Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
EvyL

strange discussion: clan war concepts

49 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Super Tester
1,677 posts

note that I had just made this out of pure, unadulterated boredom during hanging out at the NA forums at pre-alpha (didnt get in sadly) and is no way to be treated as being written in stone.

 

durr another concept again huehuehueheuhe. well, this is one of the most boring things that I had ever done when I waited for alpha but kinda refused to put it for fun on NA during the pre-alpha forum herpaderp because I'm a lazy terribad and I don't think I'm CW caliber as a player but since OBT is kicking off smoothly(?) and stuff, why not just put it in here to be mocked for counting chicks before they hatch or some stuff like that? it is, and may very well be, just a random babble of concepts for clam warz but enjoy the randomness of this. I'll just grab the stuff I concepted for our region APAC, revise some of them and feel free to mock the idealism. this was also made under the assumption some guys who are competitive might ask for this eventually. this is already under the assumption of clans are getting a rather large amount of pop cap that reaches 200+ in a clan.

 

(note that this was way back so I have no idea what the RUdevs are thinking nor do I have any faintest idea what the NA guys had any word since I quietly left there)

 

 

WORLD

- most likely will encompass the entire globe. EU cluster will most likely slug it out at Europe, North Africa, NA cluster at either APAC region, Europe and Africa, and APAC cluster will favor the APAC region. in this retrospect the entirety of APAC shall be our server's battleground unless the megalomaniacs in clam warz want to reach the west.

 

- should the map be global, I'm actually expecting a couple of things in being a locationfag:

  • someone camping at Gibraltar effectively turns the Mediterranean into a giant lake, isolating clans there from the outside and choking the supply lines
  • UK will probably be hotly contested due to close proximity to several countries at once. that or turning Greenland into a defensible location
  • anyone at Denmark will also turn the Baltic into a giant lake, again isolating clans and choking up the supply lines
  • Madagascar will be a good staging point in South Africa
  • the Philippines probably will be also hotly contest as it has the north, west and southern areas as accessible areas and its also in the middle(?) of APAC
  • holding Indonesia will probably give enough areas to attack and cut a clean swath to Australia and New Zealand
  • anyone who holds Japan and Korea will form a safe haven for fleets in the Sea of Japan

 

- inclusion of supply lines where convoys pass. the convoy line can be have a fleet sitting on the line in the map as a form of commerce raiding in CW. the gold earned from the supply line will either not be credited or will have twice the lower amount. example, if the India to Singapore supply line that normally brings in 500 gold has a fleet sitting somewhere on the line, the amount brought in when the turn shifts will probably be 50 or 25 or none at all. an owner's fleet sitting on the line means that they serve as merchant escorts. it is not limited to fleets that are fast that can sit on the line to either disrupt or protect but even a fleet packed for anti-fleet operations can still disrupt them. there's also the suggestion of forming two small squadrons, the commerce raiders or the screen.

 

- fleets cannot change ships on the fly unless they are in their own port territory or if there is a nearby fleet that can transfer ships. if the fleet is a commerce raiding type that comprises of ships of Cleveland, Myoko, New Orleans, Benson, Fletcher, Shimakaze and Fubuki, players with those type of ships can be selected for that commerce raiding type fleet should said group encounter battle. when a fleet encounters each other, only the players with the ships in the fleet composition can join in but the ships still cannot be changed.

 

-base will have ship cap that can dock as well as the improvement of the base to accommodate more ships to be in reserve and the lesser repair time during CW without relying much on flags. any fleet that attacks a port will have to attack with their ships within the group, the defenders have the advantage of being able to choose their ships but only those that are stored within the base as well as the chance to pick ships that will deal with the attackers. base will also have tier restriction so that tier X will not be the only units to frequently run in CW. IMHO, having tier X's be the limelight of CW is getting redundant and in this game especially for the lulzy part of CBT, even the humble Atlanta cruiser dealt glancing damage to the Yamato of all things when MM was still messed up (and still it most likely is)

 

- a base that has no defenders and is attacked will be an automatic win to the attackers. the attackers can then choose whether to desolate the base, downgrade the upgrades in there and disable the stored ships within for five turns or capture the base entirely. of course this does not mean they gain the enemy ships stored because that would defeat the purpose of the hard grind but rather those that have the ship types stored in can now be designated to be there. if the defenders lose, its an automatic occupation. if the base is empty, the attackers cannot desolate the base but will instantly occupy it, upgrades and all.

 

- fleets cannot stay in the open sea for long. this is assuming that they will put the capital ships in the water and never returning to dock so they will be safe from attacks. gauge on how far they can travel is suggested as well as how many turns they can move until they run out of fuel and this is assuming oilers are in the sea within the said supply line. a fleet dead in the water attacked will automatically make the attackers the winner, removing the attacked fleet from the map

 

 

INDIVIDUALITY

-fleet and squadron composition. fleets will vary for use, ranging from the standard. most likely fleet arrangement so not as to spam tier X ships. tiers 5-10 shall be used to this effect. limiting fleet composition is also a must to divide the playerbase. examples of composition to work in conjunction to purpose:

(note: capital ship = CV and BB, standard ship = CL, CA and DD)

 

  • typical fleet of 5 capital ships and 7 standard ships (destroyers should not be numerous as it will most likely break the meta in CW)
  • rapid action (1 light carrier, 2 battleships, 4 cruisers, 5 destroyers)
  • commerce raid (possibility of attaching battleships or light carriers. norm of default: 3 cruisers, 5 destroyers since all they need to do is sit on the line to disrupt gold supply unless response fleet comes in to confront them)
  • solid center (4 battleships, 4 cruisers, 3 destroyers)
  • range (2 fleet carriers, 1 battleship, 4 cruisers, 5 destroyers)

 

- fleets with carriers or with substantial amount of battleships will have bigger 'force projection' in the global map whilst those fleets or squadrons that have no capital ships present with them will have a smaller radius. force projection is the radius where if any fleet gets inside it both will automatically attack each other. if two opposite force projections overlap, it will mean they must battle, this force projection can be useful, seeing as there are narrow areas in archipelagos and large islands. suggestion of placing statuses of alliances in order for allied fleets that come into contact with each other will not automatically queue as a pending battle

 

- forming a fleet from base as well as detaching ships from fleets to form a new squadron takes 1 turn. assimilating small squadrons into a fleet also takes 1 turn

 

 

BASE

- the base as is default was shown in the world aspect but will have inclusions on upgrades so it is imperative to guard heavily modernized bases

 

- base mods may include:

  • repair and supply ships - any fleet within the base projection of control can repair and resupply their ships without docking into the base itself. will cost metal and oil in doing so for R&R and to burn the economy, the ships having a small fuel charge
  • dry dock improvement - CW repairs will be lessened without hoisting of flags
  • arsenal improvement - fleets in the base may be fully supplied faster
  • dock improvement - base ship storage capacity and bombardment protection
  • improved administration buildings - increased income of gold

 

- improved bases may project greater projection of controls

 

- passing fleet can bombard the base dealing damage to the complex and hopefully disabling it for a 2+ turns as repairs commence

 

 

MISC

- inclusion of resources used for expeditions. certain areas and supply lines shall have a preset amount of resources generated per turn and fleets in the field will take them as upkeep

 

- some bases will have multiple resource generation. aside from gold, a base can procure additional supplies

 

- resource will be as follows:

 

  • gold/doubloons - generated per successful convoy delivery in supply line, the base end turn gold generation
  • oil/fuel - how many moves a fleet can move in the water until it literally will be dead in the water. fuel consumption per fleet depends on the ship composition. battleships and CV's have the highest res burn whilst light cruisers and destroyers have lower res burn
  •  metal - aside from monetary repairs per ship, metal is used to gauge how many ships can be repaired. CV's and battleship have the highest res burn whilst light cruisers and destroyers have lower res burn
  • munitions - attacking costs munition. the larger the fleet composition, the more ammo res they burn

 

 

if you have something to add to this chain of thought or reactions, feel free to add or argue. this was made during the pre-alpha and I had apparently forgotten all about it until I dug it back from old papers. as this was made with derp in mind, I don't think its that feasible. well, I can ease my stuff knowing the RUdevs don't have confirmed eyes and mouths here like in RU or NA(?) else if they eyeballed this, it would have a more stranger turn of events.

 

EDIT 1: inclusion of MISC and BASE

 

that is all.

Edited by EvyL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
753 posts
657 battles

note that I had just made this out of pure, unadulterated boredom during hanging out at the NA forums at pre-alpha (didnt get in sadly) and is no way to be treated as being written in stone.

 

durr another concept again huehuehueheuhe. well, this is one of the most boring things that I had ever done when I waited for alpha but kinda refused to put it for fun on NA during the pre-alpha forum herpaderp because I'm a lazy terribad and I don't think I'm CW caliber as a player but since OBT is kicking off smoothly(?) and stuff, why not just put it in here to be mocked for counting chicks before they hatch or some stuff like that? it is, and may very well be, just a random babble of concepts for clam warz but enjoy the randomness of this. I'll just grab the stuff I concepted for our region APAC, revise some of them and feel free to mock the idealism. this was also made under the assumption some guys who are competitive might ask for this eventually. this is already under the assumption of clans are getting a rather large amount of pop cap that reaches 200+ in a clan.

 

(note that this was way back so I have no idea what the RUdevs are thinking nor do I have any faintest idea what the NA guys had any word since I quietly left there)

 

 

WORLD

- most likely will encompass the entire globe. EU cluster will most likely slug it out at Europe, North Africa, NA cluster at either APAC region, Europe and Africa, and APAC cluster will favor the APAC region. in this retrospect the entirety of APAC shall be our server's battleground unless the megalomaniacs in clam warz want to reach the west.

 

- should the map be global, I'm actually expecting a couple of things in being a locationfag:

  • someone camping at Gibraltar effectively turns the Mediterranean into a giant lake, isolating clans there from the outside and choking the supply lines
  • UK will probably be hotly contested due to close proximity to several countries at once. that or turning Greenland into a defensible location
  • anyone at Denmark will also turn the Baltic into a giant lake, again isolating clans and choking up the supply lines
  • Madagascar will be a good staging point in South Africa
  • the Philippines probably will be also hotly contest as it has the north, west and southern areas as accessible areas and its also in the middle(?) of APAC
  • holding Indonesia will probably give enough areas to attack and cut a clean swath to Australia and New Zealand
  • anyone who holds Japan and Korea will form a safe haven for fleets in the Sea of Japan

 

- inclusion of supply lines where convoys pass. the convoy line can be have a fleet sitting on the line in the map as a form of commerce raiding in CW. the gold earned from the supply line will either not be credited or will have twice the lower amount. example, if the India to Singapore supply line that normally brings in 500 gold has a fleet sitting somewhere on the line, the amount brought in when the turn shifts will probably be 50 or 25 or none at all. an owner's fleet sitting on the line means that they serve as merchant escorts. it is not limited to fleets that are fast that can sit on the line to either disrupt or protect but even a fleet packed for anti-fleet operations can still disrupt them. there's also the suggestion of forming two small squadrons, the commerce raiders or the screen.

 

- fleets cannot change ships on the fly unless they are in their own port territory or if there is a nearby fleet that can transfer ships. if the fleet is a commerce raiding type that comprises of ships of Cleveland, Myoko, New Orleans, Benson, Fletcher, Shimakaze and Fubuki, players with those type of ships can be selected for that commerce raiding type fleet should said group encounter battle. when a fleet encounters each other, only the players with the ships in the fleet composition can join in but the ships still cannot be changed.

 

-base will have ship cap that can dock as well as the improvement of the base to accommodate more ships to be in reserve and the lesser repair time during CW without relying much on flags. any fleet that attacks a port will have to attack with their ships within the group, the defenders have the advantage of being able to choose their ships but only those that are stored within the base as well as the chance to pick ships that will deal with the attackers. base will also have tier restriction so that tier X will not be the only units to frequently run in CW. IMHO, having tier X's be the limelight of CW is getting redundant and in this game especially for the lulzy part of CBT, even the humble Atlanta cruiser dealt glancing damage to the Yamato of all things when MM was still messed up (and still it most likely is)

 

- a base that has no defenders and is attacked will be an automatic win to the attackers. the attackers can then choose whether to desolate the base, downgrade the upgrades in there and disable the stored ships within for five turns or capture the base entirely. of course this does not mean they gain the enemy ships stored because that would defeat the purpose of the hard grind but rather those that have the ship types stored in can now be designated to be there. if the defenders lose, its an automatic occupation. if the base is empty, the attackers cannot desolate the base but will instantly occupy it, upgrades and all.

 

- fleets cannot stay in the open sea for long. this is assuming that they will put the capital ships in the water and never returning to dock so they will be safe from attacks. gauge on how far they can travel is suggested as well as how many turns they can move until they run out of fuel and this is assuming oilers are in the sea within the said supply line. a fleet dead in the water attacked will automatically make the attackers the winner, removing the attacked fleet from the map

 

 

INDIVIDUALITY

-fleet and squadron composition. fleets will vary for use, ranging from the standard. most likely fleet arrangement so not as to spam tier X ships. tiers 5-10 shall be used to this effect. limiting fleet composition is also a must to divide the playerbase. examples of composition to work in conjunction to purpose:

(note: capital ship = CV and BB, standard ship = CL, CA and DD)

 

  • typical fleet of 5 capital ships and 7 standard ships (destroyers should not be numerous as it will most likely break the meta in CW)
  • rapid action (1 light carrier, 2 battleships, 4 cruisers, 5 destroyers)
  • commerce raid (possibility of attaching battleships or light carriers. norm of default: 3 cruisers, 5 destroyers since all they need to do is sit on the line to disrupt gold supply unless response fleet comes in to confront them)
  • solid center (4 battleships, 4 cruisers, 3 destroyers)
  • range (2 fleet carriers, 1 battleship, 4 cruisers, 5 destroyers)

 

- fleets with carriers or with substantial amount of battleships will have bigger 'force projection' in the global map whilst those fleets or squadrons that have no capital ships present with them will have a smaller radius. force projection is the radius where if any fleet gets inside it both will automatically attack each other. if two opposite force projections overlap, it will mean they must battle, this force projection can be useful, seeing as there are narrow areas in archipelagos and large islands. suggestion of placing statuses of alliances in order for allied fleets that come into contact with each other will not automatically queue as a pending battle

 

- forming a fleet from base as well as detaching ships from fleets to form a new squadron takes 1 turn. assimilating small squadrons into a fleet also takes 1 turn

 

if you have something to add to this chain of thought or reactions, feel free to add or argue. this was made during the pre-alpha and I had apparently forgotten all about it until I dug it back from old papers. as this was made with derp in mind, I don't think its that feasible. well, I can ease my stuff knowing the RUdevs don't have confirmed eyes and mouths here like in RU or NA(?) else if they eyeballed this, it would have a more stranger turn of events.

 

 

that is all.

 

I like the idea for world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
512 posts
308 battles

Speaking as someone who has called cw before and who has plenty of experience playing cw, anything that limits the choices of what you can and can't bring is inherently bad* and shouldn't be implemented, aside from campaigns cw has been about bringing as many tier 10s as you can, and whichever team has the better strategy and whose players play better should win, which is why forcing pre-set compositions of varied tiers on players is bad because it limits the options of what is possible, thereby taking some of the skill out of the game.

 

*Exclusions apply to bringing low tiers when the tier maximum is far higher, as that's just wasting your opponents time and therefore limits in that regard are good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

Speaking as someone who has called cw before and who has plenty of experience playing cw, anything that limits the choices of what you can and can't bring is inherently bad* and shouldn't be implemented, aside from campaigns cw has been about bringing as many tier 10s as you can, and whichever team has the better strategy and whose players play better should win, which is why forcing pre-set compositions of varied tiers on players is bad because it limits the options of what is possible, thereby taking some of the skill out of the game.

 

*Exclusions apply to bringing low tiers when the tier maximum is far higher, as that's just wasting your opponents time and therefore limits in that regard are good.

 

the fleet composition here I mentioned are just examples. those arent presets but the most typical of group compositions I can assume will form but varied tiers isn't the total norm. oh well, this is just to the notion to try and deviate from the WoT CW chain of thought since having an unchangeable fleet in the sea unless you are near a base's projection of control to change them on the fly or a smaller group to change what is in there for in-depth variation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

Hotspot and more Hotspot that should be it

:hiding:

 

Hotspot in clam warz will probably make it THE most reviled map ever and it would be lulzy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,314 posts
7,096 battles

Well.... I can just imagine the obscene number of naval battles occurring in Asia region especially in South East Asia where there's way tonne of islands to fight over and vital shipping lanes to control and interdict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

Well.... I can just imagine the obscene number of naval battles occurring in Asia region especially in South East Asia where there's way tonne of islands to fight over and vital shipping lanes to control and interdict.

 

I'm more concerned on the lulzy commerce raids that might happen in this initial draft. really wanted it to deviate from WoT style CW so tried a new draft for fun but its still just a feasibility concept at this point. in order to maximize the people, commerce raiding is a highly valuable move in navy CW. would love it if there are those that have concepts themselves to add to the discussion.

 

if SEA is a gigantic CW battleground, the guys camping at the ANZ area will likely be isolated should a massive clan dominate the region.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4 posts
602 battles

if they were to add clan wars or campaigns to WOWs then for dock attacks, then having what Navyfield did in which they used LST's which were practically cargo ships that had 2 shitty guns on and a few torps to defend itself with would be a good idea to use. By this i mean that a fleet with one or two of these craft in it would be able to do a naval landing/dock takeover. It would also give the defending force a target in which they can target if seen to end the attack early.

 

This would also increase the teamwork and skill level in the game as fleets would need to protect the LST's until they are in rage to start the landing(capping of say 2/3 points) but also keep them hidden from the enemy eyes while moving around the map.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
773 posts
796 battles

When I hear WoWS and CW in the same sentence I imagine two teams endlessly circling and refusing to engage until one manages to cross the other's T. :trollface:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

if they were to add clan wars or campaigns to WOWs then for dock attacks, then having what Navyfield did in which they used LST's which were practically cargo ships that had 2 shitty guns on and a few torps to defend itself with would be a good idea to use. By this i mean that a fleet with one or two of these craft in it would be able to do a naval landing/dock takeover. It would also give the defending force a target in which they can target if seen to end the attack early.

 

This would also increase the teamwork and skill level in the game as fleets would need to protect the LST's until they are in rage to start the landing(capping of say 2/3 points) but also keep them hidden from the enemy eyes while moving around the map.

 

thing is, blasting merchant ships would serve another new geim mode which I'm still doubting I would concept just for fun again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,314 posts
7,096 battles

 

I'm more concerned on the lulzy commerce raids that might happen in this initial draft. really wanted it to deviate from WoT style CW so tried a new draft for fun but its still just a feasibility concept at this point. in order to maximize the people, commerce raiding is a highly valuable move in navy CW. would love it if there are those that have concepts themselves to add to the discussion.

 

if SEA is a gigantic CW battleground, the guys camping at the ANZ area will likely be isolated should a massive clan dominate the region.

 

Commerce raiding is indeed viable. Soon you'll have massive hunts. What'll be more interesting if commerce raiding was done by IJN DDs. You'll definitely have a HUGELY MASSIVE sea clearing expeditions done by the defending navies to weed out those ninja DDs.

 

if they were to add clan wars or campaigns to WOWs then for dock attacks, then having what Navyfield did in which they used LST's which were practically cargo ships that had 2 shitty guns on and a few torps to defend itself with would be a good idea to use. By this i mean that a fleet with one or two of these craft in it would be able to do a naval landing/dock takeover. It would also give the defending force a target in which they can target if seen to end the attack early.

 

This would also increase the teamwork and skill level in the game as fleets would need to protect the LST's until they are in rage to start the landing(capping of say 2/3 points) but also keep them hidden from the enemy eyes while moving around the map.

 

When you mention dock attacks, 2 places come to mind... Pearl Harbour and Taranto.

 

Unless you want to include RN's bombing of the Vichy French fleet at Oran and that other port... Mers-el-Kabir I think. Pretty cool to see it in action.

 

When I hear WoWS and CW in the same sentence I imagine two teams endlessly circling and refusing to engage until one manages to cross the other's T. :trollface:

 

And thus a new flag signal is created, "England expects every man to do his duty"

 

Perk, the 1st team that fires upon the enemy and scores 1 hit gets the team a +15% in income earned, -15% in damage repairs and -10% price of consumable reload.

 

 

thing is, blasting merchant ships would serve another new geim mode which I'm still doubting I would concept just for fun again.

 

PQ 17!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

still... IJN DD's stalking the global map in the draft = insane annoyance and anyone wise enough would send in USN DD's that specialize in DD killin' as part of the cleaning force. the bad thing about that would be if the scouring battlegroup gets found by a main navy and if the ship locking is in effect, that fleet can hopefully force a draw or not be killed entirely (imagine a couple of light cruisers and heavy cruisers vs a full 12 force of battleships, heavy and light cruisers with destroyer support. hurr). but ninja commerce raiders still project a small circle of projection but cover a wide span since they don't technically have huge capital ships with them to escort even if they are fast cap ships as per initial draft rules.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,314 posts
7,096 battles

One can do 3 ways to counter the prowling ninja DD raiders

 

  1. Direct escort support i.e. USN DDs and QF CL are attached to the convoy
  2. Stand off escort support i.e. convoy escorts just linger at the fringes of detection distance of the convoy. This could include BBs
  3. Hunter killer groups with DDs centred around QF CL and/or CVs

 

​But really, since commerce is moving in convoys, there's bound to be drought periods for the raiding DDs. So when there's high value convoy sailing from port to port, you're bound to know that the raiders would start to flock to the target. That's when you can hit them. That is if the clan leader is like Donitz, packs his raiders together. Packing is definitely a double edge sword. For one, you Zerg the convoy. On the other hand, the pack is liable to be lost through enemy action.

 

If the clan leader was like Nimitz, he'd disperse his DDs and leave them to their own devices to wreck havoc. That itself presents a challenge to sweep sea lanes clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,314 posts
7,096 battles

But speaking of fleet on fleet action, it can go a few ways:

 

  1. Jutland style - Self explanatory
  2. Midway style - Self explanatory
  3. Ten-Go style - Self explanatory

 

​Are there any other possible styles that I might have missed out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

not that I know of as well for the fleet engagements but aint Midway CV spam? was thinking more like the lulzery of the Solomon and Guadalcanal campaigns myself.

 

but this was under the draft of 15 whereas the pop cap for a match is 12. forming a fleet for commerce protection would be something to be of a challenge in a 12 pop cap. depends on the location as well since if we speak of APAC, as you said SEA will be a total hotbed for commerce raids.

 

it would be something to note if the fleets for commerce protection will not be full fleet carriers but light carriers and light cruisers for that matter. oh well, we'll see to the tech branch for that in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,314 posts
7,096 battles

If you are going to put styles in, please explain them as well. Other players may not know what you are talking about

 

My bad. 

 

Jutland Style - BB slug fest. The fleet with better gunnery, positioning, information, tactics and RNG wins the day. No CVs involved from both sides. DD qualifies to be in this set up and I think torpedo attacks count as well. 

 

Midway Style - All out CV fight. All other surface combatants only serve as scouts or screening. Minimal or no combat between surface ships. Unless that is till when CVs run out of planes.

 

Ten-Go Style - This is the current root of ALL evils and rage on this forum. Simply put, 1 team has CV support while the other doesn't. We all know what happens in this kind of matches. Especially when the other team has overwhelming CV superiority and CV player skill. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,314 posts
7,096 battles

not that I know of as well for the fleet engagements but aint Midway CV spam? was thinking more like the lulzery of the Solomon and Guadalcanal campaigns myself.

 

but this was under the draft of 15 whereas the pop cap for a match is 12. forming a fleet for commerce protection would be something to be of a challenge in a 12 pop cap. depends on the location as well since if we speak of APAC, as you said SEA will be a total hotbed for commerce raids.

 

it would be something to note if the fleets for commerce protection will not be full fleet carriers but light carriers and light cruisers for that matter. oh well, we'll see to the tech branch for that in the future.

 

I know nuts about the naval campaigns of The Solomons and Guadacanal. All I know about them is that there were plsnty of pew pee pow pow boom boom chitty chitty bang bang. Many ships sank. Many casualties and was an attrition for the IJN. 

 

Was Battle of Surigao Strait part of Solomons campaign or Guadacanal? How about Taffy 3 action for that matter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

 

I know nuts about the naval campaigns of The Solomons and Guadacanal. All I know about them is that there were plsnty of pew pee pow pow boom boom chitty chitty bang bang. Many ships sank. Many casualties and was an attrition for the IJN. 

 

Was Battle of Surigao Strait part of Solomons campaign or Guadacanal? How about Taffy 3 action for that matter?

 

I doubt anyone would want another Surigao Strait reenactment in composing battlegroups but if that large force containing a lot of battleships without an CV wishes to decimate a fleet that has only two battleships and plenty of workhorse ships, I wouldn't blame them for being sadistic commanders.

 

what may come of Taffy 3 reenactment at Samar would be a full composition of 2 carriers and a LOT of light cruisers and destroyers against a composition like that of above but again, I doubt anyone would even want to compose that kind of group unless they dedicate themselves to annoying the crap out of the enemy battlegroup that has slow ass ships or is a commerce raiding fleet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
76 posts

i suggest the Harbour Assault  or strategic point conquest  on each clan sea area  each strategic holding the unique bonus like more credit income in normal battle , lower ship repair cost each region sea area should have the protect tion such as mine layer costal gun battery some region should even have airfield  provide the bomber and fighter to defend the region and  the main base of each clan should the the harbor city with massive HP and resistance   by the level of each clan the higher level clan is the more HP and resistance of the Harbour will become

this mode could be win by 2 way 
the Attacker
1. eliminate the strategic point HP this way could prove to be a faster way to captured the strategic point but the conquror will suffer a  huge penalty due to the destruction   this need a loong time to  recontruct the strategic point
2 . capture the strategic point by using the landing ship made specially for this mode  or by using the landing craft on Destroyer or some cruiser this way is slower and have more risk but when it complete the strategic point will fully operational and will give more bonuses to the conqueror than destroyed it

for the defender  could win by
1. eliminate all attacker ship in the area this will grant the huge bonus for the defender who seccesfully prevent the attacking

2. the attacker is failed to finish thier mission in time  but this will give only the small bonus to the defender


also the ship that damage or sunk in the assualt can't be repaired also the carrier can't replenish your aircraft  until the assualt time is end  and you can declare the attack up to 2 strategic point  simultaneously  so batter manage your fleet and your men

also you can raid the enemy supply line  if your strategic point  is close enough  to the enemy supply line if seccess you could take the amount of supply roughly 10 - 30%  of supply ship you take down also the owner of supply line could assign the AI ship the defend the supply line but it will cost more to maintain supply line

the thing that need for this mode  is
1) landing ship / landing craft on destroyer and cruiser

2) Naval mine <<<<<< this required the destoyer or the cruiser sonar to seek out and destroy it and it should only appear in this mode

3) coastal battery / airfield << this is essential for the defender to defend thier region or thier main harbour

the duty of each ship in this mode
Destroyer  -  seeking out the enemy  as well as the defender naval mine for the hugh ship and could be using for the landing operation
Cruiser     - same as the destroyer but will provide firepower to desroying the small to meduim size coastal battery and the air defend for nearby ship
Battleship  - thier main duty is cripple the enemy ship and thier defensive system the  Battleship  HE shell will do huge amount of damage to ground any ground target  base on the carliber of their gun only in this mode  
Carrier    - the main duty the Rule the Sky , provide both air defence and offence to your team   but carrier limitation in this mode should be 2 carrier otherwise the defender will have massive spam on carrier  and give no chance for the attacker to win


all of my credit belong to  NF1
 it was really really fun for the harbout assault at that time



for anyone have no idea how NF1 harbour assualt done searcing out NF harbour assult in younube


this is absolutely not advertise cuz NF is already dead :(

Edited by reinforcezwei

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×