Naval Question

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Naval Question

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War I] >> Guns of August 1914 - 1918 >> Naval Question

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Naval Question - 8/8/2007 9:15:00 AM

Cyrano~

Posts: 35
Joined: 7/5/2004
Status: offline

When sending out a "shipping" mission do you (or should you) also send out a "patrol" mission in the same sea zone so as to protect your shipping or is that not necessary ?

Thanks

Post #: 1

RE: Naval Question - 8/8/2007 9:29:02 AM

flintlock

Posts: 358
Joined: 10/8/2006
Status: offline

It's not a prerequisite, as a patrol will target enemy warships (along with shipping), though it certainly doesn't hurt. The more enemy warships you can destroy in a sea zone where your own shipping is operating, you improve the chance of successful shipping operations for yourself.

(in reply to Cyrano~)

Post #: 2

RE: Naval Question - 8/8/2007 7:02:21 PM

Cyrano~

Posts: 35
Joined: 7/5/2004
Status: offline

OK thanks that's what I figured.
Next logical question (to me) is how important is Shipping then ?
In the game for Germany for example it says you should have 6 transports in the Atlantic and 2 in the Baltic.
If you send those out (all 8) you should according to the manual get an increase in food and materials.
Does this increase lead to more economic pts shortly thereafter ?
If yes, is the usage of Naval assets to send out those Transports (as necessary) worth the expense ?
My hunch is that it's probably worth it in the Baltic which you can probably control rather easily but in the Atlantic not so sure (if you have to send out your military fleet to defend your shipping).

Anyone with knowledge in this matter would be greatly appreciated, thanks.

(in reply to flintlock)

Post #: 3

RE: Naval Question - 8/8/2007 7:30:04 PM

hjaco

Posts: 872
Joined: 3/23/2007
Status: offline

Well, the more sea areas you spread out to the more likely something is to be found.

Unless you can knock Britain out of the game surface naval combat is not to Germany's benefit. The last thing you want to is repairing dreadnoughts or building new transports. It's attrition you can't win (against a human player that is). Remember it cost naval assets to both patrol and repair ships.

I normally focus on the Baltic only, saving 2 transports as reserve or for invading Riga/Petrograd. Live happily and merrily in the present as long as the transports is still there.

Germany is always short on resources and food so it matters yes.

Just remember to send those surplus resources from AH and later OE to the German factories

Even when producing at full capacity there comes a time when you lack resources or food as CP. And always sooner than anticipated.

(in reply to Cyrano~)

Post #: 4

RE: Naval Question - 8/9/2007 12:45:50 AM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

If, as the CP, you can get 6 shipping in the Atlantic you will get a lot more food and IIRC - which means much higher efficiency for your industry, and more IP.

the problem is getting those 6...and keeping them there....

the 2 in the Baltic bring in raw materials

(in reply to hjaco)

Post #: 5

RE: Naval Question - 8/9/2007 7:22:19 PM

JD Walter

Posts: 235
Joined: 6/20/2003
From: Out of the Silent Planet
Status: offline

Hi Cyrano,

quote:

Next logical question (to me) is how important is Shipping then ?
In the game for Germany for example it says you should have 6 transports in the Atlantic and 2 in the Baltic.
If you send those out (all 8) you should according to the manual get an increase in food and materials.
Does this increase lead to more economic pts shortly thereafter ?

Shipping is helpful for the CP, but not vital. IIRC, the Baltic generally yields 3 extra RM's per TR. (Note: I cannot say this is anything but an estimate; it was just the average I got in the one PBEM game I've played.) These are useful (they translate to an extra 6 IP's per strategic phase), but you have to weigh that against the cost of escort and the risk of interception by the superior TE fleet. The RM's appear in your trade reserves the strategic phase after the shipping mission is first performed.

As the CP, I generally shoot for control of the Baltic and place all 4 available TR's there in case one or two of them get intercepted by an English raid and are damaged or forced to retire. I have never been able to acquire sea superiority in the Atlantic; both the AI and my opponent patrol the North Sea and the North Atlantic aggressively, and all of my HSF sorties have met with combat. Generally, the HSF can hold its own and give as good as it gets, but the TE combined has more ships, and Britain can concentrate of building naval points for repair which Germany can ill-afford to devote the IP's to.

Since loss of ships also contributes to exhaustion and decline of national will, I usually try to avoid sailing the HSF into areas I know where the British are going to be out in force. However, I balance that with a careful consideration of the losses the BEF is taking in France; if I perceive an opportunity to "overload" the British national will and damage it by inflicting additional losses on their navy, I will sortie the HSF to do so.

quote:

If yes, is the usage of Naval assets to send out those Transports (as necessary) worth the expense ?
My hunch is that it's probably worth it in the Baltic which you can probably control rather easily but in the Atlantic not so sure (if you have to send out your military fleet to defend your shipping).

That's been my experience. Agreed.

But note U-Boats are very effective in the North Atlantic if the TE does not invest in ASW.

And, the AH & OE fleets, if combined, can contest British patrol of the Eastern Med, or French patrol of the Western Med.

< Message edited by Def Zep -- 8/9/2007 7:24:13 PM >

(in reply to Cyrano~)

Post #: 6