Coastal defense range is too short

**Kinjo** · April 07, 2012, 07:24 PM

So one thing I have noticed is my ports with coastal batteries keep getting destroyed by naval bombardments. Apparently ships have longer range then coastal defense guns (on the campaign map) and can target ports with impunity. Personally I think the coastal guns should have the longer range for game play reasons alone other wise they are pretty useless on the campaign map. If a ship can fire on a port then the port should be able to fire back aka attrition damage if the port is not destroyed by the bombardment. Here are a couple of pics to show how ships can set outside the range of the coastal batteries and bombard the ports.

Ship's Range

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

Coastal Gun's Range

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

**StukaJr** · April 07, 2012, 09:04 PM

The Port in the screenshot is a Trade Port, doesn't Military Port get a higher level of defense?

It kinda makes sense that a mobile fleet can outrange coastal defenses - the latter is a static geographic location with a number of identifying geographical features for use in targeting (which can be calculated by a map), a much larger target and where near misses still cause damage... Ships can also bombard on the move. The only way a Coastal Battery of the era can engage the bombarding fleet is by sight.

**aeoleron9** · April 07, 2012, 10:41 PM

Yes armed ports need a buff, they're way too useless atm. Any gunboat can land a lucky shot and your expensive coastal guns are rendered useless.

**Lord Cornwallis** · April 07, 2012, 11:02 PM

From what I have seen the coastal batteries for the trading ports and dry docks have the same range. It doesn't make sense for ships of this period to out range larger or same caliber coastal guns since they still used los. Coastal guns are a counter and should be able to counter attack ships that can attack them. If you have read much on naval warfare of the this period you would know 1 coastal gun was worth 2-3 naval guns and are generally more accurate.

As for the subject of range I think they should have a slightly longer range due to firing from a stable platform. As annoying as the Ai can be with its suicidal 1 ship fleets the coastal batteries should be able to fend these off pretty easily BUT THEY CAN'T. I'll admit its rater silly to have these idiotic Ai ships sail around one of my small fleets to bombard one of my ports only to be attacked by my fleet the next turn.

**Yarkis de Bodemloze** · April 08, 2012, 01:46 AM

Ports have different defense ranges (trading port 8; drydock 12). The range of ships also scales with the type of ships with heavier ships having a longer range. Currently there is a bug with the damage calculation. 20% damage indicated on the bombardment screen transfers to 80% actual damage to the port. Even small fleets can completely destroy a port in one bombardment.

**spur390** · April 08, 2012, 05:48 AM

I do agree that having coastal defenses outrange ships makes for better gameplay and that should be the case even if history says otherwise.

**Humble Warrior** · April 08, 2012, 06:44 AM

Originally Posted by spur390

I do agree that having coastal defenses outrange ships makes for better gameplay and that should be the case even if history says otherwise.

Don`t agree. keep it realistic and let the Player figure it out like they did in the real thing.

Too much screwing with game mechanics and ruining what could be good.

**Kinjo** · April 08, 2012, 10:46 AM

I think there is enough historical resources out there to back coastal batteries were effective counters to naval guns for this period. Trading ports should have the same caliber/range to any of the ships that can be recruited there. The only ships that should have better range are the ships that can only be recruited from the military ports and dry docks. I do enjoy the coastal batteries on the sea scape just they were a little more effective on the campaign map.

Coastal guns pounding some weak wooden ship from its strong fixed concrete platform.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

**Ifernat** · April 08, 2012, 02:41 PM

I would agree that ports should have slightly higher ranges than their associated level of ships. Coastal emplacements in this time period typically mounted extremely heavy pieces often comparable to the pieces employed on the larger warships.

For example this was the initial primary armament of the HMS Warrior and a number of their other mid 19th century heavy warships http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/68-pounder_gun That was also a very common coastal emplacement. The British bought thousands of them.

Also the standard emplacement was likely to be pre-sighted and pre-ranged on the harbor channels.

**ryan1266** · April 09, 2012, 01:53 AM

I actually had success with port defences once... The enemy sailed up and bombarded my city (while sitting in range of my port). My navy was too damaged to intercept so I just had to take the damage. The turn that my navy repaired, the enemy sailed away, but I chased them down and intercepted them. To my surprise their ships were almost completely destroyed. I didn't even realize my port was doing damage, but it was really devastating the enemy

**Kinjo** · April 09, 2012, 06:54 AM

After experimenting with the different ports here are the ranges.

Dry dock 12
Military port 10
Western Trading port 10
Trading port 8

I was mainly having problems with my trading ports so I replace all of them with dry docks on the coasts that kept getting bombarded. So far so good I just had to reconfigure my ports a bit, it kind of sucks that I took large trade hit. The 12 range on the dry docks is pretty imposing and covers a large distance, I guess the only way to make trade port defenses useful is to have a small fleet within its radius.

**Ferdiad** · April 09, 2012, 07:31 AM

They should have a range upgrade for Ports if you research a specific tech.

**Lokgar** · April 09, 2012, 07:53 AM

Yeah, I've modded my game to have ranges higher, and also give the tier 2 port, dubbed "port" a fairly weak battery. Much better campaign experience imo.

**♘Top Hat Zebra** · April 09, 2012, 06:50 PM

Originally Posted by Lokgar

Yeah, I've modded my game to have ranges higher, and also give the tier 2 port, dubbed "port" a fairly weak battery. Much better campaign experience imo.

Can you.... Upload this? That would be pretty awesome, and you would get buckets of rep, Im sure.

@Ecthelion: Actually, at least, on normal, it is useful to bombard the AI.

I've taken out all their ports, and most of their infrastructure this way. They are unable to produce ships to counter mine!

**Lokgar** · April 09, 2012, 09:08 PM

Originally Posted by ♘Top Hat Zebra

Can you.... Upload this? That would be pretty awesome, and you would get buckets of rep, Im sure.

Not trying to dodge you or anything, but I'm looking through my data files and I can not find out where the

I put that pack.
I must have hidden the changes within one of the radious packs I've had... I'll search around.

**Ecthelion** · April 09, 2012, 08:33 AM

Complete agree with the thread starter. The coastal bombardment issue is becoming the center of gravity for the entire game. 80% of my efforts seems to revolve around defending against it.

And doing it back against the AI is useless, since the AI seems to draw from some endless money pit, you just waste money training and upkeeping gunboats.

**DeliCiousTZM** · April 09, 2012, 11:06 AM

You guys are all silly goose ofc Coastal defence should reach further then ships bombarding them anything else would render them useless.

And for your information a gunboat even hitting a drydock wont do much damage.