Air Unit Spotting of Submarines

[Edwin P.]

Building on SeaMonkey's comments on air unit spotting, in my view air units should have a percentage chance to spot submarines as they presented a much smaller profile than surface ships.

For example:

Base Chance of Air Unit to Spot Submarine: 80%

Modifier 1: Submarine is Running Silently: -10%

Modifier 2: Each Level of Submarine Tech: -10% as improvements allowed submarines to run submerged for longer periods.

Modifier 3: Bad Weather: -10%

Modifier 4: Proposed Naval HQ Unit: +10%

Example: 80% (Base) + 10% (Naval HQ) - 20% (Sub Tech 2) = 70% Spotting Chance

Example: 80% (Base) - 30% (Sub Tech 3) - 10% (Bad Weather) = 40% Spotting Chance

Additionaly, I would have air units' ability to spot surface naval units and transports reduced by 10% during periods of bad weather. This would reflect cloud cover obscuring their view of surface ships.

[ July 06, 2004, 10:44 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[ev]

Originally posted by Edwin P.:

Additionaly, I would have air units' ability to spot surface naval units and transports reduced by 10% during periods of bad weather. This would reflect cloud cover obscuring their view of surface ships.

I would go much further. In the 1940's bad weather often men planes would not even take off, let alone, patrolling large areas out at sea, with no reference points, and winds that take you off course so you cannot accurately calculate your location.

And even if you take off, you rely solely on eye sight to find a sub... in bad weather. It sound really tough to me. And if you find one sub, you have to attack that one sub, and keep on searching the area for the rest of the pack represented by the unit counter we see on the SC map. The likelihood that you will be able to successfully spot enough of the subfleet, so you may attack it and cause material damage at the scale represented in SC is pretty small.

I would reduce the likelihood of spotting subfleets during bad weather by 80%.

[Edwin P.]

Interesting observation and quite true. The only change I would make in light of your refinement is that airfleets should always have some chance to spot submarine fleets.

To do this I would suggest that the spotting rules, proposed above, say that the minimum chance for submarine spotting is 10%. Thus even under the worst conditions an airfleet would have a 10% to spot a sub within its spotting range.

[ev]

Makes sense...

Now, what about spotting of other units, and, spotting by other units.

Bad weather should give a random chance for any unit to miss spotting any other unit. If the fog is bad enough, even battleships could fail to see each other.

[Edwin P.]

Another good point. At this scale I would favor limiting spotting % to Submarines and during bad weather reducing the spotting range of surface naval units of another by 1 tile. Thus Battleships would spot other surface ships 2 tiles way, except during bad weather when the visibility would be reduced to 1 tile.

[John DiFool the 2nd]

Air spotting percentage should be subject to

modification by the current level of Radar Tech

(airborne centimetric radar was probably the

primary reason the Kriegsmarine lost the Battle

of the Atlantic).

[Edwin P.]

John DiFool the 2nd, excellent point. So you now have;

Base Chance of Air Unit to Spot Submarine: 80%

Minimum Chance: 10%

Highest Chance: 100%

Modifier 1: Submarine is Running Silently: -10%

Modifier 2: Each Level of Submarine Tech: -10%

Modifier 3: Bad Weather: -10% to -80% (subject to play testing, varies with weather)

Perhaps:

------------ Clear: No Effect

------------ Overcast: -20%

------------ Storms : -50%

Modifier 4: Proposed Naval HQ Unit: +10% due to better coordination and analysis

Modifier 5: Anti-Submarine Warfare: +10% per tech level

Example: 80% Base + 10% (Anti Sub Tech 1) + 10% (Naval HQ) - 10% (Sub Tech 1) + 0% (Clear Weather) = 90%.

Note: The proposed generic naval HQ unit (limit of 1 per country) would 1. Give a readiness bonus to 5 Naval Units anywhere on the map, 2. Improve Naval Intelligence and 3. Give a bonus to Naval Attacks by Adjacent Air Units.

[ July 06, 2004, 11:40 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Blashy]

I hope that -10% for running silent is just a number thrown out there and that HC never considers that number, hehe.

It should be more like -80% in today's world (since the 70's) it would be -99% .

I'll say it again, if a sub does not want to be found, it won't, in WW2 it was a little easier by planes because of the lower depth subs were but still very hard at sea with the darker waters and big waves.

[With Clusters]

What do we mean by "run silent" in WWII? The subs were all diesel (no nukes), and I thought that they had to spend most of their time on the surface (where the oxygen is ), while recharging their bateries (and this is when they were usually spotted by planes?), diving only when commencing an attack, or trying to avoid one. Just how long were WWII subs able to stay submerged, and how long did it take to recharge the batteries? Didn't the Germans invent (can anyone say 'sub tech'?) a so-called "snorkel" so they could remain somewhat hidden while using their diesel engines? Perhaps any "run silent" movement should be severly restricted (w/o snorkel tech perhaps). But in one consideres bad weather, I would think a sub with recharged batteries would be almost impossible to find, as it would most likely be "running deap" to avoid the nasty surface weather. On the other hand, it shouldn't be able to spot much of anything itself in such circumstances either.

[pzgndr]

What do we mean by "run silent"

Basically, "hunt" mode will allow subs to inflict convoy losses but be subject to spotting and surface attack, which is what we have in SC1 now. The new "run silent" mode will essentially disable both convoy attacks and spotting of subs, which should allow subs to move to/from the active shipping lanes with less hassle. I expect surprise encounters will still work the same way in both modes but I don't know. The idea is to give subs a little more surprise but not make them invincible.

As for new spotting rules and such, that's still up in the air. Haha. (Pardon me.) Seriously, I did ask Hubert about this based on all of the good comments above. There are things that can be done regarding spotting, weather effects, and intelligence that still need to be worked out. I'm optimistic that we'll end up with a good system. :cool:

[ev]

Thanks for your comments, pzgndr. It sounds good to me.

By travelling at night, and staying under during the day, a sub should be able to avoid detection by airplanes... And, given the scale of the map and WWII tech, I doubt radar and sonar would have worked well enough at the time to make any meaningul difference. As someone else mentioned earlier, subs became vulnerable when they attacked, otherwise they could remain hidden pretty much at will. That is why they were such a dreadfull weapon.

[pzgndr]

subs became vulnerable when they attacked

Right. I forgot to mention subs would have to be in "hunt" mode to make attacks against enemy naval units, as well as for surface raiding activities. Therefore, they will be vulnerable while active. Otherwise, they should be able to slip in and out of their patrol zones quietly without detection. The simple ability to toggle sub modes will add a lot to the naval war in SC2.

[Liam]

Bad weather was a big thing, even for transports to get across Oceans.<D-Day was delayed due to bad weather> No Aircraft flew during much of Battle of the Bulge cause bad weather. It's a huge factor in Europe

[Roosevelt45(the 2nd)]

It's a huge factor in Europe

was, weather in Europe(or in Belgium anyway) has evolved a great deal since then.

temperatures are a lot higher now.

just saying.