Whats actually the objective of the campaign?

[bjornvermeulen4]

Title.
Honestly i have no idea you can gain territory, but for instance as germany gaining territory means maintaining a fleet in the mediteranian which always repairs in germany.

Accumulate naval prestige? Develop your economy (basically fighting as little wars as possible as they negatively impact gpd.)? You can completely annihilate your enemy but in like 2 years theyll have rebuild. As ships are cheap but upkeep high.

[Rear]

I feel the same way tbh. There's no real goal to any campaign as of the current patch.

Going to war hurts your own economy more than the enemy's. Even long-term blockades are pointless. Destroying transports doesn't feel very rewarding and, again, doesn't really do much to hurt your enemy.

All that happens is the AI reduces their tech slider for a bit (combined with not having any ships to maintain) until they've rebuilt their fleet, which makes the game even more boring because you usually end up with a huge tech advantage anyway.

The boost to GDP every five years or so completely offsets any damage a player can do to the AI GDP through blockading etc.

Every war ends in a 'minor victory' even if you completely demolish them, and the money you get in peace deals is meaningless because it isn't punishing enough.

We really need more incentives to encourage countries to go to war, to stay in said war, and to win decisively instead of peacing out ASAP.

[godspeedthunder]

Atm it's just a sandbox, there are no goals.

Personally I like it like this but I can understand why people want specific goals too.

[Bramborough]

I guess the main goal is to make it to 1950 without getting fired. Successfully shepherding a navy through 60 years of war and peace, shrug. This is basically what RTW was (didn't play RTW2, but I assume it was the same).

Additional slightly-related comment: we're not fighting the entire war each time. Presumably there's a substantial land/air component occurring as well. We might be obliterating the enemy navy in a given war, but that doesn't mean our nation's armies & air forces are faring so well. I guess that's one possible rationale for why the government doesn't always follow our naval recommendation on potential peace deals.

[caaron14]

RTW2 is pretty much same, just with carriers.

[bjornvermeulen4]

Originally posted by Rear:

I feel the same way tbh. There's no real goal to any campaign as of the current patch.

I think there needs to be more pain in losing ships like a way larger cost to build (Like 3x). Not having a BB for 1 year pays for 1 BB. SO the best way to increase their naval budget and to get them to replace their ships with new designs is sinking their ships. If they cost more to build then endlessly replacing them would be impossible.
To offset this there should be a financial return for scuppering ships in order to not completely destroy innovation. Like a 40% of initial cost x % of durability. This would not be illogical as at least the materials can be reused. And would still allow you to renew and let you benefit from keeping ships from sinking other then keeping the crew. Regarding that your crew pool should be more varied and reflect the source. Veterans from a scuppered ship should be the first assigned to a newly build one. The loss of experienced crew should be a disadvantage you dont have when scuppering one.

This would at least give us a sense of effect to the war.

Then maybe special long term missions to control strategic passages or ports for GDP gains. But territorial gains should require big wins which dont exist. But maybe a goal for germay control the baltic. England probably wants to control strategic ports around the world. Speain mainly in the americas. Maybe greece could fight to win territory from the ottomans and cyprus from the uk. Etc

[godspeedthunder]

Originally posted by bjornvermeulen4:

To offset this there should be a financial return for scuppering ships in order to not completely destroy innovation.

I'm pretty sure that this is already a thing, at least it used to be.

[bjornvermeulen4]

Originally posted by godspeedthunder:

Originally posted by bjornvermeulen4:

To offset this there should be a financial return for scuppering ships in order to not completely destroy innovation.

I'm pretty sure that this is already a thing, at least it used to be.

Could be didnt notice it so far.

[bjornvermeulen4]

Originally posted by Bramborough:

I guess the main goal is to make it to 1950 without getting fired. Successfully shepherding a navy through 60 years of war and peace, shrug. This is basically what RTW was (didn't play RTW2, but I assume it was the same).

Additional slightly-related comment: we're not fighting the entire war each time. Presumably there's a substantial land/air component occurring as well. We might be obliterating the enemy navy in a given war, but that doesn't mean our nation's armies & air forces are faring so well. I guess that's one possible rationale for why the government doesn't always follow our naval recommendation on potential peace deals.

True but winning at sea keeping supply lines open wins wars. Also id like to see the brits invade anything or the other way around without at least doing a decent job at sea.

[Deusmortis]

In theory, the point is to destroy every nation you are not allied with.
In practice, that is nearly impossible. Especially on higher difficulty modes. I've seen enemy nations increase their GDP despite being in a long war and suffering months of blockade. I walked away from my last Legendary difficulty campaign, because it had become so stagnant. I had fleets in the territorial waters of all enemies, constant blockades, and had destroyed their navies... they'd pump out a new CL, DD or TB every turn or two (which ran away if I tried to fight) but they were no threat.

Just end turn... chase a DD.... end turn... no, I don't want peace... end turn... sink a CL... end turn... further increase my tech advantage... on and on, with no end in sight.

[Delta25]

the real objective, Survive meme

[SentosKarum]

How do you destroy nations actually?

I'd love for France to perish as they no longer any provinces to lose and at this point only serve to keep me at war, destroying my GDP.

[godspeedthunder]

Originally posted by SentosKarum:

How do you destroy nations actually?

I'd love for France to perish as they no longer any provinces to lose and at this point only serve to keep me at war, destroying my GDP.

You have to reduce their GDP to 0 or reduce their growth to -5 to -10% I think. Not exactly sure which though.

To do this you have to sink their convoys and blockade them.

I managed to catch a nation dissolving on vid but I wasn't the one at war with them so I'm not totally sure what was reducing their GDP, but something was reducing it by large amounts each month.

https://youtu.be/iGk4sDayoE8

[Mobzonk]

My goal is to reach the end of the game with a strong economy and strong navy. If playing as Germany or UK then I want to be no.1 in both categories. As other nations I will settle for being near the no.1. I also want to finish the campaign with high prestige and low unrest.

[Blazin Hazen]

Originally posted by caaron14:

RTW2 is pretty much same, just with carriers.

RTW2= Rome Total War 2 right?

[Silence Suzuka]

Originally posted by bjornvermeulen4:

Originally posted by Rear:

I feel the same way tbh. There's no real goal to any campaign as of the current patch.

I think there needs to be more pain in losing ships like a way larger cost to build (Like 3x). Not having a BB for 1 year pays for 1 BB. SO the best way to increase their naval budget and to get them to replace their ships with new designs is sinking their ships. If they cost more to build then endlessly replacing them would be impossible.
To offset this there should be a financial return for scuppering ships in order to not completely destroy innovation. Like a 40% of initial cost x % of durability. This would not be illogical as at least the materials can be reused. And would still allow you to renew and let you benefit from keeping ships from sinking other then keeping the crew. Regarding that your crew pool should be more varied and reflect the source. Veterans from a scuppered ship should be the first assigned to a newly build one. The loss of experienced crew should be a disadvantage you dont have when scuppering one.

This would at least give us a sense of effect to the war.

Then maybe special long term missions to control strategic passages or ports for GDP gains. But territorial gains should require big wins which dont exist. But maybe a goal for germay control the baltic. England probably wants to control strategic ports around the world. Speain mainly in the americas. Maybe greece could fight to win territory from the ottomans and cyprus from the uk. Etc

I think it is fine to have expensive new ships. So the player will mothball and keep the old ones and refit them. Now I just make a new design every 3~5 years (usually when new hull, engine, guns available), and refit the previous design, and delete any older ships because it is pain to make refit for every ship I have.