Why does naval combat suck?

[@LemonCake101]

Want to discuss the video? Do so here: discord.gg/pb5b33YTpB

[@ahhtism3386]

Hoi4 naval-wafare logic is lowkey funny: UK: Why are you spreading see-mines in international waters (British channel), Italy? Italy: *E T H I O P I A*

[@nathaniel1207]

this is actually a part of a strategy for the world record roman empire forming run in hoi4 btw. (or at least it was at one point)

[@Style-tw5rp]

Swedes couldn't give Danes anything that could make them happy.

[@LemonCake101]

Wait true!

[@albaniaalban]

Love how Danes and Swedes are united in their disinterest in Skåneland lol

[@thegrandnope7143]

Rule the Waves 3 makes me want to tear my hair out, when you see your, nearly, perfect ship die, because your sailors forgot how to fight a fire.

[@LemonCake101]

Maybe if they spent less time drilling sailor drills and more time volunteering at the local fire brigades, you would have done better.

[@avaji1]

That's my favorite part about rule the waves. In a lot of games you can avoid ending up in a really horrible crisis once you're good enough, but that's also the most exciting part of the game.

[@monacatowa9406]

Battle of Tsushima moment

[@jimtherook3722]

and then on the opposite side, you have 30,000 ton battlecruisers tanking enough damage to make Yamato blush for no reason other than their godly damage control crews

[@cloroxbleach9222]

Moskva moment

[@Madokaexe]

Me like spam big ship me like big number big ship go boom 💥

[@LemonCake101]

Number go up good in fairness

[@pelinalwhitestrake3367]

When money: Spam big ship. When no money: Spam galleys.

[@zinmoney96]

3 hours watching hoi4 navy guides, 2 hours designing perfect ships for everything, 1 minute of naval combat.

[@juppjepp4303]

My favourite by far naval combat from both a tactical and a strategic perspective has to be Shogun 2 Fall of the Samurai. There is a big incentive to actually use your navy because you can use powerful and really cool naval barrages in land battles or to just damage enemy buildings or armies on the campaign map and the battles themselves are really fun and a big improvement over the honestly just frustrating and quite buggy ships in Empire or Napoleon. Also nothing beats getting a single western ironclad and then just demolishing all the simple wooden ships your enemies throw at you. The visual spectacle of the naval battles is exactly what it’s supposed to be.

[@Filip-pz7wu]

i feel as if eu4 is good enough naval combat for a PDX game because i will never ever ever understand the hoi4 navy system

[@LemonCake101]

It not even that bad, I feel like people just say that because its a meme: like claiming Eu4 trade is hard.

[@Filip-pz7wu]

it might not be that bad but as you stated in the video naval combat is overshadowed anyways, i just make naval bombers instead. ever since they introduced the ship designer it just became a lot more clutter to try to figure out and finding the component researches that are relevant is just terrible

[@hanneswiggenhorn2023]

In all seriousness, land combat is probably actually harder than naval combat in hoi4, because you have things like defense and breakthrough. The problem with hoi4 navy is that ships take for ever to build

[@jodinha4225]

They really need to add ships on the market, or the ability to lease Rickard production. That is how most small countries get their babies anyways.

[@RobbiusBossius]

@@hanneswiggenhorn2023 yea exactly, if your a japan player and you lose navy to usa in MP, you will never be able to get contest navy again bc of how long it takes to build ships lose your carriers? have fun waiting till 1946 to get 1 more out

[@elcazador3349]

Lemon Cake knows his navies. He may even be preserved dessert which was once served on Her Majesty's pre-dreadnought battleships.

[@sammeargaming9967]

This sums up how I feel about navy in strategy games

[@basedimperialism]

When you said artillery fire pips affects ship cannons I genuinely did a double-take.

[@LemonCake101]

They do!

[@Alorand]

What about Iberian Artillery Fire +1? Is it as broken for naval cannons as a Custom Nation taking Infantry Fire +1?

[@LemonCake101]

@@Alorand that does effect it!

[@jansatamme6521]

@@Alorand no, its just 5% more dmg, Britain does not care and the ai doesnt know what a heavy ship stack is

[@felipevega484]

Total war Warhammer 3 mentioned!!! Trench craventail world conquest confirmed!!!!

[@LemonCake101]

Yup, mentioned for forgetting to show up!

[@felipevega484]

​​@@LemonCake101 They hate the sea so much they gave ships legs and wheels so that they could have them fight them on land

[@linkhidalgogato]

while combat in general isnt the focus in victoria 3 and it shows in the way naval combat works, they actually do blockades right. Getting blockaded in vic 3 when u have a bunch of colonies will destroy ur economy and make your people mad, could lead to a revolution, it will make your subjects mad and probably make them revolt or their people revolt against them if not. To the point that its often worth it to white peace or even surrender on wars u could eventually win to avoid the economic damage, sadly the ai doesnt take this into account at all, and will let their economy be destroyed to not white peace cuz they could theoretically still win.

[@Augustus_Imperator]

The problem with naval combat in Paradox games it's not about the mechanics themselves, it's about the abysmal interfaces for it. Users have zero control, zero flavor and it's overall very poorly designed for how I see it. Let's take HoI4 as an example: admirals and generals have a similar interface that works way differently, hence offputting the beginners, which then tend to never learn. The fleet control it's way overcomplicated for what it brings to the table, no point and clicking like one can do to micromanage the armies but they have to select the task. The tasks are fairly complicated to get especially to beginners to identify the one they need in every specific situationm meaning it's harder for them to assess the naval situation they're in and the one they want to reach via what task. For how oversimplified and boring in EU4 it is, at least you can deathstack heavy ships and galleys to reach your objective if you don't know any better. In HoI4 one wrong move against the UK or US and your game is toast.

[@LemonCake101]

The UI certainly doesn't... help.

[@eventuel4987]

Even though it might be a lot to implement, I think the way to solve it would be to tie trade to ACTUAL "ships" and "caravans", not just an arrow that indicates the direction. That would solve most of the economic problems. Sea tiles should also be much smaller (because it's not true that in one day a ship docked in St-Petersburg can join a battle on the other side of the Gulf of Finland or that 3 ships from Satander can block all trade in the Bay of Biscay up until La Rochelle) and make battles more determined by luck, so that you can partially break a blockade or a siege of a navally superior nation at times but they will probably win on the long run due to the numbers

[@gurigura4457]

What you really want is to be able to assign warships to a trade node, a bit like piracy. And it would reduce trade power in that node significantly, for only people you are at war with, depending on the number of your ships compared to your enemies. So if you and your enemy both have 10 ships at the same tech level, trade isn't impacted a lot. But if it were a 50 to 5 ratio that has a much larger impact. Equally, the ships could still behave like "Hunt enemy ships" so your ship's combat ability does matter since there will be naval warfare. In short, a proper naval wartime raid system, which was one of the key reasons countries invested in a navy: to harrass enemy merchant fleets.

[@Ghosty99675985]

I think the biggest problem is that the most realistic mechanic is supply lines, which is extremely hard to make work properly and be fun. A UK fleet should, in some way, be weaker the further away from the home islands it is, like you just can't afford to have a doom-stack over a certain distance away, but even getting basic mechanics like fleet basing to work right in EU4 were never successful, let alone how complicated this system would have to be.

[@Sevastous]

Explaining hoi4 naval combat by using Eu4 Icons and UI is just sooo weird

[@LemonCake101]

I mean I am an Eu4 channel, so I have to do it in a way that is understandable to someone who hasn't played Hoi4; and if you are a Hoi4 enjoyer, you don't need an explanation :)

[@hiptoptoe4847]

Well EUV might be able to clear up some of those issues - having a game where materiel is critical - and plenty of types exist so that you don’t just build a single type of refinery building - could make trade impact from blockades and convoy raiding a lot more powerful at least

[@LemonCake101]

The control loss from blockades should also be interesting, although it is a bit.. unusual in implimentation.

[@GusanGaming]

Blockading in EU4 does also increase war exhaustion, and devastation while tiny does kill prosperity which can really hurt the economy of the target. I agree it's not game ruining but I think a true navy that is game ruining might be super unfun to be a little guy.

[@rowbot5555]

Opinion before watching the video: Naval combat is lame for many people because it operates funamentally differently to most other forms of combat, so to make a game that makes naval combat fun will either drive away a broad playerbase who will likely be bored or overwhelmed by it, or drive away the core base of naval war history fans who would be dissapointed with the lack of accuracy or depth

[@cosmosyn2514]

big irony here is that the one paradox game thats main focus is naval combat (technically) is stellaris, and even then its a very shallow system. you take the designing system of hoi4 and put it on a map as restrictive as eu4. the resulting system is satisfactory, but id hardly call it good.

[@sirflasm3456]

12:47 please don't do that again. I almost died

[@LemonCake101]

What do you mean I am professional Italian

[@christophernoneya4635]

My ideal naval system would be more about logistics than anything. Planning supply lines, capturing specific ports, cutting deals with local tribes, trying to negotiate naval treaties with other nations, planning raids on eachother. Most combat is designed around a permanent presence and front lines or stack warfare, but naval battles are a lot more vague and need to be a lot more abstracted. Id much prefer if they were redesigned to essentially be supply lines than stack warfare or whatever hoi was trying to do

[@juergen4ever]

Navy Field enjoyers: RISE UP!!

[@TheRealKiRBEY]

Because i only see number go down of enemy somtimes

[@jansatamme6521]

Hoi4 naval combat can be pretty fun in MP, and the dopamine hits... oh man, if only i didn't win 90% of the time due to the small problem of being one of the few people who see this video and know exactly what the hit chance graph means.

[@yearslate9349]

The most dangerous navy I've ever encountered in a game of EU4 manifested from me smashing Spain's light ship fleet so thoroughly that they had over 100 naval limit open for them to build their newest heavy ships. Gave me some severe whiplash when I saw them come at me with 60 new heavy ships.

[@skycaptain95]

If they reduced naval reserve morale damage or let us reinforce morale with more ships it would be better

[@Mkill14]

I feel like this is more complaining about poor AI than about the naval system itself. The EU4 and HOI4 naval systems are quite good imo, it’s just the AI is incapable of countering even the most basic of strategies done by the player. Naval combat especially in hoi4 is great in multiplayer with competent players, but I do agree with most of the tweaks you mentioned in the video.

[@LemonCake101]

Thing is, most MP's focus on land warfare, and Naval warfare in MP is something that you almost have to prearrange, as in Eu4 for example anyone that isn't England doing a Naval Build dies to someone with an army.

[@Mkill14]

​@@LemonCake101 maybe Im misunderstanding, do you see the focus on land warfare as a mistake? if you and your enemy aren't seperated by water, than ofc naval warfare is gonna exist purely to support the land army. Ik Its a niche example but playing as gotland and fighting denmark in the 1450s is a fantastic naval combat experience, being the underdog and trickling down the much larger enemy fleet was very fun for me. idk i think naval combat has its moments.

[@plebisMaximus]

In HoI4, I just replace any boat factories with real factories, the navy is so useless when you have bombers and paratroopers. In EU4, I just spam light ships and do privateering because doing anything but combat with your navy is far more productive and fun. Not that I want them to fix the navy for grand strategy games, I just don't think you could do anything engaging. So much counts on holding your land that anything they'd try with navies would just feel like a waste of your time managing.

[@iseeyou5061]

It's suck to buff France and nerf UK :v

[@LemonCake101]

Wish it was that intentional :)

[@Leo-ok3uj]

Was Napoleon Total War really the last time we had good naval-campaign gameplay???

[@LemonCake101]

Again, if you want good navy gameplay, get a navy gameplay only game :)

[@elcazador3349]

Try Total War's Fall of the Samurai naval combat!

[@ninjadude1494]

The only game I’ve played where the naval combat was better than the land combat is Star Wars Empire at War. It doesn’t have a lot of the problems that you listed for games like hoi4 or eu4

[@LemonCake101]

Space Navy is quite different to normal navies though, that's more of an airforce+

[@Xcyiterr]

I genuinely want a mod where Genoa is actually able to doomstack their navy off the coast of the fort in Genova and have that massively slow the siege progress to a crawl even the whole diplo mana to reduce siege progress could be fun potentially, as long as it costs enough mana to not be frustrating for the player (like >100 per 20% progress reducting potentially, plus scaling) would make naval actually mildly relevant for once

[@speedypichu6833]

I wish naval combat was more fun, studying history, my favorite parts of warfare are the naval stuff, with the scale and often the large amount at stake in naval battles. I wish they were more fun in these games, though the historic tendency of it being all or nothing isn’t fun in games, neither is being completely devastated because you lack a navy. I could imagine in EU4, that a blockade could hurt a nation’s trade income, but I imagine that would be hard to program and make sense (like, does it lower a nation’s downstream trade ability in oversea trade routes? I imagine there would be some consequence I don’t see there) and for Civilization, I think the most fun I had with Naval stuff in video games outside of World of Warships was TSL Huge Earth game in Civ VI as England, which was mostly for the Mediterranean against Greece.

[@Arrow_of_Times]

Even though it’s actually about flying bricks, I’ve always felt that Highfleet is the best naval game (for a modern navy). It does a really good job showcasing the intelligence and electronic warfare aspects of naval combat.

[@azpont7275]

Naval combat sucks bc it is bad. Simple. Tbh large scale naval engagements always sucked IRL too. Most of them was decided by weather or positioning before they started, or were multiple day long chaotic messes like during the Punic wars.

[@elcazador3349]

Jutland discredited the battleship. :V

[@NebulaOfNorth]

sometimes in eu4 even just a single naval battle can determine the person dominating the seas not for a 100 years but even for the entire game

[@ssdrbx6180]

I agree with your points, but here are some nitpicks (As someone who got brainrot'd by paradox games) 8:35 You destroy submarines by spamming airplanes, as you previously said for sinking fleets generally. Submarines, by default, run away when they spot destroyers with depth charges. So destroyers are useless for sinking bot's submarines. 8:58 mp players just throw 4 SHBBs with aa guns only + screen. It is just another point proving how broken/unrealistic hoi4 naval gameplay is 9:02 planes that deployed to the carriers already get x5 damage and have 2 sorties in a day instead of 1 sorty when engaging other naval ships. Not to mention they don't care about ranges. It is uber-buffed already. 8:11 The "meta" is to steal enemy ships during a peace deal, though it is locked behind DLC, typical Paradox shenanigans There are other points that you pointed out in eu4 also valid for hoi4: hoi4 AI also doesn't upgrade ship often (usually max out at lvl 2). So You can easily only research lvl 3 ships and beat them if you really want to build ships (still, it is better to steal ships) hoi4 ships can also bombard enemies during naval invasion but not many players bother with it. As planes are much more useful Ai can also hole up in ports with strike force missions. You need naval bombers to force them out or just capture that state

[@autoloadable]

eyyy he fixed his foot!

[@LemonCake101]

Yup, that was the one :)

[@felixmustermann790]

best naval combat was experienced in Empire: Total War

[@LemonCake101]

o7

[@fabianeweil192]

What does „o7“ mean?

[@atticussanders7394]

FOTS is also pretty good

[@qhu3878]

​@@fabianeweil192 its a salute

[@DaBigWilliG1995]

Wait a minute that means when I was the siege admiral in the Korea LS I was extra giga chad with all those pips

[@22slice]

TW: Shogun 2 has naval combat that's fairly engaging and the blockades have actual affect, though the reasons why are limited to that game's smaller scale and combat you can actually engage with. Good video

[@xkevlarex]

For a more impactful and fun naval gameplay every mentioned game should have fully reworked economy and trade model. Because, historically, navy was a toy for superpowers or insanely wealth countries only, so, in eu4, for example, it would be simple: either you go colonial and make profit or die.

[@dexwrex7594]

Its strange you didnt mention Ultimate admiral dreadnoughts. Im just waiting for Sea power and Task force admiral.

[@LemonCake101]

Never even heard of that game I’ll be honest

[@Benwut]

Bro, Hoi4 navy shit is just "Build superheavy. Ship go boom boom. Unga bunga.". Like, if u have maybe 2 or 3 decent superheavies, the british navy is just gone. Like, ceases to exist. But of course easiest strategy is laying 6000 mines in the bloody english channel or chesapeake bay.

[@pikanchion]

AoE2's naval combat is actually fairly decent both early game and on mixed terrain maps, on a water map you generally reach a point where one side just snowballs though, and from then on anything in range of the coast becomes a wasteland for the other side, and this is followed either by a hasty resignation or a needlessly drawn out war of attrition. More mixed maps can remain interesting throughout however, with ships and land units sharing the same pop cap, a strong navy and a strong army may at times become direct trade-offs, and when combined with sneak attack landings, demolition ships taking out armies crossing the shallows, and land raids on enemy dockyards, land and sea warfare still has a fair bit of interplay. I think the takeaway for me is that for naval to work it either has to be the sole/primary focus, or it has to be able to directly interact in a variety of ways with whatever the main area of the game is. In EU4 navy serves almost entirely as a binary access for overseas land, while in HoI4 ships are basically just a stat modifier for coastal land battles. In both cases this is a purely one-way interaction, and while at least in HoI4 ships can be fought from the air, this interaction again is effectively one-way. I think the issue for making naval work in a Paradox game is the level of abstraction, it just leaves very little room for land-sea interaction. In Civ the combat as a whole is meh, and in Total War it's an issue of the developer repeatedly botching pathfinding and either halfheartedly implementing or simply lying about the existance of other systems the first few times and subsequently giving up on it entirely (Rome 2's naval landings during sieges had so much promise...).

[@RobbiusBossius]

Navy has the big problem of just not being important, in EU4 SP its only really needed for conquering indonesia and britain. Even in MP where navy is much more useful, imo its still only really relevant for colonial wars, and again southeast asia Even in HOI4, it doesn't really matter in SP bc of how bad the ai is, in MP tho if you lose navy as say, japan you die pretty much

[@carlosdumbratzen6332]

My highpoint in EU4 Mp is still the moment I got attacked by a coalition of Britain, Portugal and Spain, while playing Nusantara in a vanilla lobby. We clashed, because I took some american colonies together with my buddy Japan. I did not pick a single military idea at that point. I went full on naval power. They stood no chance, while I was shipping japanese troops to the new world, I sank stack after stack of the shores of Java. My troops were total dogshit, but the Europeans got so impatient, that we could at one point enforce peace on them, after around 400 units drowned in the waves of the Indian Ocean. Both Spain and Portgual didnt show up to the next session.

[@itriedtochangemynamebutitd5019]

Remember when Jager tried to encircle a Navy?

[@icecanyon6090]

Sea Power coming out in November seems like a really fun modern naval age game. You should check it out

[@aeoniangears372]

I think a decent small little change to indirectly buff blockades would be to make the Reduce button for War Exhaustion unclickable while at war, thus enabling a naval power to economically cripple an opponent over time. Still, it's slow going though. On top of that, I suppose there could be a harsher ramp-up of the devastation and WE based on the percentage of land blockaded. That's all just tweaking numbers that already exist. A REALLY crazy idea could be devastation overflow, where 100% devastated provinces spread any additional devastation they would accrue evenly among neighboring provinces. This would be vaguely realistic while still simple enough to be feasible in EU4. After all, Institutions work similarly. This would mean that if you blockade France long enough, eventually Paris WOULD begin to accrue devastation. My ideal system would be one where devastation from blockades would scale up with target's WE, enabling blockades to do serious damage in a span of a few years vs doing almost nothing, while also not being entirely trivial for the naval player. This has been a tired ramble.

[@LemonCake101]

Honestly I really like both of those. The no reduce war exhaustion at war actually is in a couple mods too.

[@gungiginga6969]

Hoi4 naval system is pretty good but most players dont have the necessary mindset or knowledge

[@gijskramer1702]

Ultimate admiral dreadnoughts has its problems but is very fun otherwise

[@jurriaan7]

I like the Hoi4 Naval as Japan. Altho I have a feeling the AI doesn't get it

[@gigachad8425]

i think it just comes down to the fact that you have realistically no control over navy in HOI4 all you can do is move them to some tiles and thats all also the fact that naval combat is based on tiles does not help rule the waves3 hasn't got tiles and that what makes it cool you just feel the atmosphere of two grand navys facing each other and not knowing where the enemy will move also battles are just way too fast i mean i don't believe that a combat beetwen 300 ships ends in literal hours i think that all you need to have a good navy combat system ig is just deleting the "tile" system and give more control to the player Like i would love if you could interact with a battle and you could just give an order to focus on some ship or maybe order your fleet to take an defensive stance unfortunately it is just one "deathstack" facing another "deathstack" shooting at themselves until submission also you didn't mention Total war empire or napoleon as both of them have great navy system and it is just lovely

[@christianwhite8877]

i just got a decent start in a ironman game as Naples. i have France (got them after becoming independent) castle (who was most willing to help) and Austria (who i needed the most help from because France didn't want to help me initially) as allies. i have an opm Sardinia as a vassal. Aragon is only allied to savoy and Ferrara, the only problem is i had to wait around a year till the renaissance spawns and i couldn't get any of Sicily in the war (for some reason. for me the starting ruler of Aragon seems to almost never die within 10 year unless I'm not playing as Naples or Aragon, and even then for me the starting heir of Aragon seems to usually die first which doesn't really help) and so far i think the papal state doesn't seem to want to give the event to make me give something to them

[@christianwhite8877]

It seems that castle broke the alliance over the province that I used to get Sardinia as a subject, I was hoping to keep the alliance longer but now I guess I'll be competing with them for some land (I already was going to try to form the Roman empire, but now Iberia is going to become a bigger priority)

[@joshithegreat5303]

Actual LemonCake recipe for 25k subs!

[@LemonCake101]

I am not going to advocate for the consumption of myself

[@Theplaymaker57]

Personally, I love Naval combat.

[@LemonCake101]

Almost as much as trade!

[@TheGhostrix09]

3k hours on hoi4 and I still dont know how it works

[@suedeciviii7142]

If you pick the naval policy idea, naval combat is a lot better 😉

[@LemonCake101]

I thought Naval was trash tier though :)

[@Wormopera]

In my hoi4 experience, it just never really worth the investment The moment you get a Better navy the only thing you should do is just to naval invade

[@jakebranch2599]

Part 2 please

[@ethanbrown7198]

I enjoy Napoleon total war naval battles.

[@countjondi9672]

It would be interesting to bring up the similar issues with planetary combat in Stellaris

[@LemonCake101]

Space Combat is kind of the land combat for Stellaris, although honestly Stellaris combat as a whole leaves a LOT to be desired

[@countjondi9672]

@@LemonCake101 Agreed.

[@johnconnor8206]

I think naval rotations are fun and challenging to time I think it’s fun

[@sosogo4real]

Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts!

[@icecanyon6090]

I have sunk (not a pun) over a hundred hours in that game, just wish the AI was better

[@matthewmcneany]

1. Empire and Napoleon total war had great naval combat mechanics.

[@AlreadyDeath666]

What about the ship game Paradox published on 2009 - East India Company? They have had direct exposure to ship based games in their past.

[@LemonCake101]

They did? Never heard of it!

[@korakys]

For real time Total Annihilation is the only game I've seen make naval as impactful as land. There are 100% water maps in that game.

[@Zombi3Johnny]

I do like hoi4 naval combat, once you learn it its pretty fun

[@federationprime]

RTW3 still has fundamental issues from the first RTW game, it's fun for a while, until you get absurd situations thanks to the TOTAL lack of control over your fleet's deployment. Oh yeah the division designer exists but it just gets ignored in favor of your dedicated support ships (which you designed, built, and assigned as such) getting deployed in the English Channel, at night, against the entire enemy navy at once.

[@MarkVrem]

Maybe you have done a video already. But if a person wanted to do a bad ideas run, What to get for tall or expansion.

[@LemonCake101]

I mean since no ideas are negative, technically no ideas are worst ideas.

[@Hu_Li]

​@@LemonCake101So take no ideas? Such insightful comment!

[@LemonCake101]

@@Hu_Li I mean... yes?

[@MarkVrem]

lol no idea run, --- theoretically that would be a lot of mana to throw at development i suppose LOL

[@Oiyss]

in EU4 ships should cost significantly more to build and upkeep them. Becasue you can just spam galleys and win against Ai. Smaller nations that takes naval ideas cant win this way easily because of upkeep cost and build cost so they can spam ships. SO they have to build up aswell. plus naval blockade should directly destroy your provinces trade access and if there are armies at coastal provinces that is blockaded they should suffer more attiration. and if a battle going on there navy should effect it via bonus to fire damage or morale damage.

[@electricVGC]

DW Civ VII will have riverine combat so we've fixed everything

[@theorixlux]

Did the tinto talks mention naval warfare yet? Theres a good chance pdx are aware the navy kinda disappoints in euiv... But theres also a good chance they don't care/they dont know how to solve it.

[@LemonCake101]

Not sure actually, I am not keeping up with the talks that much (wrong person to ask)

[@Speedster___]

5:23 Is that Aussie hate I hear?

[@LemonCake101]

I hate landing in Australia

[@notme8232]

One of the only good naval strategy games that also has land combat, in my opinion, is Star Wars: Empire at War. Both land and naval combat are absolutely essential to do anything, and the ship battles are fun enough that it often has the opposite problem, where no one ever wants to do ground battles because they comparatively suck, unless whatever mod you're playing completely overhauls the mechanics like AOTR (Also, fuck you, spaceships are still ships, so it definitely counts as naval warfare.)

[@jonathanlaulund3027]

hi love your content know this is the wrong place to send this idea but what if an uncontested blokaed of a province or are like normandy over time made the trade power of those provinces buff the enemies economy instead of yours over time and if you let it go long enough the are or province would defect to engalnd or become an independant nation with a guarantie or smth, short term you could igonre as it is now but if you let decades go by an dont adress the issue you would have a slowly building negative effect on your nation culminating in lossing control of the are compleatly.... makes engaging in naval warfare more necesarry which can make the combat more interesting as the consequnce of loosing a batle if you adress is right away is negligable but if its a battle you have been puting of for a while loosing is more disaterous... as it is with land battles... your fort being seiged in eu4 at minus 49% is not something you need to rush your army into deal with andd you can even spend some time the fort buys you to hire mercs or army and then adress the threat.... but if your capital is at plus 49% you want to deal with that asap to avoid at best some war exhaustion and at worst loosing the war... i dono im a little drunk and mostly rambeling but maybe someone can look at this and tell me why my idea sucks.

[@LemonCake101]

Could be interesting, but as always you have to make it not too annoying on the receiving end.

[@basvriese1934]

In EU IV you really only need a navy to conquer islands, otherwise they do very little and are quite expensive. I really hope that in EU V ships will atleast be able to interact a lot more with the trading system, especially during peace time as well

[@КофаЛыч]

Navy isn't really expensive in my practice, even going above limit is fine. It can be useful to siege coastal forts and secure strategic crossings

[@calamity916]

@@КофаЛыч That's my experience too

[@basvriese1934]

@@КофаЛыч they are expensive, because every ducat you put into your navy is one you could have put into a building and if you compare it like that then buildings are more worthwhile basically until you make so much money you're trying to find ways to spend it

[@КофаЛыч]

@@basvriese1934 bad logic, apples to oranges. One is long term financial investment, other is military tool. You see, if fleet was challenging, than it would've not been worthwhile. But with how it's easy to dominate AI in naval, and by the fact that you can literally expand your fleet without spending (ship capture) it doesn't really puts strain on your country.

[@Makem12]

Rise of Nations naval combat was pretty good

[@tsaralexis9459]

Ron navies suck, it amounts to just being wealthier than the other country and being able to make more battleships and aircraft carriers. Also the fact that not having a navy can absolutely ruin you is super annoying and makes large countries able to destroy smaller ones

[@Cutepanda1943]

Also it is death stack based so it is just who has the bigger death stack.

[@arthurrelke]

lets see how fast can you delete a victoria 3 comment

[@LemonCake101]

Me, deleting comments? I would never...

[@gottkroprinz7859]

>Naval combat mentioned >did not mention AC4 Tragic

[@LemonCake101]

AC4?

[@mappingshaman5280]

​@LemonCake101 assassins creed 4 Black flag. Probably the best naval game there is

[@martinprince8253]

HELP THIS GUY OUT! HE HAS ONLY 4 MEASLY SUBSCRIBERS Edit: 3:14 okay maybe there is a reason for that: Greatest sea faring nations of WWII: USA, JAPAN, GERMANY. That's it. None more. Thats all. Yep.

[@LemonCake101]

Hey, limited space on screen, and I do touch on Britain too! (Usually just as the allies though)

[@martinprince8253]

@@LemonCake101 I'm just poking fun. thx for the response :)

[@juncheok8579]

I actually quite enjoy the naval combat in hoi4 lol 1:07 people aren't praising AoE naval combat? What? Now i might not be seeing the full picture as i only play AoE2 but that's just not true

[@LemonCake101]

I am friends with a couple AoE 2 enjoyers and they cronically cope about AoE naval combat being insanely ‘richer person wins’ and once you win you can stop the other side even attempting to build ships

[@qhu3878]

you can hate on naval combat all you want, I would do anything to see naval combat in ck3

[@taylorcasale680]

Is there any hope for Navy in EU5?

[@blazewardog]

"If you dont care about boats, you shouldn't be playing WoWs"

[@LemonCake101]

I mean I played destroyers only in that game

[@blazewardog]

@@LemonCake101 for 4000 hours? My condolences.

[@theonetruebobthecob972]

Bongo

[@LemonCake101]

Bongo

[@jonbro65]

why doesnt lemon cake mention victoria 2 and three

[@LemonCake101]

Honestly haven’t played the games enough

[@FalkyRocket2222]

damn based

[@tritojean7549]

12:23 erm ackchually cadia come from french cadie which is the name of the place the cadien lives (they're called cajun for some reason in english instead of cadian which would follow he standard translation from french to english)

[@LemonCake101]

I dunno, I prefer my head cannon

[@crafterofdoom]

how about Empire Total War?

[@Ridien]

Answer: It doesn't

[@wademarshall2364]

>Victoria 2 UI my guy thats vicky1 UI at BEST

[@anelstarcevic696]

I love the naval aspect of games, and I always try to get the most out of it but it's sad that most of the GSG and 4X games don't utilize it well, HoI4 has such a great fleet organization and naval UI in general, even the naval designer works well for the game and is able to represent most of the ships that were used in ww2... Then PDX decided to ruin the stats of the modules to make it impossible to recreate historical stats and have made the Navy so expansive that when compared to historical prices refining a battleship could cost up to 6 times more in HoI4 than in real life. For example, the refit of HMS Queen Elizabeth, HMS Warspite, and HMS Valiant, cost over 3x more than a new KGV class battleship in HoI4 whilst in real-life money needed for refit of the 3 ships could not cover the price for one KGV class battleship. I made a price comparison on the forum or Reddit so I will try to find it, if I can't find it I will calculate the prices again. Also, HoI4 does everything in its power to remove the need for a navy, The USSR Will never need a land lease, and the blockade of the UK doesn't do anything for the war effort in the way that it forces the UK to surrender and won't crack the British industry unless blockade lasts for 2 years without break, My 16" guns can't even break level1 naval fort, whilst marine divisions can cause damage to infrastructure and buildings whilst landing and fighting. I found comparison "...You are right it can be more expensive but HoI4 takes it to a whole other level, where historical refits like the one Warspite got would be faster cheaper, and more feasible since you can have 3 Queen Elizabeths modernized for less than one KGV built, in HoI4 you are better off by building a new battleship because the game packs many systems into one, Armor is the thickness of armor, type of steel, and armor scheme. The same is true for engines and turrets, they are multiple systems cramped under an umbrella. For example Q.E. Warspite and Valiant all went through refits which lasted about 2 years and all ships were modernized before WW2. and during or shortly before the construction of the KGV Class started. The refit included new Boilers to try and rise their speed and efficiency. In HoI4 this would cost 7300 IC The in-game version of KGV costs 9600ic Queen Elizabeth Class battleship costs 8600ic just one upgrade to increase the ship's speed by 3 knots is enough to make refit obsolete. However, those ships received some other upgrades, Secondary armament was changed to dual-purpose guns 400 IC The superstructure was remodeled to make space for larger floatplanes 100 IC New Fire control and radar were installed 300 IC New AA guns were installed 200 IC Total cost: 8300 IC for refit. But the refit did not end there, irl 15" MK1 guns were upgraded, and new systems were added inside the turret to increase the elevation and rate of fire. from heavy 1 to heavy 2 would cost 1500 IC Totaling refit to 9800 IC, 200 IC more than KGV irl 3 modernized battleships cost around 7.2M pounds KGV cost 7.4M pounds. Even if we were to ignore the main gun upgrade 21900 IC is enough to construct two KGV class battleships and still have 3000 IC left to spare, probably to start construction on another KGV.

[@abrvalg321]

DW, it sucks irl too))

[@LemonCake101]

:( I find it fun!

[@jesuschrist9477]

Next video should be suggestions and ideas to make naval combat fun

[@anothervirgin826]

I'm the only one who likes eu4 navy?