Jump to content

Navy


Clash

Navy  

13 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

I suck at polls, my bad if I messed that up.

Navy on CN sucks a lot more tho, which actually makes it easy to improve. Improvements cause more fun. Fun is every game's bestest friend. More fun means more people play the game, and here in TE, more people blow more things up. I like it when that happens. Thus, thread.

There is more cash and bigger nations in TE than ever before. I don't think the prices of certain items necessarily need to be changed, like the way the Manhattan Project was made more expensive. Why don't we just find other things for people to spend their money on, and ways to make them work harder to earn their money? The first two suggestions here I think are slam dunks that should happen at the start of next round.

#1: "Blockade" needs to really mean something. The random % of cash penalty thing is lame. Taken literally and historically, for military accuracy: A blockade means ships are being stopped from going in and out of your harbor. How can you be getting the resources from your harbor, if nothing is going in or out of it? I say that if your nation gets blockaded, your harbor gets deleted and you lose your last trade. It's like that until the end of the war or until you get navy to break the blockade, before you can buy it back again. Fact: If your nation has a harbor - it can be blockaded. That's all there is too it, for war accuracy in a war game that should be right.

2. Ditch the less than 400 miles of nation or you can't be attacked by navy thing.
If your nation has a harbor - it can be blockaded.

I know adding a bunch of coding for a bunch of stuff would take a lot of time. So, I imagine any changes would have to be done incrementally, on a round-by-round basis. I don't think it would be hard to add these first two for next round tho. They increase the importance of navy in general and make wars more fun, even for long-time players. They automatically make the game more historically and militarily accurate - and more fun.

Preface for the next suggestions: Aircraft carriers add planes to your air attacks and defenses.
Other naval vessels should add things as well, depending on what they do best.

3. Battleships stink right now. They are really expensive in upkeep, which is accurate. But their advantages are not being used properly. Battleships have really, really big guns. Lots of them. What battleships do better than anything else is DESTROY INFRASTRUCTURE. In WWII battleships had 14-16" (356-406 millimeters) guns and cruisers had 8" guns. That's a lot of firepower and those guns could be even bigger if we made them today. Aircraft carriers add planes. I think Battleships and Cruisers should add another possible navy attack: Shelling. Depending upon how many of them you have[i], affects the damage they do.[/i] You can launch a shelling per day, which now gives you four naval attacks instead of three per day.

4. Thusly, if a. Battleships and Cruisers can shell; b. Aircraft carriers add planes; c. What frigates and destroyers do is cruise missile. They can launch a LOT of those. We ditch the 2% damage thing that destroyers add now. The fifth possible naval attack per day for navy becomes Cruise Missile. How many destroyers and frigates you have becomes a damage modifier. Your naval cruise missile attack also uses the same tech modifiers regular cruise missiles have, and you still get the same modifiers you get for having satellites.

Those last two attacks only work the same way a blockade would - when the other nation no longer has navy to fight you with.
So, I guess we need to kill more navy, right? Let's blow more stuff up.

5. The sixth naval attack and next navy attack becomes Air Attack. It becomes an extra air attack you get using just the planes you have on your aircraft carriers. This attack goes against the other nation's navy. After all, you can't attack with the extra planes you get for having carriers now - you can only defend with them. Well, here those planes are attacking, and it's historically militarily accurate. This way we get more navy ships blown up. I think also that defending fighters can defend against you as well, in the same ways that other air attacks are.

6. Naval attacks have more dead ships per attack, perhaps? Let's get navy more involved overall, and blow 'em all up lol.

These modifications add three types of naval attacks and three more attacks per navy per day.
Navy becomes more fun and a more integral part of the game.

Predictions: People might have to start thinking of trades differently. Perhaps now you'll need both 10 resource building guides and 12 resource building guides? Obviously, people are going to be very careful about what trade they make their LAST trade, because that will the one directly affected by a blockade. People will have to start including buying navy right along with buying tanks or planes - and spend more money on it. Unless you want your nation to get the crap kicked out of it, you must build you a better nation. That's Darwin, babes. Darwin for the win.

/end wall of text

edited shelling

Edited by Clash
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Voted for all except #1. Completely agree that navy needs a kick start. Would add a greater dimension to war.

The issue would be in the detail for me. Like when you have to rebuild your harbour, in order to collect with the full 12 resources(is that right?), would it take into account the many negative improvement slots your nation is going to be in from Nuclear War?

I probably would be for #1 if it didnt seem to lets say "affect" your nations collection even more, while at war. At war, you are already suffering from various economic penalties too numerous to list.

Edited by StevieG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree that navy as it exists now is nerfed, and easily nullified by the land limitation. The problem with un-nerfing by removing land limitation is that it gives an even greater advantage to larger nations over smaller nations. Navy is expensive in improvement slots, and purchase/upkeep costs -- making it harder for smaller nations to maintain a defense -- but causes disproportionate damage compared to other attacks. Adding even more attacks and penalties makes the situation worse.

As things are now, all the incentives push nations to keep land below 500 until enough navy can be built up for defense, and to delay buying navy to avoid the loss of improvement slots and additional military costs. If you want to make navy useful and encourage it's use earlier, one simple change will do:

Always allow battle support.

Right now, you have to grind down opponents with navy -- and hope they don't sell land -- in order to make use of the navy special abilities. If you always have the battle support option, navy becomes useful. So, if battle support is used, a nation may send 75 (or 95) aircraft instead of 50 (or 70), and get the up-to-twenty-percent bonuses on ground, missile, and nuclear attacks.

Keep the limitation of 500 land for blockades only, keep the total number of attack slots per day at three. Navy becomes useful, and is kept from becoming ridiculously overpowered vs. smaller nations. Also should be trivial to implement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='jraenar' timestamp='1329122991' post='2919460']
The problem with un-nerfing by removing land limitation is that it gives an even greater advantage to larger nations over smaller nations. Navy is expensive in improvement slots, and purchase/upkeep costs -- making it harder for smaller nations to maintain a defense -- but causes disproportionate damage compared to other attacks. Adding even more attacks and penalties makes the situation worse.[/quote]

I agree with this completely. We already see 2 to 1 NS attacks regularly. If the "1" is unable to disable, in a small way, the already massive advantage that the "2" has, the situtation is made even worse.

I would however accept removing the 50% discount for repurchasing the land. This would make it a bit more costly for a non-navy nation to disable the advantage.

In fact, I think that land should cost full price to repurchase (it makes RL sense) but Tech repurchase should be at 50%. From a RL perspective, replacing lost "tech" should not cost full price since the "R&D" required for its initial development was not lost.


And btw, the land requirement is 250 miles, not 500. :)

Edited by Thomasj_tx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Clash' timestamp='1329061345' post='2919013']


#1: "Blockade" needs to really mean something. The random % of cash penalty thing is lame. Taken literally and historically, for military accuracy: A blockade means ships are being stopped from going in and out of your harbor. How can you be getting the resources from your harbor, if nothing is going in or out of it? I say that if your nation gets blockaded, your harbor gets deleted and you lose your last trade. It's like that until the end of the war or until you get navy to break the blockade, before you can buy it back again. Fact: If your nation has a harbor - it can be blockaded. That's all there is too it, for war accuracy in a war game that should be right.


[/quote]
Ehh dont really agree with it. You get trades from land too ya know. But we cant make it like RL blockades, What if there income from Sea trade was only 0.001% and they get blockaded and lose 2% now that wouldnt really be right. Also you are assuming their are no land locked nations :lol1:

But navy could be changed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we improve naval attacks for realism and a sense of historical accuracy to better represent true naval capabilities, we should add the ability of planes to attack and destroy navy. Being able to counter navy is also historically abd realistically accurate and adds another strategic element. It also adds another reason to purchase air.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1329152908' post='2919548']
thats why only the harbor trade would be blockaded. Land trades would not be affected.
[/quote]
Yea i saw, But losing a trade could be so damaging. I dont think a trade should be taken away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Stelios' timestamp='1329153771' post='2919562']
Yea i saw, But losing a trade could be so damaging. I dont think a trade should be taken away.
[/quote]
If it can be replaced/given back after the war, then I see no problem really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1329150550' post='2919535']
I agree with this completely. We already see 2 to 1 NS attacks regularly. If the "1" is unable to disable, in a small way, the already massive advantage that the "2" has, the situtation is made even worse.
[/quote]
I disagree. Navy already adds a LOT of NS to a nations NS total. So if you dont have navy, someone with a big navy will have more NS anyways. Furthermore, this will mean Navy NS is not merely NS. Someone with a strong navy could take on someone with more infra/tech/nukes, and they would each have their own advantages over each other in different areas of the war.
[quote]
but Tech repurchase should be at 50%. From a RL perspective, replacing lost "tech" should not cost full price since the "R&D" required for its initial development was not lost.
[/quote]
Agreed. Id like to see peak tech introduced, as it would encourage more tech to be bought earlier with ease of rebuying it. This would create more destruction during wars IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='StevieG' timestamp='1329155760' post='2919578']
If it can be replaced/given back after the war, then I see no problem really.
[/quote]
then people have to keep track of what their last trade is. If you lost fish and wheat.. You lost so many soldiers.. I need casualties brah

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your nation has a harbor - it can be blockaded.
That's kind of hard to argue with.

You get two resources for having a harbor, and you lose those exact two resources when it gets blockaded. That's logical. Perhaps it's just for a day or two, and you don't actually lose the harbor? It just has a big "X" over it while it's blockaded or something. The blockade would have to be renewed every day for it to stick. Once the war is over, obviously the blockade disappears. That better? Besides, perhaps shelling would better destroy a harbor so it has to be rebuilt lol.

Anyways, people would then have to buy navy in the same way they buy planes and tanks. They would also have to plan their resources better, that's for sure. I was running 10 resource combos through the resource calculator, some of them aren't too bad. Perhaps nation specialization then comes into play, one five nation circle would have all the pop resources for example, while another gets microchips for extra tech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Clash' timestamp='1329220505' post='2920175']
If your nation has a harbor - it can be blockaded.
That's kind of hard to argue with.

You get two resources for having a harbor, and you lose those exact two resources when it gets blockaded. That's logical. Perhaps it's just for a day or two, and you don't actually lose the harbor? It just has a big "X" over it while it's blockaded or something. The blockade would have to be renewed every day for it to stick. Once the war is over, obviously the blockade disappears. That better? Besides, perhaps shelling would better destroy a harbor so it has to be rebuilt lol.

Anyways, people would then have to buy navy in the same way they buy planes and tanks. They would also have to plan their resources better, that's for sure. I was running 10 resource combos through the resource calculator, some of them aren't too bad. Perhaps nation specialization then comes into play, one five nation circle would have all the pop resources for example, while another gets microchips for extra tech.
[/quote]
Definately would add a strategic sense to assigning targets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...