Is the sub war viable now? (MP only)

[jon_j_rambo]

Too much crying in this thread. Bottom line: Every now & then, the Legend goes nuts & builds subs...lots of subs. I come out with a pack of Nazi freaks under the water and dish out the damage.

[jon_j_rambo]

In a current game against Liam, I did a delayed sub strategy to boot, Das Boot. I saved up, have about 6 of these monsters with tech+4. I just rammed him. Could careless about spotting, ships, ports, whatever. I RAMMED THE UK with subs. I found Mr. Eisenhower sailing around the Scapa Flow & sent him to the bottom. It has set back the Western Allies nearly a year. Then after taking some damage, lost half of my force, I scattered, now raiding heavily!!! My strategy was all out suicidal attacking. At best the Western Allies have a couple surface ships left, this includes the Yanks.

[Blashy]

Hence the problem with subs. Attacking ships in ports should be suicide. Nets and minefields were killers for subs.

If it had been that easy, it would have been done continually.

[ev]

Originally posted by Liam:

Personally I would have subs powerful for 1 hit, then must retreat.. Every time they're detected the next turn the detection becomes greater so they must hit and run. Not be used as MainLine Battleship type weapons.

[ev]

Originally posted by Liam:

Personally I would have subs powerful for 1 hit, then must retreat.. Every time they're detected the next turn the detection becomes greater so they must hit and run. Not be used as MainLine Battleship type weapons.

In order to have real hit and run tactics you need the sub to move away after they hit their target.

Subs could be made weaker, but, given the ability to retreat in a random direction after surviving and engagement (whether hitting a convoy, or, attacking or defending an enemy unit. ...just a random retreat after each combat or convoy raid so as to make it harder to find.

[jon_j_rambo]

"I'm waiting for the Germans! We're going to ram 'em" --- Sgt. Guffy in the movie classic, Battle of the Bulge.

[SeaMonkey]

Thanks Cap'n A, a breath of reason!

[Liam]

Actually that game with Rambo was hurting for me before the Subs came. USSR had basically kicked the crap out of those weakened Axis, took the offensive the first 4 months of Barbarossa and retook Moscow. Turkey was diplomatically purchased by the Axis. PBEM sometimes puts me to sleep a little. I figured I would conquor Turkey along with Finland but didn't work out that way. I overdid Brest and D-Day, feeling a bit overconfidant and had to retreat... The Axis link to the MiddleEast and myself allowin gtoo many Allied Ships to be caught scouting is what lead to the disaster. Any Intermediate player could make the same error. Though my tech went slowly in IT and Production but good in LTs... So offensives are good for Allies, but when Axis get even MPPs via Turkey supply things are tough!

By the time I was ready for D-Day the 2nd time, Allies were massive and ready to kick some German Rear the Russians were bogged down defending the Caucasus and reconquoring Russia but those Subs came out of nowhere. Really when you think of the 1 that likely escaped, that makes 3 Axis Subs. Plus 3 more built. Not that expensive, a viable strategy for the Axis if they then Dwindle the Allies Ships leading up to this point. I was too divided in my Russian strategy too Split up in too many places. One trying to keep Caucasus, Two attempting to move in on Finland. Both ended as a disaster... In the end the game is likely lost as Allies have lost about 13 ships to GLR1 & 2 plus 6 or 7 level4 subs??? I think of the Axis spend what 1000 MPPs to build the 3 new ones. 300 MPPs to outfit them. Think of this way, those 20 US and UK land units never landed, why? 1300 well spent Axis MPPs. You must scout for Axis Sub Tech early and prepare or score a kill or two on their existing fleet to negate this strategy! That or save every Allied Cruiser and Battleship and do not lose them in low supply skirmishes for crappy territory. It is a good strategy but will not work twice!

Russia would be defeating the Germans alone if the Allies could keep the Luftflottes away from the East! 60 Germans lost to about 60 Reds Lost. Point is Axis are producing MegaMpps at this point, I'll keep fighting on, Elements of the Red Army are outside Konisburg, and Allies have retaken Paris in a dashing suicide Mission. It's just we're outnumbered now 2 to 1 attempting to counter a Naval disadvantage and the clock is ticking. I could probably get a Draw if I keep pushing but I admire Rambo's play and it's 1945 so why not let the Axis have it... He knows he got lucky some

[ December 01, 2006, 08:32 PM: Message edited by: Liam ]

[SeaMonkey]

Ok, got an idea.

The biggest problem of this Atlantic sub warfare program is that once a sub is spotted the Allied taskforces can be configured in a way so that the sub is surrounded and its escape movement halted by "surprise contact".

That happens because the subs spotting range is one, the adjacent tiles only, which allows for the collaring.

How do you overcome it with the present system?

Perhaps a bit unrealistic, but what if the sub's spotting range was say 3 tiles? That would give the sub enough of a spotting perimeter that the Allied naval forces would not be adequate to stop its escape to all directions of the compass. It could also serve to avoid lurking allied blockades in its proximity, ie. its decision to run and not fight.

Maybe it should be four tiles?

Now what if this additional spotting range could only be activated when the sub goes to "silent" mode?

Could this also be coded for water only tiles, not to exceed one land tile for sub recon?

[TFL]

@SM

I would prefer to do this a bit differently, since sub spotting would make them extremely powerful. I think subs should be able to pass "surprise contact" without stopping. Say give sub a 50% chance of getting by an enemy fleet. So surrounding them would give a chance of killing the sub, but not a certainty. Also this would help subs returning for supply from the Atlantic.

[SeaMonkey]

Yeah TFL, I already suggested something on those lines, but the problem is; Who's going to code it?

You? Me? Not likely.

This is a quick fix suggestion that is compatible with the present code. Doesn't require anything other than a modification of the spotting parameters using the editor.

Its for some abstract thinking modders to try out.

Now.

[John DiFool the 2nd]

It makes sense-remember it's not one lone submarine

bobbing on the open ocean (or under it)-it's 1-3

dozen subs all spread out over many square miles.

So it would make sense then (even a tight wolfpack

will be more spread than a typical surface task

force would be) that their spotting range would be

higher.

[SeaMonkey]

Good one JDt2, a reasonable way of looking at it.

I've been trying to think of a disadvantage to the extended spotting for gameplay purposes that has impact. Some exploit other than the obvious spotting range inland?

[ChrisND]

But then wouldn't the surface ship's spotting range be raised? After all, they have aircraft to spot for them.

[SeaMonkey]

ND, other than carriers, most WW2 surface vessels carried maybe one plane and could only be launched and recovered under manageable conditions.

Still, its a good point, a SC taskforce could have numerous planes with good spotting characteristics even without a carrier.

I believe the focus though is something that can assist the sub's survivability.

Is it worth a test?