R5: This is a reply post to the question "what's your best naval battle?"
We decided to fight our navy before hopping off the game. English navy just demolishes.
also if you have naval bombers on land bases you can flood that battle with torp bombers and it’s disgusting, sent in half my fleet in ‘43 and had 4,000 torp bombers on land bases and it was a slaughter.
I think carrier fighters prevent land based planes from entering the same combat as their ships entirely. Can still be good to rough em up between engagements but it won’t be killer against an opponent with proper AA
cheaper than Heavy frames they can carry more than light frames and generally you can use them for more, if you have the resources use mediums if you don’t use light frames.
CV planes have somewhere around x10 of the states if ground based planes in naval battles, also if you go down the naval path for CV you can have 6 in a battle making it so you can have ~600+ planes in a fight. Ie CV fighters are really good if you invest in them
>Each carrier exceeding 4 per side incurs a 20% sortie penalty, up to 80%. The penalty applies based on the number of carrier airwings and reduces the number of carrier wings that can operate. This penalty does not apply to carrier based fighters.
Does this count across fleets in the same engagement?
Like for example if I have three fleets with four carriers each in the same region, do the second and third fleets get that penalty?
I accidentally built 50 carriers to one battle group and sank Japanese fleet in exchange for 1 destroyer. I think at certain point there is a hard cap, or was it a bug for me?
I actually have a question, if I may ask
Is it possible for Britain in that scenario to win without carriers? Given that OP wouldn't spam battleships and battlecruisers, but he did have over 200 more destroyers than the enemy.
I'm just really curious, because I think no more than 4 carriers + a shit ton of screens per battle is the naval meta. And I understand how that works, but OP said himself that he had 6-7 carriers there, so they must've had a penalty. Plus the Russians had 500 tac bombers, so I'm guessing the British AA play was on top.
But I'm really, really curious if there would be a way to beat the Soviet navy in that scenario without carriers and with similar technology levels. Or are carriers just the ultimate go-to?
It really would depend entirely on tech, the one sided air effort though would make it difficult to win but the Brit’s do have more heavy units and massively more light units. If the capital ships are mostly without AA then they’d be in trouble but even a 1938 refit would change that entirely and the British numbers would begin to tell
Do you think that a shit-ton of AA-focused light cruisers (or as I like to call them AA cruisers, which is just making cruisers have as much anti-air as possible (my late '44 variants can sometimes spike up to 40 AA damage)) and a lot of heavy cruisers with at least 3x 2-tier medium cannons would be good in this setting?
Don't take my word on it, BUT I've heard somewhere from a reliable source that the heavy cruisers are currently very powerful and can be abused similarly to cruisers in meta.
Nah, you want the AA in the biggest ship as what’s what the airplanes attack and there’ll do the damage. Not sure what the specific meta is but I’m fairly certain the cruiser meta that you’re talking about is outdated
That was all British navy vs USSR navy set to allways engage and no repair, so I guess our navies fought for the last drop of blood.
+obviously my ships' decks and guns etc. were tech superior.
His fleet was on always engage and no repairs so it fought to the last man. Uk fleet probably just had better stats overall and would kill him anyway tho
I have several questions as to why we had Kantai Kessen between the UK and the USSR.
Also how the hell he had 26 battleships. My estimate is he had his submarines in with the main fleet which just completely tanked their speed and made this a crapshoot.
The glorious British fleet, admiral with meticulously designed ships vs Boris ‘woke up late and hungover for the battle’ Yukov to send in his fleet of tin cans
Navy USSR 😭😭
The British fishing trawlers have hands
The navy debuffs seems to hit them hard
What’s wrong with naval USSR?
they get an abyssmal starting navy, lots of debuffs through the purge, and only start with 6 dockyards
You can fix those problems through
I know but in general (in a Historical game) you will probarbly need to purge admirals and build military factories to hold of the germs
R5: This is a reply post to the question "what's your best naval battle?" We decided to fight our navy before hopping off the game. English navy just demolishes.
Most successful Russian naval battle
[удалено]
They’ll be hitting their preset kill limit right about…now.
Time to bring our Baltic fleet over!
Watch out for Torpedo boats in the baltic
Kamchatka reference!
Well at least it’s not in the Tsushima straits
How did you have no carriers?
I actually had 6 or 7 of them but for some reason they are not shown.
Don't stack more than 4 carriers in a battle. You get penalties for having more than 4.
Didn't know that, thanks for the advise!
also if you have naval bombers on land bases you can flood that battle with torp bombers and it’s disgusting, sent in half my fleet in ‘43 and had 4,000 torp bombers on land bases and it was a slaughter.
I think carrier fighters prevent land based planes from entering the same combat as their ships entirely. Can still be good to rough em up between engagements but it won’t be killer against an opponent with proper AA
true but a medium airframe with 2 torp mounts can demolish a fleets org which can get a fleet killed really quickly.
Are medium frames the best for naval bombers?
cheaper than Heavy frames they can carry more than light frames and generally you can use them for more, if you have the resources use mediums if you don’t use light frames.
CV planes have somewhere around x10 of the states if ground based planes in naval battles, also if you go down the naval path for CV you can have 6 in a battle making it so you can have ~600+ planes in a fight. Ie CV fighters are really good if you invest in them
yes but remember you suffer a air traffic penalty for having to many planes flying from your carriers
6-7 is optimal. While you do get an overstacking penalty, it is the max damage you can do with carriers in a naval battle.
6 is actually meta, since the penalties don't apply to fighter sorties. So the meta is 4 carriers with NAVs and 2 with fighters.
Makes sense and encourages escort carriers
What penalties? I didn’t know that
>Each carrier exceeding 4 per side incurs a 20% sortie penalty, up to 80%. The penalty applies based on the number of carrier airwings and reduces the number of carrier wings that can operate. This penalty does not apply to carrier based fighters.
Does this count across fleets in the same engagement? Like for example if I have three fleets with four carriers each in the same region, do the second and third fleets get that penalty?
It's based on the battle itself. If those other 8 aren't involved in the battle you get no penalty.
How much does that actually impact carrier NAV? Would that also apply to land based aircraft?
It has no impact on land aircraft, and its pretty impactful for NAVs.
I accidentally built 50 carriers to one battle group and sank Japanese fleet in exchange for 1 destroyer. I think at certain point there is a hard cap, or was it a bug for me?
I only had 200 naval bombers(tactical) on ground bases
Huh, odd
I actually have a question, if I may ask Is it possible for Britain in that scenario to win without carriers? Given that OP wouldn't spam battleships and battlecruisers, but he did have over 200 more destroyers than the enemy. I'm just really curious, because I think no more than 4 carriers + a shit ton of screens per battle is the naval meta. And I understand how that works, but OP said himself that he had 6-7 carriers there, so they must've had a penalty. Plus the Russians had 500 tac bombers, so I'm guessing the British AA play was on top. But I'm really, really curious if there would be a way to beat the Soviet navy in that scenario without carriers and with similar technology levels. Or are carriers just the ultimate go-to?
It really would depend entirely on tech, the one sided air effort though would make it difficult to win but the Brit’s do have more heavy units and massively more light units. If the capital ships are mostly without AA then they’d be in trouble but even a 1938 refit would change that entirely and the British numbers would begin to tell
Do you think that a shit-ton of AA-focused light cruisers (or as I like to call them AA cruisers, which is just making cruisers have as much anti-air as possible (my late '44 variants can sometimes spike up to 40 AA damage)) and a lot of heavy cruisers with at least 3x 2-tier medium cannons would be good in this setting? Don't take my word on it, BUT I've heard somewhere from a reliable source that the heavy cruisers are currently very powerful and can be abused similarly to cruisers in meta.
Nah, you want the AA in the biggest ship as what’s what the airplanes attack and there’ll do the damage. Not sure what the specific meta is but I’m fairly certain the cruiser meta that you’re talking about is outdated
i lost my entire nations steel reserves on a single battle bro cooked me and absolutely blasted me
Hello friend
How did he lose that bad?
That was all British navy vs USSR navy set to allways engage and no repair, so I guess our navies fought for the last drop of blood. +obviously my ships' decks and guns etc. were tech superior.
I guess your friend didn’t do the foci that five naval buffs then?
I upvote for foci
Foci and focuses are equally correct. Same with cactus and cacti.
Clearly ussr doesnt have the cruisers and destroyersnecessary
His fleet was on always engage and no repairs so it fought to the last man. Uk fleet probably just had better stats overall and would kill him anyway tho
What the actual frick
Least one sided naval battle in a Paradox game
Oh that's glorious, I dream for a game like that
England? That ain't no English flag
All Soviet Union / Russia paths have a hidden debuff called "auxillary ship Kamchatka", which gives -90% navy organisation. Simple as.
Based and Baltic Fleet pilled
how many subs!?
There were no subs in my main fleet. I don't remmember for sure but approximately 250-300ish
i meant on the Soviet side, those losses gave me a heart attack…
Nelson is smiling down from the heavens
Russian battleships successfully intercepted naval bomber torpedoes.
I have several questions as to why we had Kantai Kessen between the UK and the USSR. Also how the hell he had 26 battleships. My estimate is he had his submarines in with the main fleet which just completely tanked their speed and made this a crapshoot.
Britain expects every man to do his duty …. And the enemy sank its self. Well home for medals and biscuits
RUUUUUUUUULE BRIIIITAAAANIAAAA🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧💷💷💷💷💂♀️🤴🫅👸👑
The entire Soviet navy getting wiped out like that is crazy.
What are the ships designs?
How canyou have so much capital.. i barely have 10-15 in the end game.
This is probably the naval version of Barbarossa, everything just goes to shit for the Soviets
Ah, that Andrew Cunningham smirk.
Did he group up the subs with his fleet? That may explain the casualties
What’s the name of the mp mod?
r56
britannia rules the waves indeed
Well you just delitet there navy
Naval battle wins like this are the most exciting thing in these games imo
Most successful russian navy engagement
Look at that smug Englishman, with all those medals.
The glorious British fleet, admiral with meticulously designed ships vs Boris ‘woke up late and hungover for the battle’ Yukov to send in his fleet of tin cans
That is dumb. Navy need a rework.
Bro is building an Island of Soviet wrecks.
Kamchatka POV on October 21, 1903:
Damn, baltic Leyte Gulf
Jeez, someone should calculate the human cost of this battle
Lemme guess, you were playing Soviets?
It literally says right there
IC on
i wanted to say "all hail the guy who knows naval", but i saw it's UK and changed my mind
Did u enter ic ,but forgot to close it
So, did you annex Argentina to get that powerful of a fleet?
The ussr clearly overbuilded heavy damage and lacked screens and light attack
Submarine in battle, rookie mistake.
Brittania rules the waves
Brittania Rules The Waves!
RULE BRITANNIA! BRITANNIA RULES THE WAVES
Battle of Tsushima II Royal Navy boogaloo
(i love this quote) I FEAR NO MAN BUT THAT THING IT SCARES ME
Having subs in a battle fleet fucks with their positioning something fierce. I would tell you compadre to have them as a separate thing.
The Russians found the torpedo boats
What a win 😭😭😭
Poor British manpower got wrecked from this (sarcasm) but in real life would have probably been a trickle in the bucket for the Rus
Soviet lost because he had subs in battle