Sub war in H vs. H?

[John DiFool the 2nd]

When the game first came out there was a lot of

discussion of the u-boat war and how it apparently

got improved. But just about every AAR I read here

hardly mentions any strategic u-boat action (typically

you have some huge tactical battles in the Baltic,

during a Sea Lion, or in the Med during a hard

Axis middle-east push).

If not what changes would you suggest? I made a mod

where attack/defense ratings were lowered for all

combat involving subs (and planes too), and it

seemed to work well. Is just that most of you are

army-oriented guys? Terif's opinion on this matter

would be appreciated as well.

[Edwin P.]

If you really want a sub war then;

A. Have 90% of UK MPPs come via Convoy Routes, except for one city - Manchester. Thus Canada provides 100MPP per turn. That's a target worth attacking.

B. If UK Lend Lease MPP damages exceed XXX over nine months then the UK may surrender. Example - if UK Convoy Losses exceed 300MPP in 9 months then UK has 20% to surrender -i.e. it returns to neutrality unless attacked.

C. Provide some convoy report; perhaps linked to intel tech, so that the Axis knows how much the UK is getting from Convoys. Now the Axis player does not know and thus it does not seem important.

D. Or have attacks on Convoys damage the readiness of forces, or perhaps temporarily reduce their build limits. Example - UK build limits are linked to Merchant Ship Income - Merchant Ship Income goes down then UK Build Limits are Reduced by 1 or 2 or 3.

Example:

Losses over 6 months = 120MPP = Reduce Build Limit by 1 for each non-naval unit type. (Or Reduce Max value of Each UK City and Port by 1)

Losses over 6 months = 240MPP (about 40 per turn) = Reduce build Limit by 2 for each non-naval unit type. (Or reduce value of each UK city and port by 2)

Losses over 6 months = 360 (about 60 per turn) then reduce build limits by 3 for each non-naval unit type. (Or reduce value of each UK city and port by 3 - going from 10 to 7)

Or put another way:

If UK Convoy Income is less than 60 over six months then the value of all UK cities and ports is reduced by 3.

If UK Convoy Income is >60 but less than 120 over six months then value of UK cities and ports is reduced by 2.

If UK Convoy Income is >120 but less than 150 then value of UK cities and ports is reduced by 1.

If UK convoy Income over prior six months is > 150 then no-effect on UK cities and ports.

[Guest Mike]

the problem with the sub war (and indeed the naval war in general) is that submarines (and other naval units) are treated jsut het same as land units.

they were nothing of the sort.

And nor were the units that hunted them and/or protected the convoys.

the naval war deserves mechanisms of its own, not grafted mechanisms for land combat that are barely adequate for their intended purpose.

[Konigs]

Knowing the limitations of the game, we could have some sort of bonus for a sub war on the convoy routes. Now you are lucky to take out a hundres or so MPPS then you loose a sub worht 250, very negative return rate. Maybe there should be some morale loss for a good sub campaign. Also if British begin to loose too many MPPS coming into the islands, they would have cut back on the supplies being sen tto thte Russians. SO in short, maybe the British lose morale and scale back the amount of MPPS being sent to Soviets. That way maybe a sub would be worht to loaded up Corps. That is about whta a sub is, currently we build land units because they are more cost effective. I mean if you really think about it, the subs are way out of line for their cost. I mean there was much less metal in a sub, as compared to outfitting two whole corps. If we do not do the morale thing, reduced MPPS to Russia, we should reduce the cost of a sub by half. If you really think about it early in the war, except for North Africa, the British spent money on the Navy, Air force to battle subs and Carpet Bomb the German Civilians. Just my 2 cents worth.

[Konigs]

I think some sort of sub campaign would also slow down the '42 and '43 West Allied invasions of France etc... They would have to secure the seas first.

[Edwin P.]

Konigs, I agree. There should be some penalty to the UK if their comvoys suffer severe losses.

The question arises though how to do it in a manner that can be modified in the game's editor and what should the penalty be? Readiness? Damage to Production? Build Limit Reduction? AP (action points, aka Movement point) penalty due to fuel shortages? Or something else?

Perhaps something as simple as:

Convoy_Resources_Event

Country_ID=

Convoy_MPP= XX ;If receive this amount of MPPs via convoy then this event is triggered, only one event can be triggered per country_ID

Penalty= [Action Points][build Limit][Readiness][Production][No Movement Chance][Research Penalty]

Example:

Country_ID= 1

Convoy_MPP= 30

Penalty= [0][0][0][0][0][0]

; If Convoy Income is 20 to 29 then each unit must has a 5% that they can't move that turn

Country_ID= 1

Convoy_MPP= 20

Penaltys= [0][0][0][0][5][0]

; If Convoy Income is 1 to 19 then each unit of this country has their action points reduced by 1 and their is a 20% that they can't move that turn.

Country_ID= 1

Convoy_MPP= 20

Penaltys= [1][0][0][0][20][0]

[ November 07, 2006, 10:48 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Lars]

The problem is the subs are just too easy to hunt down and kill, plus they're expensive to build and upgrade, and even if you go that route, the convoy routes can just be turned off if the Allies feel like they are losing. Basically, you'll never get your investment back even if you somehow win the sub war as Axis. All you can be is an annoyance.

I'd increase dive percentage, get rid of subs sticking when they bump into a ship, and reduce the cost somewhat.

At bare minimum, the convoy routes should be set so they can't go below a certain percentage of mpp.

[jon_j_rambo]

You guys obviously aren't aware of the Legend's use of subs Liam is getting a good dose of them right now.

[Lars]

I'm aware of them, just don't think it's a war winner in this game.