Naval Battle system seriously broken

[RomanKnight]

As we have experienced you can not stack embarked military units with ships. You can only have a ship traveling nearby the unit. But this does not protect it from being killed by enemy ship coming outside the fog of war. Even if you dominate the sea you can not ensure unit coming to the enemy shore alive.

I have played islands game and AI killed half of my land invasion forces just with 2 caravels, I had 4 frigates traveling not far from them. Zones of control do not work. Unless you play Songhai your transport fleet will always be defendless

[Peets]

If you go to war, you should bring more then 4 frigates to protect them, use caravels since they are cheaper and faster build.
Also a caravel can only attack once, so with 2 caravels they shoud only be able to kill 2 units. Since next turn you sould be able to kill those two caravels.

I don't see any problems.

[I<at]

I agree with OP, embarked units should be treated as civilian units, thus be stackable with military vessels. Embarked units are defenseless so they should be protected by warship sailing in the same tile, in a convoy-style.

[bificommander]

The non-stacking is rather weird, but with decent positioning you can make it difficult to attack your landers. Zone of control does function for me, and going around it should eat up enough move (if you placed your ships right) that they can't hit your landers as well. And even if the enemy gets through, the ships shouldn't be able to take out more than one lander before being destroyed if you have a decent escort.

On the naval system, has anyone had a modern fleet-vs-fleet battle? Given the high move of modern ships, it seems like it will be VERY difficult to protect carriers. And with their high cost and low defense, it's worth sacrificing one or two subs to wade into the enemy fleet and kill it. My sollution (that I didn't get to test, since I haven't had a decent navy opposition from the AI yet) would be to put your destroyers well in front of the carrier so you'll either see the enemy on your turn (and can attack him) or the enemy won't have the move to reach your carrier on his turn. But I have no idea if it'd work, and if there is any ships comming from behind you....

[Veshta]

What we need is for units such as Frigates to not tickle smaller vessels to death from range. A broadside from a frigate is and was nothing to sneeze at.

Allowing all ranged units to attack-move onto a tile in a do-or-die attack would solve all the issues mentioned here as well as a lot of similar landbased problems.

[RomanKnight]

If you go to war, you should bring more then 4 frigates to protect them, use caravels since they are cheaper and faster build.
Also a caravel can only attack once, so with 2 caravels they shoud only be able to kill 2 units. Since next turn you sould be able to kill those two caravels.

I don't see any problems.

The problem is caravels never die from 1 attack. you need at least 4 bombards from caravels to kill another enemy caravel. So to kill 2 caravels and dont loose any of my embarked units I need to bring 8 caravels... seems like stupid idea.

[Hakuryu9]

I agree that embarked units should be stackable with military ships.

I think some people here are exaggerating though... moving onto an embarked unit counts as an attack, so even if a military ship has more moves, it cannot move on multiple embarked units in one turn, unless it has the extra attack upgrade, in which it can move onto two embarked units.

[Peets]

The problem is caravels never die from 1 attack. you need at least 4 bombards from caravels to kill another enemy caravel. So to kill 2 caravels and dont loose any of my embarked units I need to bring 8 caravels... seems like stupid idea.

But you had frigates (who are a little stronger) 4 of them, that should at least kill the two caravels in two turns. Meaning you lost max 3 units. Which isn't much unless you attack with 5 units over sea? Which is pointless to attack with anyway.

Also if you go in war with someone you should recon first before going with your embarked units.

[thefluffyrocker]

In naval warfare especially you can never create an airtight defense to protect vulnerable ships 100%.
The most effective defense is using pickets to warn of long range threats rather than simply crowding your escorts around your vulnerable units.

[Zenicetus]

Also if you go in war with someone you should recon first before going with your embarked units.

Yes, not just recon, but also control that area with naval power. I haven't had a problem with embarked units. That's partly due to the AI's inability to make a decent navy and hold territory with it, but it's also because I build a big enough navy to control large areas of ocean, not just huddle close to the embarked units. If enemy ships are taking out your embarked units, it's because you're letting them get too close in the first place, and not taking the time to prepare the route so it's safe.

I think some people get into trouble with embarked units because they're trying to launch invasions too early, before they have a navy strong enough to remove all the pirates, and weaken enemy navies in the area. Obviously this becomes harder at higher difficulty settings where the AI can crank out tons of ships.

I wouldn't mind if the game allowed stacking embarked units and naval units, but it would probably just double the number of combat ships you need, if you want a chance of hitting the enemy before it gets close enough to be a real threat. Relying only on stacked combat ships for defense, just seems riskier than controlling the surrounding ocean.

[Tanix]

There are 2 other options.

1. Position your embarked units to be able to land on enemy territory before ever declaring war.

If 1 isn't possible then

2. Establish Naval superiority before putting your land units at risk of easy destruction.

[Black Gate of Mordor]

I agree with OP, embarked units should be treated as civilian units, thus be stackable with military vessels. Embarked units are defenseless so they should be protected by warship sailing in the same tile, in a convoy-style.

They were supposed to be. But for some reason, they're not.

[tfordp]

If enemy ships are taking out your embarked units, it's because you're letting them get too close in the first place, and not taking the time to prepare the route so it's safe.

I think some people get into trouble with embarked units because they're trying to launch invasions too early

I was going to write this^, luckily I read to the end first.

They were supposed to be. But for some reason, they're not.

That's what I seem to remember, it was mentioned a few times that embarked units would be counted a civilians, so I was trying everything to get it to work before I realised it doesn't and gave up.

[Black Gate of Mordor]

That's what I seem to remember, it was mentioned a few times that embarked units would be counted a civilians, so I was trying everything to get it to work before I realised it doesn't and gave up.

In fact.... was that in a Gamestop video? I seem to have the feeling of a naval embarkment with the land/naval stack, but Greg never used the waves.

[The Rockman]

I was going to write this^, luckily I read to the end first.



That's what I seem to remember, it was mentioned a few times that embarked units would be counted a civilians, so I was trying everything to get it to work before I realised it doesn't and gave up.

It not that embarked units are not civilians, but that all ships are as well you can check this with a sea city you can stack a swordman and a ship in a city but not a ship and a worker.

[tfordp]

It not that embarked units are not civilians, but that all ships are as well you can check this with a sea city you can stack a swordman and a ship in a city but not a ship and a worker.

Ah, of course. I wondered about that while I was seeing off an attacking force and had a general, an artillary and a destroyer in one city. I assumed it was because of land and naval units, never considered the destroyer could be a civilian.

[BitterDevil]

say thanks u have a navy...i have lakes...coastal cities...but unless i can make workboats use artilery i have absolutely no navy whatsoever )

[civ97]

You can always try sending a bunch of embarked scouts along with your military. If you put them on the outside of your blob, the enemy will have to waste an attack moving into them and give your ships more time to shoot back. Plus it's much cheaper than building more ships

[JoshTheValiant]

As we have experienced you can not stack embarked military units with ships. You can only have a ship traveling nearby the unit. But this does not protect it from being killed by enemy ship coming outside the fog of war. Even if you dominate the sea you can not ensure unit coming to the enemy shore alive.

I have played islands game and AI killed half of my land invasion forces just with 2 caravels, I had 4 frigates traveling not far from them. Zones of control do not work. Unless you play Songhai your transport fleet will always be defendless

I'm not sure what's up with your game, but Zone of Control works fine for me. In fact, I did a bit of an intellectual exercise in another thread about this same subject and determined that you only need an excessive Naval force until your landing party reaches the size of three. The way that ZOC works (kills ALL movement when a unit moves from one space of it to another) means that spacing your ships three spaces apart (that is, two empty spaces between them), their ZOC overlaps and completely envelops a vulnerable civvie fleet. Four naval units can completely defend seven land units, which is a sizable army, and gives you a navy large enough to busy itself with other things after it's finished escorting. Preventing blockades, providing cover fire for coastal attacks, scouting, keeping tabs on various potential barbarian encampments, etc.

Especially later in the game, I have become a fan of naval units, and unless you're on a Pangaea, I see little reason not to field some sort of a navy.

[Soulfire777]

I agree with OP, embarked units should be treated as civilian units, thus be stackable with military vessels. Embarked units are defenseless so they should be protected by warship sailing in the same tile, in a convoy-style.

Agree 100%.

[CrispyCritter]

There are 2 other options.

1. Position your embarked units to be able to land on enemy territory before ever declaring war.

If 1 isn't possible then

2. Establish Naval superiority before putting your land units at risk of easy destruction.

A third, later game option is air superiority.

I just finished an Emperor archipelago game where I had a maximum of 2 ships in the game. But I had 8 bombers (and eventually 3 stealth bombers) and the highest priority targets were the AI's ships. My destroyers would engage the ships and my bombers would destroy them.

This works well for island hopping invasions, but it's tougher to pin down and reach the AI ships for long distance movement.

[Peets]

I am now playing a game against my brother who plays much better then the current AI.

Much more fun games and still I can manage to get my embarked units from my continent to his continent without minimal losses.

It just a matter of controlling the sea.
There are a lot of bugs in this game but this is not one of them.

[EasymodeX]

I had 4 frigates traveling not far from them. Zones of control do not work. Unless you play Songhai your transport fleet will always be defendless

I think I know what your problem is.

[SteelDragon]

Transport fleets are always defenceless. Real life situation. Imagine a big fat carrier sailing. And there is one tiny sub lurking. The sub sees that there isnt a tight screen of destroyers protecting the carrier and she can slip a torpedo or 2. Fires and the big far carrier goes down into the cold dark locker under jolly roger. Valuable ships must be protected all the time by other vessels. You cant just have 4 caravels around.

[Takao]

Except, I believe the discussion was focused on caravels and frigates, not submarines...

Still, your convoys must be protected. However, as EasymodeX pointed out, by putting your protection force well ahead of your transports is a recipe for defeat. You would have been better off placing the frigates as such: left - side, left - front, right - front, right - side. Thus giving you better all around protection.

Also, scale in Civ V is a problem, while the frigates may appear close, they really are not. You have to take into account spotting ranges and ship movement ranges, and then adjust accordingly. Several times I have had convoys that literally took up the entire ocean, when realistically, they should have only covered a small portion of the area they actually occupied, Stupid 1UpT rule.

Usually, for large convoys, I try and have at least 6-8 escorts out on picket duty.

[Jaenus]

Naval combat is an afterthought to the afterthought that is multiplayer.

[Kevik]

Send in a few dummy transports to lure out their ships. Then destroy them with your ships before you send you main invasion in.

[kaybeebiscuits]

There are a few solutions that can be made to resolve this issue:

1) Allow embarked land units to be able to defend themselves, but to avoid the state of being overpowered or imbalanced, they can only defend, but not attack over water, and in addition, they retain only about 50% (adjust if needed) of their original strength over water. Songhai units, with their River Warlord ability, would gain a higher percentage of the strength retained, possibly 75% or even 100% if needed. This is to avoid making the Songhai special ability worthless.

2) Make embarked land units stackable with military naval units, but not with themselves. This seems to be the most common proposition suggested by most people. Not allowing embarked land units to stack with themselves preserves the standard 1 unit per hex system in most instances, while still allowing a degree of freedom in allowing military units to defend each individual unit. However, the main weakness of this is the fact that not all naval units will be able to defend the embarked units. Trying to attain a 1:1 ratio of naval units to embarked units is totally uneconomical.

3) Give naval units a certain zone of control, like in the case of fortified land units, such that any unit that enters the hexes adjacent to any fortified naval unit would result in that unit using up all its movement points for that turn alone. This bonus should only apply to fortified naval units (make them fortifiable or something close to that without the defense bonus if it is too unrealistic), and that it should take at least 1 turn to take effect (fortifying them at the current turn has no effect, it only applies next turn) in order to make sure that players do not exploit this by being on the defensive all the time, and causing offensive maneuvers to be sub-par compared to the defensive pose. This sphere of influence or zone of control can be adjusted to be 1 to 2 hexes away from the unit depending on which one is more balanced overall. This will avoid the problem of (2), and allow 1 naval unit to easily guard up to 3 or more embarked units. The naval unit can then attack any target within its radius next turn (direct attack, not bombard from range), but forfeit its zone of control for that attacking turn, forcing players to choose some units to fortify and yield this bonus, while assigning others the task of being on the offensive in order to avoid the fortified ship from losing its bonus. The fortified unit, however, can still be allowed to bombard targets within its range of control, since bombard damage is noticeably weaker compared to direct attacks. I suggest extending the radius to 2 hexes for larger battleships, while making it only 1 hex for smaller ships. A larger radius will make it less problematic to get your ships to move along with your transports (you can just form a chain of 3 battleships in fortified mode, then move transports along, while getting smaller ships to escort them).

4) A combination of (1), (2) and (3) is possibly the best proposition; an ability for the embarked units to defend themselves, for them to be stacked with for more protection, and finally a zone of control to relinquish opportunistic enemies of the ability to flank them too easily. These changes can also benefit aircraft carriers as well, since aircraft carriers are similarly quite vulnerable, enabling them to seek refuge from incoming enemy vessels.

<Squeaks!>

[Sombra]

Dont see a mayor problem here. Either clear out the enemy beforehand or bring more ships.

Helpful would be to be able to move units in their positon as a group aka marking all untis and they take their step from the slowest unit in the fleet

[Varus2319]

Naval combat in this game is different than it used to be, and it takes some getting used to.

For one thing, naval units that are nearby to the embarked units are not as effective as you would immediately think. What you need is for your navy to be deployed FAR from your embarked units, to catch the enemy outside its movement range. Thus you can start chasing them and box them in before they reach your convoy.

So in the game, like in the real world, the trick is to get to the enemy far before they reach you.

Thus, you actually need a few ships in close in order to close ranks quickly, but you also need a few ships way out, scouting around and blanketing the sea with LOS.

[shadowxavier]

As we have experienced you can not stack embarked military units with ships. You can only have a ship traveling nearby the unit. But this does not protect it from being killed by enemy ship coming outside the fog of war. Even if you dominate the sea you can not ensure unit coming to the enemy shore alive.

I have played islands game and AI killed half of my land invasion forces just with 2 caravels, I had 4 frigates traveling not far from them. Zones of control do not work. Unless you play Songhai your transport fleet will always be defendless

Try speaking to war veterans from the american\english trade and supply convoys passing the atlantic during the World War II. Ask them if they were ever in fear of being torpedoed, even with up to six escort destroyers in formation while crossing.

Fact is, in real life, heavy protection is not a guarantee for you not loosing your ships. Its war, its a risk... just be glad that this game aint a pushover!

[Ash_F]

Clear the seas of enemy ships before sending a landing party over. They can at most hide 1 ship in each city.

[kaybeebiscuits]

Naval combat in this game is different than it used to be, and it takes some getting used to.

For one thing, naval units that are nearby to the embarked units are not as effective as you would immediately think. What you need is for your navy to be deployed FAR from your embarked units, to catch the enemy outside its movement range. Thus you can start chasing them and box them in before they reach your convoy.

So in the game, like in the real world, the trick is to get to the enemy far before they reach you.

Thus, you actually need a few ships in close in order to close ranks quickly, but you also need a few ships way out, scouting around and blanketing the sea with LOS.

Yeah, that is the real world's style of handling naval confrontations. Germany would have been able to invade England if that were not the case.

However, the problem with Civ 5 is that the line of sight of the units are not far enough to usually spot enemy vessels way before they can make an attack. Especially with England's bonus, you can get a ship to move up to 10+ hexes in a turn, allowing them to occasionally bypass securities to assault the transports right away. If there is a restraint on this, it is the fact that only 1 attack order can be carried out in any turn, preventing a few naval units from wiping out the entire armada.

That said, even though realism is highly desired in many cases, it seems like there is a universal law of progression in gaming which I have observed across games: "Realism tends to be exchanged for simplicity and pure abstraction over time." Maybe it is just for the sake of convenience that empowers this law. Same for Civ 5, I think people do not fancy the idea of being unable to fully protect one's own invading forces; they want simplicity over the idea of realism, possibly due to having been accustomed to it in the previous Civ predecessors, or it may just be due to the fact that having to load back again and again just to prevent the loss of some units defeats results in a case of "game failure" that is akin to the concept of governmental failure or market failure where allocation fails to naturally meet its supposed ends. Developers and players may simply just want a 100% method of insuring their units against losses, and imputing realism into the mix simply defeats that purpose.

( >^-^)> Squeak! <(^-^< )