Battle of Dogger Bank

[tramker]

I made a new scenario, Battle of Dogger Bank.

http://bet.iline.cz/~mk/dl/DoggerBank.zip

Since the AI is dumb, if you want realistic results, set both sides as human controlled and just let the Germans charge ahead at their given course and speed.



http://www.worldwar1.co.uk/dogger-bank.html

[CaptHawkeye]

The AI isn't really "dumb" as much as it's just trying to do its job. IE: Win the war. Dogger Bank basically calls for the AI to think on a widely strategic sense. (IE: Sheer could gain nothing from trying to fight Beatty's cruisers and may just expose himself to the Grand Fleet.) The problem is the battle AI doesn't think that way and has little concept of self-preservation unless it is TOTALLY outnumbered and outgunned.

Besides, none of Jutland's scenarios are designed to play out exactly like they did in history. They start out that way but the beauty of the game is that after the initial dispositions are set, *you* are writing history now. Who'd want to play Jutland if all the battles played exactly like they were supposed to anyway? I'll read a book in that case.

[tramker]

I think a scenario like this shouldn't be hard on the AI, if the game allowed to gave it a little bit of guidance:

- ability to set a goal (preserve the force and escape to Wilhelmshaven).
- ability to keep formations (both division a task force formations). There should be several preset division formations (column, line, echelon) and task force formation (like in the campaign, but tha AI forgets about it as soon as the battle starts).

[Bullethead]

Dogger Bank is a problematic battle to do at present because the Jutland game is set up for 1916. It's not just the obvious thing of having to use a Brit AC for Blucher, it's fire control In very early 1915, things were rather different in that regard, which tended to put Brit and German BC gunnery fairly close to parity. By 1916, however, the German BCs shot way better than the Brit BCs, and that's how things are in Jutland. So that's what you'll see here.

This presents a serious balance problem for a Dogger Bank scenario with the historical OOB. Under the 1916 gunnery conditions modeled in the game, the Germans have a very substantial advantage. They will score significantly more hits in a give period of time than the Brits will, effectively making the Brits outnumbered even though they have a few more BCs. The AI will realize this and fight accordingly.

We hope someday to produce expansion packs for Jutland, extending the timeframe on both ends of 1916. If that ever happens, we'll have early-war versions of the existing ships, plus of course Blucher. At that point, this scenario should work much better.

I agree with you that the scenario editor should allow you to set an objective for a fleet. The game actually supports this already, but it's only available to developers at present, and not via the scenario editor. I've mentioned this myself a few times, but it would probably be good to hear it from customers as well. Why not go to the bug report server and send in a ticket with the SUGGESTION type selected, asking for this?

[tramker]

Acually the first time I played it, I got pretty good results, disabled one german BC and later sunk it with torpedoes and got Lion's turret disabled and severe flooding, but it didn't sink.

But I wonder, what game simulation options are supposed to be realistic ? The presets seems okish, but advanced hits are off and torpedoes seems to me too accurate and maybe gunnery damage too low, but I don't really know.

[Bullethead]

Originally Posted by tramker

But I wonder, what game simulation options are supposed to be realistic ? The presets seems okish, but advanced hits are off and torpedoes seems to me too accurate and maybe gunnery damage too low, but I don't really know.

For historical accuracy, you should leave all the sliders in their default positions and turn on both Advanced Critical Hit (ACH) options.

Turning on "Fagile AP" nerfs the guns that had crappy AP shells in 1916. This affects all Brit guns from 7.5" and up, and a few older German guns (mostly in predreadnoughts and shore batteries). It has no effect on guns of 6"/15cm and below because they only shoot HE anyway (except the 6" BL Mk XVII in Canada). Leaving this setting off basically gives the Brits late-war Greenboy shells, so their 13.5" and 15" guns quickly obliterate the Germans.

Turning on "Poor Cordite Handling" makes all Brit ships of AC size and larger have a 20% chance of blowing up if one of their main turrets is penetrated. This really should be called "Dangerous Cordite", because the Brit ships would explode even if all precautions were followed, due to the nastiness of their propellant. This is an extra and significant chance for Brits to explode over and above the regular, rare explosion caused by the "regular" critical hit. If you leave this setting off, all ships on both sides are still subject to the occasional explosion from the normal mechanism.

So, for the ACH settings....

• Both on: Historical, but can be frustrating for the Brits.
• Fragile AP on, explosions off: Good for MP, because Brits aren't blowing up all the time, and their big guns don't wreck the Germans too fast.
• Explosions on, fragile AP off: Would be historical for 1917-18, so is good for what-if the Brits had Greenboys earlier. Makes things interesting because now both sides are rather vulnerable.
• Both off: Significant Brit advantage in firepower, unbalanced by the German ability to even the odds with lucky hits.

As for torpedo accuracy, that's actually OK when the number of torps fired is historical (as in about 1/2 of the available DD tubes per attack). Most torps come close enough to make the target dodge, but hit rates match those shown in Campbell.

The problem right now is that DDs are firing ALL their torps at once, contrary to doctrine. This makes it rather hard for ships to dodge massive attacks--not enough room between all the torps. We're looking at this at present.

[smithcorp]

Originally Posted by Bullethead

I agree with you that the scenario editor should allow you to set an objective for a fleet. The game actually supports this already, but it's only available to developers at present, and not via the scenario editor. I've mentioned this myself a few times, but it would probably be good to hear it from customers as well. Why not go to the bug report server and send in a ticket with the SUGGESTION type selected, asking for this?

Top idea - I'd love to have some strategic objectives for my fleets to follow in scenarios! I'll do this.

smith

[Lempereur1]

Originally Posted by tramker

I think a scenario like this shouldn't be hard on the AI, if the game allowed to gave it a little bit of guidance:

- ability to set a goal (preserve the force and escape to Wilhelmshaven).
- ability to keep formations (both division a task force formations). There should be several preset division formations (column, line, echelon) and task force formation (like in the campaign, but tha AI forgets about it as soon as the battle starts).

Why dont you upload your scenario so everyone can take a look at it.

[tramker]

Originally Posted by Lempereur1

Why dont you upload your scenario so everyone can take a look at it.

Of course I did, see the first post.