Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Naval Dominance Paradox

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Soryn Arkayn's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    531

    Default Naval Dominance Paradox

    Has anyone else experienced the "naval dominance paradox" wherein the player's faction is so strong by the time First, Second, and Third Rates become available that it's seemingly futile to produce them.

    This certainly has been my experience in my current campaign as GB, as well as my previous campaign (until it was killed by CTD bugs in 1756). In the summer of 1741, my first four First Rates launched from my shipyards: two regular Firsts, an Admiral's First, and a Heavy First. I declared war against the Spain the same turn, and the next turn I used my "First Rate Fleet" to blockade Spain's mainland ports.

    Unfortunately, the Spanish "home fleets" refused to fight my vastly superior navy, and they remained holed up in their harbours for several turns while I conquered Spain's colonies and provinces in Italy, and sank most of their trade fleets. Finally I figured out a trick to lure out the Spanish fleet by sending a lone ship into their interception zone, and then relying on nearby reinforcements to win the battle. This trick succeeded -- although I made the mistake of using my Heavy First as bait and it was severely damaged -- and I captured a Spanish Second and Third Rate in one battle, and two Fourths in another battle.

    Now the only two Spanish fleets remain, which are mostly comprised of Fluyts and Galleons, as well as a few Fourths, Fifths, and several smaller ships.

    My point is that if the player is successful in his/her campaign, it's far too easy to outclass and overwhelm enemy factions' fleets.

    After I destroy the Spanish, the only naval power that remains is the Ottomans, and from what I've seen, their fleets are mostly comprised of countless light ships, as opposed to "Rated" warships like the Western European factions' navies. Likewise for the Indian factions, whom I haven't declared war on yet.

    So now that I have the most powerful navy in the world, I have no worthy enemies to fight.

    This is why I wish the AI was much, much smarter than it is, so that another faction could be a worthy rival. Or, better yet, that CA patched in multiplayer campaigns -- as they claimed they would. At least competing against another human player would be a challenge, and ideally both players would establish mighty, global empires before they inevitably fought each other for world domination. I'd love to compete in epic naval battles in a campaign game -- instead of just lame multiplayer battles.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    CA just created the naval battles,but in fact in the grand campaign it is completely broken,they focused in an age when trades and fleets played a memoral part,but in fact nothing like this happen in this game.
    what a great potential have this game,and it is extremely sad to see the AI completely dumb,uncapable to handle his fleets,even more than his army!
    it is a clear sign that the game is unfinished,there is no fun in play ETW for me untill they will realease(hopefully) a patch that fix at least A.I in naval and land strategy map.






  3. #3

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    Quote Originally Posted by Preussen Gloria View Post
    CA just created the naval battles,but in fact in the grand campaign it is completely broken,they focused in an age when trades and fleets played a memoral part,but in fact nothing like this happen in this game.
    what a great potential have this game,and it is extremely sad to see the AI completely dumb,uncapable to handle his fleets,even more than his army!
    it is a clear sign that the game is unfinished,there is no fun in play ETW for me untill they will realease(hopefully) a patch that fix at least A.I in naval and land strategy map.
    LOL a patch to fix AI? That's a good one.
    I got one word for you, buddy: Mods.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    Your fundamental assumption is flawed, methinks. You're assuming that time and research strength equate to a drop in your enemies' military might, so that as you say by the time you've researched and built them, your navy is useless.

    I can only speak from my own experience, but I tend to play the nations of the east - the Ottomans, Russians, and Indians, and I can absolutely assure you that in all the campaigns I've played, I am the one struggling to build naval power to match the seemingly unlimited navies of the western powers. Spain, in particular, seems to have an inexhaustable supply of high (1st - 3rd) rated ships.

    I would consider your situation a triumph of research and military expansion, rather than a sad place to be at the top.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    You started TWO threads on your naval battle against the Spanish?

    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=250676

    LOL

  6. #6

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    Quote Originally Posted by worm00 View Post
    You started TWO threads on your naval battle against the Spanish?
    i was thinking so too...

  7. #7

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    Umm double thread?

  8. #8

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    I kinda agree with OP. Unless you're playing a harder faction like Ottoman, it's really easy to build up a strong navy from nothing, and proceed to own everything.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    I've fought a number of fights against enemy 2nd-rate fleets, but sadly the AI never builds 1st rates as it seems they always upgrade their ports to the naval hospital as soon as that tech gets unlocked.

  10. #10
    Thorn's Avatar Artifex
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    2,194

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    Quote Originally Posted by Darthey View Post
    I've fought a number of fights against enemy 2nd-rate fleets, but sadly the AI never builds 1st rates as it seems they always upgrade their ports to the naval hospital as soon as that tech gets unlocked.
    False, my first 1st Rate ship was one i captured from Great Britain and they aslo has 2 3rd rate ships in that fleet

  11. #11
    the_mango55's Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    20,753

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    Quote Originally Posted by Naimad View Post
    False, my first 1st Rate ship was one i captured from Great Britain and they aslo has 2 3rd rate ships in that fleet
    Were you playing RTI?

    They build first rates all the time in that.

    Probably because the AI already has all the techs researched, so they will actually build steam drydocks rather than upgrading to naval hospitals as soon as they are available.
    ttt
    Adopted son of Lord Sephiroth, Youngest sibling of Pent uP Rage, Prarara the Great, Nerwen Carnesîr, TB666 and, Boudicca. In the great Family of the Black Prince

  12. #12

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    Quote Originally Posted by the_mango55 View Post
    Were you playing RTI?

    They build first rates all the time in that.

    Probably because the AI already has all the techs researched, so they will actually build steam drydocks rather than upgrading to naval hospitals as soon as they are available.
    Hardly, in my GC as Prussians the United Provinces were the first to deploy a Steam Ship followed by a heavy rate.

    By 2/3 of the game, the English, Turks, UP, and Spainish had dozens of powerful navies lurking the waters. The French couldn't keep a navy as they were blasted to pieces by the English and United Provinces.

    In fact in all 3 games I've played, the AI always techs up faster than me....
    Last edited by nameless; April 16, 2009 at 11:15 PM.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    It depends on which faction you play.The main naval powers are GB, france and spain. If you play one of these you can assume dominance fairly early on. The other nations will build up too, but it's definently the elast challanging position to play. Austria, prussia, russia and maratha all start off with no fleets, and soem with no ports so it takes a while for them to build up. UP has a large fleet but it's mostly underpowered and you have only trade ports so it's a bit of a challange to get a fleet that can compete with other.

    I play with IS now as austria and i've recently aquired a shipyard and am starting to build a small fleet. There are many more navies about though, prussia (which grew quite large) has a large fleet, even gerogia has one.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    In my Prussian game I worked the begining of the game more with my tech/industry and land armies. This allowed me to develop a strong central empire to which I could later build a fleet. Much like Peter I of Russia, I felt that to become a world power I would need not only a strong land empire, but a strong naval fleet(s). Around 1760 or so I started building a fleet, which after about 10 years developed into quite a great naval power. This allowed me to form an overseas empire as well.

    In my current GB game it is about 1750 or so, and I am the most powerful naval power in the world. It did take some work, but starting off with a small force, a naval shipyard, and overseas colonies help a lot!

    In conclusion: It is easier to develop an overpowering navy with one of the three big powers, but this is what's supposed to happen. For the developing nations it's possible to build an overpowering fleet, but you have to work at it, and fight many battles to take your spot at the top.

    If you think that your fleets are so powerful that it's making the game boring. Cut your fleet, and see what you can do with limited resources, or keep your massive fleet, but occupy your time working on another facet of the game where you are lacking. That way you can possibly fail but still have a fleet to mop up the mess that you make.
    Last edited by Draknith; April 16, 2009 at 12:21 PM.

  15. #15

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    Thats not a paradox.
    They close my modication thread DWWTW ='( please help evryone.

  16. #16
    Soryn Arkayn's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    531

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    Quote Originally Posted by Draknith View Post
    In my Prussian game I worked the begining of the game more with my tech/industry and land armies. This allowed me to develop a strong central empire to which I could later build a fleet. Much like Peter I of Russia, I felt that to become a world power I would need not only a strong land empire, but a strong naval fleet(s). Around 1760 or so I started building a fleet, which after about 10 years developed into quite a great naval power. This allowed me to form an overseas empire as well.

    In my current GB game it is about 1750 or so, and I am the most powerful naval power in the world. It did take some work, but starting off with a small force, a naval shipyard, and overseas colonies help a lot!

    In conclusion: It is easier to develop an overpowering navy with one of the three big powers, but this is what's supposed to happen. For the developing nations it's possible to build an overpowering fleet, but you have to work at it, and fight many battles to take your spot at the top.

    If you think that your fleets are so powerful that it's making the game boring. Cut your fleet, and see what you can do with limited resources, or keep your massive fleet, but occupy your time working on another facet of the game where you are lacking. That way you can possibly fail but still have a fleet to mop up the mess that you make.
    I admit that I've only played as GB thus far (because I haven't been able to complete a campaign yet because of CTD bugs and other problems), but I can't imagine that playing as a land-locked faction, like Austria, could be so different than GB, France, or Spain. If I was playing as Austria, I'd simply attack a faction with coastal provinces, build a shipyard, and gradually build up my fleet while I continued to expand my empire on land.

  17. #17

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    I thought a paradox allowed you to build ships twice as fast as only one dox would, hence the ensuing naval dominance...

  18. #18

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    Quote Originally Posted by JAMiAM View Post
    I thought a paradox allowed you to build ships twice as fast as only one dox would, hence the ensuing naval dominance...
    RDRR

  19. #19

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    Yup a paradox is like an impossibility of something happening or ending, like time travelling (and killing yourself)

  20. #20
    Soryn Arkayn's Avatar Decanus
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    531

    Default Re: Naval Dominance Paradox

    Quote Originally Posted by nodey View Post
    Thats not a paradox.
    I suggest that you look up the definition of "paradox" in a dictionary, because what I wrote regarding naval dominance is analogous to the classical Roman quote of "he who desires peace must prepare for war."
    Quote Originally Posted by DM>IS View Post
    Yup a paradox is like an impossibility of something happening or ending, like time travelling (and killing yourself)
    There are several definitions of "paradox"; a seemingly "impossible" contradiction is merely one meaning.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •