HOI4 Dev Diary - Naval Updates

[sterrius]

3. Dispersion to protect convoys. The British especially, were forced to assign battleships to convoy protection against the risk of a breakout of the German surface raiders. It seems to me that surface raiders are not as scary in the game as they were in real life. If a German battlecruiser had got amongst a convoy, the result would have been devastating in terms of shipping and material loss. Doesn't seem as scary to me in the game, and so my fleet stays concentrated. (Although perhaps others have had different experiences.)

To make a surface raiding fleet you will manage quite a good sucess if you use BC´s with +5 on speed.
When raiding the units will only stay in battle until the convoys are killed. So that means if you are fast enough you can close in, shoot the convoys and run.

A BC 1940 with +5 speed upgrade can reach something like 40 and really "fly" to the convoys and use their long range to target the convoys before the escort can close in and place themselves beetween the enemy BC and their target.

Some LC´s III can also give some cover as they can keep up with the BC.

Only real counter for that is carriers. That will make this strategy useless. Reason its very risky to pull it off.

@NewEnglander

 

[egslim]

Speaking of convoys: we have changed how raiding works and how losses in convoy efficiency is handled. Convoy sinkings is now tracked by strategic area rather than route, meaning that if several routes go through an area that is being raided, they will all be affected rather than single routes randomly being hit. This makes things much more predictable and you can’t get around efficiency hits by suddenly stopping a trade or a change in supply situation. The actual effect of a sunken convoy depends on how many are active (so if there are two convoys shipping stuff and one gets sunk thats a big impact, but if it’s 50 then it is pretty minor). The efficiency itself reacts slowly a bit per day to avoid jumps and weirdness. This solution means that it’s possible to keep convoy efficiency for the enemy low as long as you raid enough.

Question: Will the AI attempt to re-route convoys away from strategic areas that are being raided?

For Britain, only supply convoys to Malta need to pass through the Med. All other convoys should re-route around Africa, for as long as Italy actively raids the Central Med.

We have also changed how transports interception is handled. Before it was possible to send a sacrificial transport first, and have it get caught by the enemy fleet as the rest of your transport fleet sailed past to invade the enemy. Now ships in combat are still able to detect transports for this case and “suck” them into the same combat. This should fix multiple exploits The way it looks on map (as the later transports may get caught in a different location) is that we show a special combat indicator over them and clicking on that sends you to the main combat in the zone.

Great! This means the RN and RAF will finally be able to defend the UK from invasion, a they did historically.

 

[NewEnglander]

Countries were definitely careful about capital ship deployment, but there were quite a few air attacks on BBs all the same. One of the things that struck me (and I know Perth wasn't a BB - but still quite vulnerable to air attack) was that HMAS Perth received over 200 air attacks while on duty in the Med, for one hit (and a couple of slightly-damaging near misses). As you say, though, parking ships underneath enemy air cover for long periods of time was not particularly sensible, and not likely to end well .

In terms of HoI4 at the moment, I find air power tends to 'attrit away' ships - the way that air attacks on ships work, it's not really feasible for a handful of land-based aircraft to make a few critical strikes and sink a Prince of Wales in one battle - I don't think I've ever seen that happen - but it is possible for land-based air-power to keep 'chipping away' at a fleet and do very serious damage that way. Land-based air power is at its most dangerous when there's already a naval battle happening (so there are ships/subs on both sides, so the battle lasts more than one hour) where repeated land-based attacks can wear ships down in the war carrier-based airpower can over the days-long course of a battle.

It is the case in the game that if you park your ships in the Channel or the Adriatic, and the AI wants to bomb them, that it can be quite damaging - I've taken ships off missions in areas (I think the Western and Central Med) because of enemy air power alone being too much for my fleet (including carriers) to deal with.

But in both cases, it tends to be "multiple small strikes" that wear ships down, rather than the kind of low-probability, high-return hits that turned battles at the Coral Sea, Midway and the like - so instead of a small number of aircraft making quite decisive hits, it's lots of aircraft all making fairly small hits, adding up over time. That's just my impression though - I haven't tested it scientifically .

That's an interesting point you raise, and I've been pondering it. Why weren't more capital ships sunk by land-based aircraft? If carrier-based aircraft can sink a battleship, land-based should have been as well. I'm thinking that valuable ships were generally kept out of harm's way (which goes back to my original suggestion for the game), and also that oftentimes the land-based aircraft weren't specialized or properly designed for sinking ships (e.g. B17s in Battle of Midway).

To the general point, do you agree there's something not quite right about the way the naval war plays out? (Giving all credit to designers, who have built a generally amazing game.)

What are those links to naval mods in your footer? They look intriguing...

 

[Axe99]

That's an interesting point you raise, and I've been pondering it. Why weren't more capital ships sunk by land-based aircraft? If carrier-based aircraft can sink a battleship, land-based should have been as well. I'm thinking that valuable ships were generally kept out of harm's way (which goes back to my original suggestion for the game), and also that oftentimes the land-based aircraft weren't specialized or properly designed for sinking ships (e.g. B17s in Battle of Midway).

In terms of the overall score, not counting those sunk in port, I think the score for land-based and carrier-based isn't far off (if we're just talking BBs/BCs, no way I can do CAs off the top of my head ). That said, there were issues with the coordination of land-based aircraft with naval forces, which had an impact (particularly early war).

To the general point, do you agree there's something not quite right about the way the naval war plays out? (Giving all credit to designers, who have built a generally amazing game.)

I think that it's the best naval war in the HoI series so far, but there's a lot of room for improvement. I'd actually rate commerce warfare as far-and-away the bit that needs attention first. The naval war should be all about sea lines of communication (SLOCs), but at the moment it's far more about bashing doomstacks into each other for no particular reason if the AI is involved, and the commerce warfare (and detection) mechanics mean it's far too easy to protect against a submarine or surface raider campaign.

What are those links to naval mods in your footer? They look intriguing...

They're a couple of mods I put together with a focus on the naval game. TWAS is more involved than the OOB mod. I'd like to think they're at least worth a look, but I have to admit considerable bias in this view . Note that TWAS works well for what it does, but I'm hoping to get a chance to expand on what it does on the future (but it's in 'care and maintenance' at the moment).

 

[brisduv]

I feel the naval aspect of HOI4, like its ancestors (1 2 & 3) is the weakest element of the game. I am looking forward to the changes in the new expansion.

 

[Wraith11B]

@Axe99 I wonder if instead of a 2d panel where the ships are generally from top-down as they progress in size if the game wouldn't be better with a more 2d x/y Cartesian plane which would permit groups centered on a carrier to "circle" while those centered on BB/BC/CA would form a line or lines. Tactics, much like on land, dictate what "gets done" be it launching air strikes, or sending destroyers to conduct a torpedo attack to force away enemy ships. Reconnaissance and visibility would play a role in getting into the fight and out of it.

 

[Axe99]

@Axe99 I wonder if instead of a 2d panel where the ships are generally from top-down as they progress in size if the game wouldn't be better with a more 2d x/y Cartesian plane which would permit groups centered on a carrier to "circle" while those centered on BB/BC/CA would form a line or lines. Tactics, much like on land, dictate what "gets done" be it launching air strikes, or sending destroyers to conduct a torpedo attack to force away enemy ships. Reconnaissance and visibility would play a role in getting into the fight and out of it.

The Rule the Waves is strong with this thought . My guess (and it's just a guess) would be that it's much more difficult to code that kind of approach, but it definitely sounds like a good angle from my angle .

 

[sterrius]

@Wraith11B

Something like this? (Of course ignore the terrain and menu to make things simple for PDX ).

if yes it would open a lot of possibilities for naval battles and even air battles as now ships could actually function a lot more like in the real world with each of them having their own AI and job to do.

No more we would see 300 DD´s fighting each other at same time with 100+ subs also joining in with 4-8 carriers unprotected on the back launching planes and capital ships firing at each other with distance and speed counting for almost nothing.

With this things like Width, ships avoiding colision, and other things can become part of the battle just like it was in real life.

 

[Wraith11B]

Yeah, I would think something like that would be nice, and Axe is right: it's probably difficult to code, but for the Naval update I'd expect that P'dox would look at everything.

 

[sterrius]

going for this would be very close to what they did on stellaris. (As stellaris is essentially a 2D battle with each ship having its own AI).

 

[Walderschmidt]

going for this would be very close to what they did on stellaris. (As stellaris is essentially a 2D battle with each ship having its own AI).

If they took the Stellaris model for ships and thier combat and applied it to HOI IV I would $%# in my pants.

Wald

 

[safe-keeper]

That would be pretty cool, actually. I just don't know if deeper combat systems like that would work too well in a hectic game like HOI.

Come to think of it, HOI4 already has a Stellaris-esque combat system. You have an "arena" with ships moving around in said arena, and combat takes place in more-or-less real-time. The main difference is that in HOI4 it's a 2D screen, whereas in Stellaris it's in 3D and you have some more movement freedom.

My main wishes for the naval aspect of the game other than fixes is more features and depth, though. Like patrol and escort craft and/or a zone of control system around harbours that interdict convoys (would also fix the "Japanese suicide convoys in the English channel" bug); more control of convoys, and perhaps different kinds of convoys; improvised means of moving troops (troops on destroyers, requisitioning civilian craft like at Dunkirk, etc.); ships invading harbours, shooting it out with coastal forts like in Weserubung, and the list goes on.

 

[Wraith11B]

I have to agree. I don't feel like the Battle for the Atlantic is much of a "thing" in HoI, and it really never has been. Convoys were serious business during the War, with scheduling, escorting, fighting and intelligence all playing huge roles in them. Convoys were also not a constant/daily thing, but organized. Wiki has a pretty good bunch of blurbs about the various convoys, this was chosen at random:

"A total of 377 [HX] convoys ran in the campaign, conveying a total of about 20,000 ships. 38 convoys were attacked (about 10%), resulting in losses of 110 ships in convoy; a further 60 lost straggling, and 36 while detached or after dispersal, with losses from marine accident and other causes, for a total loss of 206 ships, or about 1% of the total."

or this one:

"The Arctic route was the shortest and most direct route for lend-lease aid to the USSR, though it was also the most dangerous. Some 3,964,000 tons of goods were shipped by the Arctic route; 7% was lost, while 93% arrived safely.[11] This constituted some 23% of the total aid to the USSR during the war."

Obviously, I don't think we want to keep track of the 2710 Liberty and 531 Victory ships that were built, but something has to make it a bit more obvious and a little less "meh" feeling.

 

[Axe99]

Obviously, I don't think we want to keep track of the 2710 Liberty and 531 Victory ships that were built, but something has to make it a bit more obvious and a little less "meh" feeling.

Not to mention the merchant ships built by Britain/Canada and Japan .

 

[Dutchr]

1) Is there any update on Naval targeting in naval battles?

I've always been annoyed how a Battleship or a Super Battleship will waste time targeting destroyers. Ships should go after the greatest threat in range they can damage.

Super Battleships may start with taking pot shots at destroyers but should switch to targeting battleships, battleships should target other battleships or heavy cruisers, etc.

The whole shooting at destroyers no matter what thing didn't ever make sense. An escorting fleet of destroyers will be killed but the SHBB won't have its paint scratched (multiple targeting by larger ships also makes sense especially at closer range where secondary weapons are available). Escorts often aren't even necessary as capital ships have a magical ability to stand off and disengage from everything.

2) What about AI wasting their entire navy in the first six months of the war? Is this problem fixed? I've seen times where all AI combatants had about six ships in total in a game.

3) I hope submarines "sneak" into battle now. Anything like a big fast warship (basically any warship was faster than a sub) should get away easily (subs really should avoid them) but convoys that aren't protected should be sunk before the player can react if ships aren't put on escort in the region. Sailing a fleet 2,000 miles to defend a convoy already engaged by enemy subs never felt right (and defeats the purpose of subs). Subs locked into a month long battle the entire enemy player's fleet can muster to isn't right. It would also be realistic if ships heavily damaged were forced to slow down making them much more vulnerable to subs and enemy fleets. A ship 50% damaged should have 70% the speed (not always historical but it would help as damaged ships were usually slower; make the ship slower after the battle ends [I think slower in the battle would make already bloody naval battles all the more bloody and max speed decrease should be about 70%]). MANY warships were lost to subs but usually when they were damaged, coming in/out of port, etc.

4) "Kiting" by carrier fleets would also a nice feature. (Kiting is where the carrier and her escorts engage the enemy but stay out of range). Carriers kite in the game but the escorts do not.

 

[Cyro]

I hope more updates come to make naval battles more immersive.

 

[billcorr]

I hope more updates come to make naval battles more immersive.

@Cyro, What would be one thing you'd like to see to make the naval battle more immersive?

Just curious.

 

[billcorr]

Not to mention the merchant ships built by Britain/Canada and Japan .

Right.

Canada.

Punched above its weight in producing small craft in WW2.

(but not capital ships, mind you. But we've discussed that before...and will again, most likely. )

 

[indignanthedgehog]

What would be one thing you'd like to see to make the naval battle more immersive?

Just curious.

More detailed OOB, with CVL, CVE, DEs, ect
mine warfare
proper supply system for landing troops without a port
Some sort of Fuel system for surface vessels to make running all ships at all times not the default
more in-depth ship research to better represent historical imbalances.
Proper mission system to make naval war more hands on
actual training and equipping of ships (to represent historical differences in both amount and focus of training, I want my Japanese night battle groups)
Redone supply system to represent stockpiling and losing equipment when convoys are sunk
Better system for submarines so they don't all kill themselves constantly
some others that I have written down but I can't remember off the top of my head

 

[Walderschmidt]

More detailed OOB, with CVL, CVE, DEs, ect
mine warfare
proper supply system for landing troops without a port
Some sort of Fuel system for surface vessels to make running all ships at all times not the default
more in-depth ship research to better represent historical imbalances.
Proper mission system to make naval war more hands on
actual training and equipping of ships (to represent historical differences in both amount and focus of training, I want my Japanese night battle groups)
Redone supply system to represent stockpiling and losing equipment when convoys are sunk
Better system for submarines so they don't all kill themselves constantly
some others that I have written down but I can't remember off the top of my head

Blockade system (to prevent supplies from going into a region/prevent them from going out and to prevent eny soldiers from leaving the port to greener pastures).

The fuel system could simulated with time:

Each ship in a fleet has a enough fuel to operate for a certain amount of time before they need to refuel - so find out roughly each ship class fuel time and then take the average of that and make that the operating time of a fleet.

Then, give the ability to extend that time by allowing the player to build fuel barges that could sail with the fleet. The more fuel barges, the bigger the operating time.

Make a naval bomber interface allowing them to prioritize certain ships (maybe the same for ships themselves?) so that your naval bombers don't waste their time attack a full health screen when a battleship is limping away.

Make a fight interface along similar lines (protect battleship/protect carrier etc).

Wald