozens of times more food that other pop points, and the benefit (in whichever of luxeries, textiles and labor you are producing) is negligible. If you notice any of these lil fellas, build a militia there or something to get rid of the pop point. This gets rebalanced in 1.2 (currently in beta) to make it far less of a problem.



Southern Hunter -> RE: Ralegh Guides (5/12/2006 7:24:23 AM)

Just thought I would post here a correction that I think I read in one of your guides somewhere.

Under 1.2.18 (and later presumably), if you combine two troop types of different morale levels (say Militia and Line infantry), the morale is averaged. So this becomes a quick way to damage permanently the morale of your better troops. It still may be done, and was historically, but the appropriate trade-offs are in place.

Cheers,

Hunter



Didz -> RE: On waste (5/11/2007 5:27:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ralegh
[contributed by jchastain] For any who missed this burried in another thread, I played around with waste a bit and here is how it seems to work...

First, waste is a result of total production ONLY. It is not impacted by number of provinces, level of feudalism, or anything else.

Discussing this with Jkbluesman in my 'Ecomony for dummies' thread he mentioned that building a level 5 Court or Culture will exclude the production from the province where its situated from the waste calculation.

Can you confirm this, and do you consider the investment worth the effort?



Didz -> RE: Ralegh Guides (5/11/2007 5:55:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok
I doubt that one should consider the Irish population much for draft purposes. They were not very eager to fight for the British crown.

On the contrary the historical facts show otherwise.

an analysis of regimental returns from the period show that not only was Ireland providing a higher proportion of manpower for the British Army than any other part of the country but that a much higher proportion of Irish recruits accepted the 5 guinea bounty offered for agreeing to unlimited service. In 1814 for instance 29% of English Volunteers limited their service to 7 years, 26% of Scots and 0.2% of Irish. (565 recruits out 566 took the 5 guinea bounty)

The percentage of Irish volunteers in British regiments varied according to recruiting practices. In Irish regiments which recruited in Ireland the percentage was close to 100%, but even English battalions contained a significant number of Irish volunteers. In 1809 the 57th (West Middlesex Regiment) was made up of 34% Irishmen, whilst the 29th (Worcestershire) only contained 19%. The percentage of Irish volunteers was lowest in the Scottish Regiments, the Gordon Highlanders only contained 3% Irish but that rose to 6% by 1813, the Irish largely replacing the English volunteers whose numbers fell form 6% to 3% over the same period.

British Regiments shipping abroad frequently stopped off in Ireland to recruit thus the percentage of Irish Volunteers in regiments serving abroad tended to be higher than those serving at home. Regiments fighting against the American's had a particularly high level of Irish in their ranks, which was further supplemented by local American volunteers recruited upon arrival.

The undoubted reason for the high level of recruitment from Ireland was a combination of poverty and famine, the escape from which obviously took preference over any feelings of animosity against the British Crown.
Figures taken from Wellington's Army In the Peninsula by Michael Glover



jeffreysutro@jeffreysutro.com -> RE: Ralegh Guides (5/17/2007 4:58:12 AM)

I am a new player to this game, and have been reading through this thread and Ralegh's guides with great interest. I like the power and flexibility of the diplomacy in the game, but I do have a few questions related to the material presented here.

1) Ralegh mentions treaties for "nonaggression pacts". This looks to me to be a very useful type of treaty, but I can't find it in the list of treaty provisions on the treaty screen in the diplomacy tab. Has it been removed, or am I just looking in the wrong place?

2) If I make a treaty to embargo a country, am I prohibited from trading with provinces that are protectorates of the country that I'm embargoing, or does the embargo only apply to the provinces that are actually part of the country?

3) Is there any way to make a permanent peace treaty with a country without surrendering to them? I know how to ask for a ceasefire, but is there any way (other than surrender) to make the ceasefire into a permanent peace?

quote:

Under 1.2.18 (and later presumably), if you combine two troop types of different morale levels (say Militia and Line infantry), the morale is averaged. So this becomes a quick way to damage permanently the morale of your better troops. It still may be done, and was historically, but the appropriate trade-offs are in place.




4) If I move lower morale troops into a division of higher morale troops (thereby lowering the morale of the division from what it was originally) does the morale of the combined division recover slowly with time, or do I have to take some action if I want to raise their morale? In general, what (if anything) can I do in order to raise the morale of my troops?

Thank you for any assistance you can give me.



Ironclad -> RE: Ralegh Guides (5/25/2007 3:54:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jeffreys
1) Ralegh mentions treaties for "nonaggression pacts". This looks to me to be a very useful type of treaty, but I can't find it in the list of treaty provisions on the treaty screen in the diplomacy tab. Has it been removed, or am I just looking in the wrong place?


An enforced peace would equal a non-aggression pact. My personal preferences used to be enforced alliances supplemented by some respect neutrality clauses. Playing a poorer country these are often useful to generate income (one off or even better monthly reparations) from your ally - but the enforced alliance needs to be at least 2 years long.

quote:


2) If I make a treaty to embargo a country, am I prohibited from trading with provinces that are protectorates of the country that I'm embargoing, or does the embargo only apply to the provinces that are actually part of the country?


I am not certain but I think an embargo would probably apply to protectorates as well.

quote:


3) Is there any way to make a permanent peace treaty with a country without surrendering to them? I know how to ask for a ceasefire, but is there any way (other than surrender) to make the ceasefire into a permanent peace?


Even a surrender isn't a permanent peace - it only lasts for 18 months (half that for a limited surrender). The maximum duration of a enforced peace is whatever period your prospective ally will accept.

quote:


4) If I move lower morale troops into a division of higher morale troops (thereby lowering the morale of the division from what it was originally) does the morale of the combined division recover slowly with time, or do I have to take some action if I want to raise their morale? In general, what (if anything) can I do in order to raise the morale of my troops?


Battle experience will increase morale (except for militia or guard units at elite level) - with a higher increase for those on a lower level (below 4.0 I think). POWs however lose morale. Some upgrades help with morale on the battlefield.





jeffreysutro@jeffreysutro.com -> RE: Ralegh Guides (5/28/2007 1:22:20 AM)

Ironclad:

Thank you for your helpful reply. There is one area where I'm still a bit confused.

quote:


quote:


3) Is there any way to make a permanent peace treaty with a country without surrendering to them? I know how to ask for a ceasefire, but is there any way (other than surrender) to make the ceasefire into a permanent peace?


Even a surrender isn't a permanent peace - it only lasts for 18 months (half that for a limited surrender). The maximum duration of a enforced peace is whatever period your prospective ally will accept.



So, if I understand correctly, there is no way to truly negotiate a peace treaty without including a Surrender?

Of course it's great if I can get the AI to Surrender to me, but even a Limited Surrender is not something they're open to unless the war is going very badly for them. If I surrender to the AI, then I have to accept whatever provisions they dictate, though offering a Limited Surrender would lessen the risk. Even so, Surrenders only apply as something of a last resort for a side that is losing badly.

I can try offering a Cease Fire (although the AI seems reluctant to accept them), but then I have to negotiate a subsequent treaty (to which they may not agree) in order to get a longer period of peace.

It occurs to me that I could offer an Enforced Peace, applying to both signatories, to a country with whom I'm at war. Other provisions could be added to make the treaty more palatable to the AI. Do you know if that would actually end the war, or does that require a Surrender or a Cease Fire? I appreciate any additional information you can give me.



Ironclad -> RE: Ralegh Guides (5/28/2007 7:53:03 PM)

Except for total war, a surrender or cease-fire is required to end a war. The AI's decisions on ceasefires can sometimes be surprising particularly when its taking a battering from a number of enemies and yet rejects a ceasefire with one of them. One change I would like to see (added to an old wish list but worth repeating) is to include ceasefire on the treaty options list so that you can combine it with other provisions for a more enticing prospect.



jeffreysutro@jeffreysutro.com -> RE: Ralegh Guides (5/28/2007 10:54:35 PM)

quote:

Except for total war, a surrender or cease-fire is required to end a war. The AI's decisions on ceasefires can sometimes be surprising particularly when its taking a battering from a number of enemies and yet rejects a ceasefire with one of them. One change I would like to see (added to an old wish list but worth repeating) is to include ceasefire on the treaty options list so that you can combine it with other provisions for a more enticing prospect.



Ironclad:

I agree with you entirely that adding Ceasefire to the list of treaty options would be an excellent change, since it would allow the player to actually negotiate peace treatys. Crown of Glory has the best diplomacy system I've seen in any game. In fact, it's the only one that I've played that could be said to even have a true diplomacy system (though I haven't played "Making History" which looks like it might also have something good in that area). Nevertheless, any game can be made better, and I think that the change you suggest would be a decided improvement.



general_solomon -> RE: Ralegh Guides (8/17/2008 8:12:14 PM)

Ralegh,

thank you for the well written tips. I have a greater appreciation for the game now.

I would like to know if you have a plans to create in depth hex battle document.

for a new player, it really difficult to get the hang of the detailed battle section.

thanks again.



sedmi patuljak -> RE: Ralegh Guides (1/10/2012 9:41:04 AM)

Ralegh guides links doesnt seems to work for me so I was wandering where those files could be found?



bazjak -> RE: Guides (10/30/2014 8:12:32 PM)

link is not working
any chance you could point me in the right direction
thanks



oliver -> RE: Guides (10/30/2014 10:04:59 PM)

Try this:

http://www.west-civ.com/ralegh.php



bazjak -> RE: Guides (10/31/2014 7:14:40 PM)

Thankyou Oliver
Just what i was looking for



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.0625