Naval Warfare - how important in Civ3?

[UKScud]

Given the new resource and trading model, the ability to blockade seaboard cities will, I think, be a very important strategy.

What do you think?

Is blockading ports the only way to intercept trade (by sea) of strategic resources on different continents? Can you intercept trade mid-ocean? I'm thinking U-boats and convoys here.

Can you defend against this, in any way other than building naval units in the seaboard cities and hoping they can destroy the blockading unit(s)?

I am assuming that we are only in the early end game here (circa 1900 real world) and that air power has not really become influential.

Can you think of any other viable tactics using naval forces?

[Sandman]

Can you defend against this, in any way other than building naval units in the seaboard cities and hoping they can destroy the blockading unit(s)?

I heard that coastal fortresses can now open fire on nearby ships. This suggests that the enemy will have to destroy the fortress with ship to shore fire in order to blockade the port unharassed.

Standard artillery units should also be able to fight naval units. They'll probably be deadly if on a mountain.

A strong culture will mean you can keep the enemy back if they have not declared war. And it will give you breathing space if they do declare war.

Can you think of any other viable tactics using naval forces?

Destroying enemy roads with bombardment.

[Lorizael]

Naval units (ones that can bombard) will be very good for hampering coastal cities. And the ability to blockade a city is expceptionally useful considering how important trade is in Civ III.

[joey703]

Originally posted by Sandman


I heard that coastal fortresses can now open fire on nearby ships. This suggests that the enemy will have to destroy the fortress with ship to shore fire in order to blockade the port unharassed.

I never heard this before, but this adds a brand new strategic element to the game. It creates chokepoints where one thin waterway connects two larger bodies of water. For instance, a city stationed in a position such as Gibralter can deny access to unfriendly ships. Hopefully, computers will recognize the strategic value of holding such a city.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Looks like im actually gonna build ships in Civ3.

[dennis580]

You can also blockade channels too. As every square in your trade route must be clear. So lets say thiers a small channel 3 squares wide that another civs trade routes passes thru. All you had to do is place 3 ships thier and you have successfully blockaded that civs trade route.

[dennis580]

Naval power will be FAR more important then your ground forces on Island type maps. Which is what I plan to play on.

[FrostyBoy]

Looking at the size of those battleships, i'm too scared to go in the water!

[Inverse Icarus]

i hope submarine warfare is expanded a bit more than "they're hard to see".

anyway, i honestly believe civ3 will have intense naval battles.

[SerapisIV]

Originally posted by Sandman
I heard that coastal fortresses can now open fire on nearby ships. This suggests that the enemy will have to destroy the fortress with ship to shore fire in order to blockade the port unharassed.

Standard artillery units should also be able to fight naval units. They'll probably be deadly if on a mountain.

Where'd you hear that about coastal fortresses? I haven't even heard mention of their inclusion in the game yet (probably skimmed over)

Also, if mountains give sight range bonuses...do they give bombardment range bonuses as well?

Have they kept the SMAC "artillery duel" feature...I hope so. Also, if one of the units, whether ground or sea doing the bomabarding and has longer range then the defender, the attacker should just kick the defenders butt.

[dennis580]

Yea I remember reading that Costal Fortresses can return fire, but I don't know what thier range is.

[dainbramaged13]

Originally posted by SerapisIV

Have they kept the SMAC "artillery duel" feature...I hope so. Also, if one of the units, whether ground or sea doing the bomabarding and has longer range then the defender, the attacker should just kick the defenders butt.

please, for the good of us that didn't play smac, tell us what u mean!

as a side note, if they have blockades, they should have blockade runners (8th grade north carolina history anyone? ) but i realize ya cant have everything, and maybe its more balanced without them. but if you really do have superior naval power, you can technically still hold a blockade OUTSIDE the culture borders by jst forming a bigger ring

anyway, i found a way that u can blocakde in the middle of the ocean, or well, kind of. if a person is incapable of using deep sea for trade routes, then they have to take one of the shallow routes. suppose that there is a kind of 'u' shaped landmass, and they want to get from one tip of the u to the other. you can prevent then by blockading the shallow sea in the middle of the u, where they dont have cities.

it may seem like an impossible situation, but if you dont take the example so literally, i can imagine plenty of cases where it will happen

[Stuie]

Originally posted by UberKruX
i hope submarine warfare is expanded a bit more than "they're hard to see".

anyway, i honestly believe civ3 will have intense naval battles.

For once I can whole heartedly, 100% agree with Uber. I think the navy will be an integral part of wresting control of cities from the enemy's clutches. I'm really looking forward to lining up some battleships and blasting the feces out of my enemy's costal cities.

Combat sounds so much improved; gaining air superiority and control of the seas will most likely mean something in Civ3, whereas I tended to ignore this aspect of the game (other than for a good laugh) in the other Civ games (the other TWO that is, I never played those other "Civ" games (well unless you count SMAC as a Civ game - I mean those other other Civ games (you know the ones))).

[SerapisIV]

Originally posted by dainbramaged13
please, for the good of us that didn't play smac, tell us what u mean!

When one artillery-type units attacks another (including artillery vs. ships) they attack each other with artillery strength values untl one is destroyed. However in SMAC all bombarding units had a range of 2, so if one artiller unit attacked another, they were both in range of each other, this is most likely not true in Civ3, as some units will probably have 2-tile bombard ranges, while others have 1-tile ranges.

It's a really nice feature adds realism to the combat system over the howitzer attacks in Civ2

[UKScud]

i honestly believe civ3 will have intense naval battles.

Me too, Uber...but where?

What I mean is this...

What are naval units needed for in Civ3?

1) Transporting ground units for invasion.

A traditional role in all the Civ games, and absolutely necessary in Civ3 if warfare is fought to deny or take resources from the enemy. The ability to move ground units from place to place on your world map has never been more important.

2) Defending against invasion from the sea.

Again, a traditional role from precious games. I hope the AI doesn't end up clustering its naval forces at one or two places on your world map as it did in the previous Civs. Will the AI know how to use naval power?

3) Shore bombardment.

Destroying enemy roads with bombardment.

The resource model makes infrastructure very important. If it's downgraded (I've been watching too many Pentagon briefings on CNN) then you might affect your enemies production capability, as well as economically.

On the other hand, the most recent modern screen shots show lots and lots of roads and rail, in much the same way as previous Civs. Ugleeee!...and how difficult is it going to be to bombard an infrastructure like that. Destroying coastal roads is going to have little effect on overall infrastructure.

4) Blockade.

It'll be much more difficult with coastal guns taking on a defensive role. Perhaps that is where effective use of submarines comes in to play. The submarine cannot be seen by the coastal fortress or other ground artillery units, can it? If so, it can just sit there till some other naval unit comes along wondering why all his merchant shipping has been sunk...and then...torpedoes away Kaptain!

5) Denying Passage.
Sticking 3 destroyers across a narrow channel was always something you could do in the other Civs. I'm assuming it'll be the same here.

Any other thoughts?

[Lonestar]

And, of course, as a Nuclear Deterrent...

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Lonestar
And, of course, as a Nuclear Deterrent...

How is Navy a nuclear deterrant?

UKScud... for all past reasons and the new ones listed here, Navy will be important...

[SuiteSisterMary]

Originally posted by Lorizael


How is Navy a nuclear deterrant?

Boomers, baby. Nuke subs. Ballastic missile launching platforms with first strike capability. Trident D5 missiles that WILL land within ~160 feet of their targets after flying half way around the world. "Chickens of the Sea - We Hide With Pride."

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by SuiteSisterMary
Boomers, baby. Nuke subs.

Oh, oh, right, right, nuclear subs. Okay, nevermind. I thought you were talking about battleships being nuclear deterrance. I mean a battleship is strong but there is nothing that compares to nuclear weapon.

Trident D5 missiles that WILL land within ~160 feet of their targets

A quote comes to mind, "Almost only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades and... nuclear weapons"

"Chickens of the Sea - We Hide With Pride."

@ that!

[Faboba]

Also don't know if anyone's mentioned yet, but all the generated maps will be at least 60% water so.....

[Sava]

Naval superiority will be a must in this game. Once all available land is claimed, he who rules the seas, rules the world.

[Deathray]

Originally posted by SoulAssassin
Naval superiority will be a must in this game. Once all available land is claimed, he who rules the seas, rules the world.

Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the waves...:-)

[cyril25376]

Originally posted by SoulAssassin
Naval superiority will be a must in this game. Once all available land is claimed, he who rules the seas, rules the world.

I agree. But I am really interested in the effectivty of sea fortresses to protect your city against naval bombarding.

[zeh]

Carriers will be a lot important too cause they are mobyle bases for Aircrafts, that now need have a base for they operations.
Hehe, and I love make carries!

[FrantzX]

It is altogether fitting that we who have sailed the deeps of space now return again to the sea. This is in many ways a water planet, and it can be ruled from the waves. With sea power, rugged terrain can be bypassed and enemy strongholds isolated. Once naval superiority is achieved, Planet is ours for the taking.

-- Col. Corazon Santiago,
"Planet: A Survivalist's Guide"

[albiedamned]

Originally posted by FrantzX
It is altogether fitting that we who have sailed the deeps of space now return again to the sea. This is in many ways a water planet, and it can be ruled from the waves. With sea power, rugged terrain can be bypassed and enemy strongholds isolated. Once naval superiority is achieved, Planet is ours for the taking.

-- Col. Corazon Santiago,
"Planet: A Survivalist's Guide"

Heh, heh. That's actually funny now, in retrospect, since naval power mattered so little in SMAC.

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Deathray
Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the waves...:-)

And their special unit comes along right about when sea power will begin to be really important.

[SerapisIV]

Then gets her ass-whooped when the ironclads show her men-o-war the bottom of Davy Jones' locker

[UKScud]

Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the waves...

Yea! Go Death Ray!

Then gets her ass-whooped when the ironclads show her men-o-war the bottom of Davy Jones' locker

Rats! I'd hoped no one would remember that, which is why I never mentioned it myself. Now there's a case for Golden Ages if ever there was one. Imperialist powers always come and go.

OK! Nuclear deterrant has been added to the list of navy uses.

Note that there is a slight difference this time round , mentioned in the latest news item. Subs can only carry ONE nuclear missile, and that has to be a tactical nuke, not an ICBM which is limited to the city it is built in (again another difference - Can you here the shelter sirens yet!). Other subs and Aegis Cruisers can see subs.

If you become a nuclear power, how will you deploy your weapons? Sub-carried TacNuke or ICBM?

[Col Bigspear]

Both, lay off the coast with Subs for first strikes and use ICBM's for follow up strikes. After all thats what the Real life ones are for. Also if all of your cities are Nuked, you still have a sea born response.