No Naval Battles in 3K folks.

[Daruwind]

What's odd is that these kinds of battles are similar or easily adaptable to what CA featured in TWR2 and Attila. Think of a typical town port battle in either game. It's hard to imagine why they can't just transform the "ocean" into a wide river and have the same kinds of operations...I'm going to offer a wild guess and say it has to do with hero units not functioning well aboard naval vessels.

Reason is the same why there are no ambushes in ToB. In attila according to CA´s stats ambushes were like 0,0 something of all battles. And similar claim was about naval battles that players are almost not playing them. It sucks if you have finite resources you can either put them in this kind of battle or add something else...

I can find you sources (ToB/Attila was one blog post, naval battles was in one youtube video recently about 3K so either Invicta,Milkand Cookies, Spartacus, PartyElite) however there is no point if you are not willing to accept the reason and logic for it...

[Huberto]

I can find you sources (ToB/Attila was one blog post, naval battles was in one youtube video recently about 3K so either Invicta,Milkand Cookies, Spartacus, PartyElite) however there is no point if you are not willing to accept the reason and logic for it...

The question shouldn't be so narrowly framed. Deciding what goes into a 3K should start by looking at the world of 3K and asking, were there naval battles? If the answer is yes, in fact there were numerous and decisive naval battles in combo with land forces then you have your answer. If can't bring a major arm of the tactical world of the period to life, then you don't have a 3K game. You certainly don't start with asking whether people play naval battles in Attila or TWR2. It's a NEW game, set in a NEW era remember?

[Intranetusa]

Reason is the same why there are no ambushes in ToB. In attila according to CA´s stats ambushes were like 0,0 something of all battles. And similar claim was about naval battles that players are almost not playing them. It sucks if you have finite resources you can either put them in this kind of battle or add something else...

I can find you sources (ToB/Attila was one blog post, naval battles was in one youtube video recently about 3K so either Invicta,Milkand Cookies, Spartacus, PartyElite) however there is no point if you are not willing to accept the reason and logic for it...

Yet they're bringing ambushes back by having it in 3K TW. So the statistics justification of "people don't play it often" that CA used is basically nonsense.

People didn't play ambush battles in Attila TW because the mechanic was poorly implemented and it was hard to even get an ambush battle in the first place. They played it more in WH when it was better implemented.

The same goes for naval battles. Fix and improve the mechanic and more people will play it. Leave it buggy and broken like RTW2's naval battles and people won't play it.

[Intranetusa]

Let's not forget that Wei tried to invade Wu multiple times with a naval fleet, and Jin's conquest of Wu was only possible with a large naval invasion in support of their land troops.

Removing naval battles is crippling Wu's naval and marine advantage.

[captainkrunch]

Can the OP contact a moderator with the following poll request? Ask people if they look forward to playing a naval engagement with the options to say Yes, No, Not Sure, and Don't Care. The results will likely be different than what people expect them to be.

If I had the choice to design a poll where the question is "Do you want Naval Battles in the game" it would be a simple yes and no question. I highly dislike polls that you often see that have 50 different answers. Yes and No is more than enough.

Also CA has never once brought up naval battle statistics, in fact CA has only ever talked about Naval Battles on Record twice, never once directly with the community. The Statistics argument is one used by people who are -speculating- that there might have been a low percentage of people playing naval battles, not people with actual data. I wouldn't blame them for R2 and Attila, those battles were awful as opposed to Shogun 2's even if you just used traditional ships.

And yes while Naval battles were often fought alongside land battles that isn;t really relevant IMO, naval battles were still fought.

[Daruwind]

Yea we are getting back ambushes and i´m glad for it. And I´m also playing naval battles and liking them too, it doesn´t mean i agree with CA´s decision especially as one nation is supposed to be naval power. However i can understand it. Tha naval warfare in 3K period is somewhat similar to Shogun 2 and that was probably the weakest in terms of fun and etc. Just try to make order of how good it was. Mine is like Empire/Napoleon, R2/Attila, FotS, Shogun 2. So i would also prefer CA trying to fix it/make it fun but of they think it cannot be done, i would not waste resources on it. Better no naval combat than the bad one...

[PointOfViewGun]

If I had the choice to design a poll where the question is "Do you want Naval Battles in the game" it would be a simple yes and no question. I highly dislike polls that you often see that have 50 different answers. Yes and No is more than enough.

Also CA has never once brought up naval battle statistics, in fact CA has only ever talked about Naval Battles on Record twice, never once directly with the community. The Statistics argument is one used by people who are -speculating- that there might have been a low percentage of people playing naval battles, not people with actual data. I wouldn't blame them for R2 and Attila, those battles were awful as opposed to Shogun 2's even if you just used traditional ships.

And yes while Naval battles were often fought alongside land battles that isn;t really relevant IMO, naval battles were still fought.

Any poll should have the options to say Not Sure, and Don't Care. You can ask a moderator to add a poll to this thread.

[Daruwind]

Also CA has never once brought up naval battle statistics, in fact CA has only ever talked about Naval Battles on Record twice

I remember recent youtube video, saying that they (youtubers) asked CA and reply was that a few players are actually playing naval battles instead of autoresolving. It was either PartyElire,Invicta,MilkandCookies or Italian Spartacus. But it was just such note in the video, i can dig it up if anybody needs it.

I would love naval battles too, probably even bringing in Japans, Taiwan,Korea...but if CA doesn´t know how to fix it to make it actually fun and worth time for more players..Then I can understand the logic, while not liking it..

[Anna_Gein]

It sucks. Same old CA keeps removing features from their game.

I feel like 3K does not offer anything new except 'China'. Ok there is duel but that's hardly a strategy feature.

[Daruwind]

It sucks. Same old CA keeps removing features from their game.

I feel like 3K does not offer anything new except 'China'. Ok there is duel but that's hardly a strategy feature.

Ambushes are back, agents are merged with generals, no naval battles.

Characters? Whole social system between them?

We have no idea about province,building system and many other parts of game.

[Anna_Gein]

Ambushes are back ? That's cool. Ambushes were great in Rome 2 and Attila.

[Daruwind]

Ambushes are back ? That's cool. Ambushes were great in Rome 2 and Attila.

yeah, you haven´t seen the recent ambush gameplay video? The night one? Many other youtubers covered this demo as well... There were some new info from gamescon, i added some links to video thread:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...1#post15645996

[Anna_Gein]

I saw it but it looked to me like an scripted battle. Not something that can happen during the campaign.

[captainkrunch]

Well yes obviously this battle was somewhat scripted like a Historical Battle in previous TW games, but Ambushes are a thing, that is confirmed, and the idea of rushing to the extraction point and still surviving the ambush is also a thing that can be done.

[14182]

How can armies go across Yangtze and Yellow River when there are no naval battles?

Let them get into a pier, show some animations like trade routes in previous games, and then the stack of army comes out from pier on the other side in the next turn?

[tentaku]

Yeah, but what happened during these battles? Were they any different from naval battles during the age of antiquity (and people complained about naval battles in Rome II/Atilla being too boring)?

There are no "real" naval battle comparable to western world. BUT, there are a lot of close interaction between naval units and land units. Many people listed battles in the Yangtze River region, but the pivotal battle where Liu Bei established his kingdom, the Hanzhong Campaign, also saw use of naval units to cut supply lines, and that region is not the typical Yangtze River region.
If anything, CA should revolutionize naval battle in this title, and allow close interaction between land units and naval units together in one battle map.

[Intranetusa]

I remember recent youtube video, saying that they (youtubers) asked CA and reply was that a few players are actually playing naval battles instead of autoresolving. It was either PartyElire,Invicta,MilkandCookies or Italian Spartacus. But it was just such note in the video, i can dig it up if anybody needs it.

I would love naval battles too, probably even bringing in Japans, Taiwan,Korea...but if CA doesn´t know how to fix it to make it actually fun and worth time for more players..Then I can understand the logic, while not liking it..

It's the same justification they tried to use for removing ambush battles in the previous historical title...before adding ambush battles back in the next historical title.


Ambush was extremely hard to trigger in the previous historical titles, so it was obvious that people didn't play it very much.


Instead of fixing the mechanic and making it so it is easier to trigger and more fun to play, they remove it entirely and give us some bogus excuse.

[sinuhe2]

As usual CA is becoming lazier and removes features less time to invest in progrsmming less effort yo improve and add New mechaniks, in the end the kind of game that fanBoys want an arcade one

[sinuhe2]

I the end Ill choose imperator of paradox seeing the lack of deepness and seeing how I waste money on thrones of britannia

[Daruwind]

It's the same justification they tried to use for removing ambush battles in the previous historical title...before adding ambush battles back in the next historical title.

Ambush was extremely hard to trigger in the previous historical titles, so it was obvious that people didn't play it very much.

Instead of fixing the mechanic and making it so it is easier to trigger and more fun to play, they remove it entirely and give us some bogus excuse.

But ambushes are fixed in HWs and 3K! CA removed ambushes only for ToB due to being build upon Attila. Guess there are certain engine limitation...
Same with agents,they are removed for ToB but better version is in WHs and 3K will merge them with characters.
We are only missing naval combat in 3K and as well in Whs. And I´m too missing it, i like naval combat but i can in both these games understand why. 3K will be very similar to Shogun2, which is quite clumsy and probably the worst so far and Whs have very weird naval combat. Basically every race has different models, style of gameplay. People are pointing out how some troops jump through air during boarding actions in R2 and almost all factions have similar ships there...WH is complete mess. Viking ships, undead sea monster carcasses, galeons, gun ships, magic ships, flying units, black archs....