A better model for the submarine war?

[Sombra]

Originally posted by Lars:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by dicedtomato:

Don't worry, Lars. I guarantee that even without super-subs and carpet bombing, SC2 won't resemble history. But I do believe that with the game as is, you will get the same outcome each time; an Axis victory.

DT

Really? I've found if you play with historical strategies, you'd pretty much end up with historical results.

Might look a bit rough around the edges, sure, but pretty close. </font>

[dicedtomato]

But who plays historically? Or the better question, does the game encourage you to play ahistorically?

I agree with Lars. We wargame because we enjoy doing better than history. But where's the satisfaction of alternate history if there are no alternate consequences? If your super-subs destroy the Royal Navy without a sweat, then all you've done is game the system. Conquer South America in Hearts of Iron as Germany; it doesn't feel very satisfying.

If Lars is serious about changing subs to warship-hunters, then he devote some effort to devising the likely British response. The RN would not have passively let its navy be wiped out.

DT

[Lars]

I'm not changing them to warship hunters, they always were. You keep missing that.

So, RN response.

At the beginning of the war, all the Brits had was the same sonars they had from the last war. ASW was woefully neglected, just like everything else in the inventory. Took a long time to develop the range of sub killing devices that they eventually had by the end of the war, like radar, hedgehogs, etc.

RN responses would be about the same, only more so. Escorts would be the number one priority, forget everything else. Research into ASW likewise. Also, arm and convert more merchants into escorts. Put a deck gun and a depth charge rack on every single one of them and hope you get lucky. Good for morale if nothing else, but they're dead meat if the real escorts go. And convert the bigger ones to ersatz carriers by putting up some sort of deck structure. Forget a hanger and elevators, just park a couple of planes up there and do all maintenance in the open.

Doesn't leave much for other needs though, like modernizing the Army and Air Force, now does it? Cuz building tanks is going to be way down the list, need the steel for ships. And you're pulling merchants and converting them, which sorta impacts the merchant fleet, as suddenly you're going down this spiral again…

[dicedtomato]

So in other words, the British get screwed?

Sorry, Lars. Not historical and it doesn't help the game. The RN has enough problems in SC2.

DT

[Lars]

Yep. And you can absolutely forget about building any landing craft for an invasion for awhile. You got other problems.

Not historical, yeah, keep repeating that. It's the whole point.

[Blashy]

It is historical, what is not historical is if a player decides to invest heavily in subs, something that the Axis did not do but probably should have.

Of course in doing so they will suffer on the ground.

You keep complaining it is not historical, ok, then stop playing wargames and watch WW2 documentaries, they ALWAYS remain historical...

[Lars]

Originally posted by Blashy:

It is historical, what is not historical is if a player decides to invest heavily in subs, something that the Axis did not do but probably should have.

It's right up there with the "what if" of the Battle of Britain

What if the Luftwaffe had kept pounding the RAF instead of switching targets? Funny that "what if" doesn’t seem to bother any one.

[Blashy]

Oh it does not bother me, I am just stating that players can and WILL ALWAYS go not historical as Axis, simply because they are trying to win and have hindsight on what not to do (leave Africa and Middle East to Allies, not cut off caucausus and just keep pounding at Stalingrad, overextending and fighting in the winter, etc...).

[Lars]

And who wouldn't? You already know what happens if you stick to the historical strategy.

You lose.

[dicedtomato]

"Uber-Submarine" (with apologies to the Beatles)

In the town where I was born

there was a man who sailed the seas

and he told of his life

sinking the Royal Navy with submarines

We all live in an uber-submarine, uber-submarine, uber-submarine...

As we live a life of ease

every one of us has all we need

nuclear reactors and guided torpedoes

in our uber-submarine

We all live in a uber-submarine, uber-submarine, uber-submarine...

[John DiFool the 2nd]

Too much bickering and not enough constructive

discussion, so...

**My Proposal**

I'll divide this up into two sections: things we can

currently do (patch may introduce some new

functionality), and things we can't do, which are

dependent on what Hubert decides.

1. Damage that subs do to the CA groups, and vice-

versa, is hereby reduced both ways. CA groups will

also have some small reductions in surface vs.

surface combat values (as of now they can stand

toe-to-toe with enemy BBs much too well), but to

compensate will be cheaper and more quickly

produced. No longer will either unit be able to

decimate the other at will: 1-2 points of damage

per encounter is much more reasonable. Tech then

if I read the algorithms right will then be the

ultimate arbiter of who wins the war of attrition,

as it should be, not lucky encounters.

2. Damage that subs do to BBs/CVs will also be

reduced, but not so drastically as above. I can

see a 4 point loss on a BB group as representative

of them losing one of the heavies, while the rest

of the fleet scurries away. 2-3 points? Then they

just lost one of the supporting cruisers or two.

But massive 6-10 point losses at a stroke are

history.

All BB/CV groups will be simulating TWO capital

ships (which means the German fleet will undergo

some reductions, as will the Italians for that

matter). If we stick with one capital ship per

group then the RN (and USN!) will need significant

expanding in their CV/BB groups. (see next)

3. The number of CA groups which the RN starts

with will be reduced to 2-same for the starting

U-boats. Neither navy had that kind of strength

in either at the start.

-Once the patch comes out I'll playtest the above,

and perhaps upload it to the mod group.

**Now the stuff which Hubert needs to give us**

[Or if this can be scripted then great]

1. Sub groups will no longer operate in terms of

"hunting/silent". They will now operate in terms

of "grouped/spread". Grouped will allow for more

convoys sunk, at the risk of extra damage. Spread

will be the opposite, safer but less of a payoff.

2. Subs with tech 0/1 will not do as much damage

to convoys as they do now (which IMHO is excessive).

Because attrition will be reduced they can spend

more time at sea in the lanes, rather than hit and

run like they have to do now to avoid detection

and sinking.

3. Subs even if not on the lanes may do some

MPP damage. Not every ship used the exact same

route. "Spread" formation can be within 5 spaces

of the routes and still do damage; "grouped" will

work as it does now (2 spaces). A sub off in the

middle of the Atlantic may still sink a few too.

4. Surface raiding will be allowed; the German

CAs will hence have more hitting power than their

British CA counterparts, and be faster (as they

were) than British BBs. And while I'm at it CVs

should move faster than BBs too (a typical 5-10

knot advantage).

[Desert Dave]

I guess I just gotta ask:

WHY on God's green earth did I post

The wrong comment

In the wrong thread? :eek:

[... since Edited and moved on over to the RIGHT one! ]

Carry on JdF2,

This is obviously something you have thought a LOT about, I for one, am listening,

AND!

Still waiting to hear IF you've made some ASW/CE/DD sprites yet?

[ May 24, 2006, 08:29 AM: Message edited by: Desert Dave ]

[Desert Dave]

4. Surface raiding will be allowed; the German CAs will hence have more hitting power than their British CA counterparts, and be faster (as they were) than British BBs.

I add my meagre voice to your own historical pleas.

Yes, by all means,

RAIDERS!! :cool:

Have suggested precisely such a thing, where appropriate, for over 2 years now!

No luck so far, but... who knows

What a future enhancement might bring

To our gaming table?

For sure,

I'll NEVER give up on this great idea!

**BTW: Just curious, but did you ever play that really OLD A-H game, "War at Sea" ... with that one update to include French Navy and frogmen and GErman raiders as "Orion?"

[Lars]

Originally posted by dicedtomato:

"Uber-Submarine" (with apologies to the Beatles)

In the town where I was born

there was a man who sailed the seas

and he told of his life

sinking the Royal Navy with submarines

We all live in an uber-submarine, uber-submarine, uber-submarine...

As we live a life of ease

every one of us has all we need

nuclear reactors and guided torpedoes

in our uber-submarine

We all live in a uber-submarine, uber-submarine, uber-submarine...

Really, is that the best you can do?

Hoch über den Wellen ob tief unter dem Meer

vorwärts in ständigem Sturm hinterher.

So wie der Haifisch da seien sie Blut,

suchen wir sie die Feiendliche Brut

Nichts kann uns halten wir trotzen Gewalten

Gruß unserm Land U-Bootsoldat

Wir zeigen uns würdig dem neuen Geschlecht

kennen den Weg unser Eisernes Recht

Der Heimat zum Schutze vor Sturm und Orkan

Der Glaube an Deutschland erhellt unsre Bahn

Reißt es empor uns mit starker Hand

wir kränkeln nicht Engeland

Und wenn du auch gehst bis ans bis ende der Welt

wird dir von uns dein Weg verstellt.

Die Menschheit betrügt damit ist es vorbei,

wir brechen dem Löwen die Kiele entzwei

Nun hört in den weiten der Ruf ist so groß

wenn der Ruf erschallt Torpedo Los!

[Rolend]

Originally posted by Lars:

I've really got no problem with the existing model either. It's more fun than putting X number of u-boat chits and X number of escort chits in a convoy box. I've played those game systems before, and that's all they really modeled, the attrition aspect.

What I would like is for surface ships to keep on moving through a sub tile if the sub is set to silent running. But for that we'd need stacking.

Oh, and commerce raiding for surface ships.

It is funny that we are banging heads over this as I to like the curent system I just think it needs some tweaking. Yes you are right commerce raiding should be a part of convoy itrediction, after all that is why the German surface fleet was built in the first place.

After the WWI I think the Germans were smart enough to learn they were not going to beat the RN head to head so they focused in on merchents. Had Hitler listened to Dornitz and put all those surface ship resources into U-boats instead then England would of had a MUCH harder time in the first few years of the war.

[Rolend]

Originally posted by dicedtomato:

"Uber-Submarine" (with apologies to the Beatles)

In the town where I was born

there was a man who sailed the seas

and he told of his life

sinking the Royal Navy with submarines

We all live in an uber-submarine, uber-submarine, uber-submarine...

As we live a life of ease

every one of us has all we need

nuclear reactors and guided torpedoes

in our uber-submarine

We all live in a uber-submarine, uber-submarine, uber-submarine...

LMAO sooo funny thanks I needed a good laugh, I was kind of dragging today, now I am chuckling to myself with a picture of a yellow U-boat sinking the entire RN with one torpedo

[John C]

I just find the Sub/ASW "find and wack the mole" sub-game to be a bit dull. Since the AI is capable of playing both sides, I wish I could check a box somewhere and have the computer move all naval forces (other than transports & amphib transports) on my behalf that have not otherwise been moved during the turn. That way, I can ignore the Navy and have the AI deal with it - or could move what I wanted and let the computer address whatever I chose to ignore.

[Guest Mike]

Originally posted by Lars:

What if the Luftwaffe had kept pounding the RAF instead of switching targets? Funny that "what if" doesn’t seem to bother any one.

Nah - that one's easy - the British had a plan to withdraw the RAF fighters to airfields behind London well befoer any real damage was done, so the Germans think they've "won", launch Sealion, lose 500,000 men in the operation, the Balkan minors see that Germany is a lost cause and don't sign up, Russia invades Germany in 1942, and the war is over in 1944.

[John DiFool the 2nd]

Bumping because of something Jollyguy said in an AAR:

should subs have that pesky dive percentage which

basically shields them from attack?

#1: The sub counters naturally are simulating a

wolfpack, but wolfpacks don't all dive en-masse...

#2: Even if you accept this "dive" thing, there are

objects called depth charges which can still ruin

your day...

Hence I would suggest that diving reduces the

damage a sub could take (say by 1/2 rounded down),

but isn't an impenetrable deflector shield kind of

thing.