Strategy & Frustration

[Bluestew]

Bluestew,

I think your point that you have to ram into the Axis subs in order to prevent convoy losses is valid and an adjustment to this might make the most difference in terms of realism without having to create a whole new convoy/raider system.

It is a tricky one for sure and perhaps something as simple as what PowerGmbH suggests might do the trick or even have a special rule that Destroyers cannot be surprised by subs might even do it.

Since I suggested it, I would welcome a special rule that keeps DD's from being "suprised" by subs. I'll tell ya, I'm in my 4th game. I'm the Axis. My level 3 U-boat just ran into a level 0 ASW Soviet DD. I took 5 hits, the DD took 1. I brought another L3 U-boat in to attack and did 3 to the DD while it inflicted 4 on me. So a 9-4 victory by the L0 DD. I NEVER get that kind of result when I'm the one fighting the subs. I'm starting to believe that the game is programmed to screw me in any sub related combat. How did you know I'd buy the game when you programmed that?

So anyway, with 4 partial games under my belt, my main irritants are:

1) Sub warfare

2) Partially abstracted convoy system. Should be all or none.

3) Technology lottery system. (4 game and I've had major issues with this already)

4) Overly powerful tac air.

5) Klunky unit management (movement) Meaning its horribly difficult to move units into and out of the front lines, i.e. swapping. I shouldn't be required to create a gap in my lines or purchase the expensive motorization upgrade for all my units just to swap units in the lines. Soldiers have been marching ever since there were soldiers but apparently only "sometimes" in SC Land.

6) Referencing #4, the inability to EVER march into a square with rough terrain while motorized units can drive into it. Man that is so wrong.

7) Square tile map. Hexes would really ease the pain on #4 above.

I humbly submit the above for your consideration.

[Hubert Cater]

Since I suggested it, I would welcome a special rule that keeps DD's from being "suprised" by subs. I'll tell ya, I'm in my 4th game. I'm the Axis. My level 3 U-boat just ran into a level 0 ASW Soviet DD. I took 5 hits, the DD took 1. I brought another L3 U-boat in to attack and did 3 to the DD while it inflicted 4 on me. So a 9-4 victory by the L0 DD. I NEVER get that kind of result when I'm the one fighting the subs. I'm starting to believe that the game is programmed to screw me in any sub related combat. How did you know I'd buy the game when you programmed that?

Any chance you have some saved turns of any of these types of results, i.e. from on both the giving and the receiving end? I only ask as there are simply too many factors to consider before I can comment on whether this is a bug or not, i.e. I can safely say that the AI does not receive any bonuses on this type of surprise combat, so I wonder if it is experience levels, readiness, morale or pre-existing unit strength at play that is accounting for these differences.

If you have turns I would be glad to take a look and let you know what might be going on.

Hubert

[Snowstorm]

Bluestew,

Although surprised, your level 3 sub took damage that seems normal, since being level 3 is a reflection of its tech, not experience. Destroyers give that type of damage to a sub of similar experience level, and more if the destroyer had even more experience.

[SeaMonkey]

Look guys, I'll be the first to admit that there are obvious improvements to the sub model, but as far as the mechanics operating as designed, I think the game engine is performing properly.

To tell you the truth I think David's suggestion could be quite helpful,(post#20)

[SeaMonkey]

I've been running some test scenarios and this thing works, the sub model, that is! Come on, you guys need to work on your ASW tactics, cause if anything subs need some more help.

I'm wiping up the Atlantic Ocean with the RN, both the WW2,39 campaign and David's WiF.

You guys ever thought about using subs to hunt subs? You know they don't take damage when you ram them into other enemy subs and the RN gets three of them.

They make a good "point".

Ohhh yeah....and this Brest script, the so-called subpen improvements, don't fall for it, it's total crap, I can make mincemeat out of the place anytime I wish with the UK forces....uhhh...except when its raining or snowing!

[Amadeus]

You guys ever thought about using subs to hunt subs? You know they don't take damage when you ram them into other enemy subs and the RN gets three of them.

Hey SeaMonkey,

that is the usual way of sub hunting!! I always guess that a destroyer should be able too not to get damaged by suprising but that is one lack of the game.

[Bill101]

Ohhh yeah....and this Brest script, the so-called subpen improvements, don't fall for it, it's total crap, I can make mincemeat out of the place anytime I wish with the UK forces....uhhh...except when its raining or snowing!

It would be good to hear other opinions on this. Anyone?

[Bluestew]

Originally Posted by SeaMonkey

Ohhh yeah....and this Brest script, the so-called subpen improvements, don't fall for it, it's total crap, I can make mincemeat out of the place anytime I wish with the UK forces....uhhh...except when its raining or snowing!

It would be good to hear other opinions on this. Anyone?

Might work great, however I say might because in my 3 games as the Allies, the UK has been almost useless in obtaining research. It took 3.5 years to get my first ASW advance and 2.5 years to get my first aircraft advance. All 3 games were similar except in one I got L1 advanced aircraft sooner but it was 1944 before I saw another advance. Meanwhile, the Axis is happily stomping my aircraft with their L3 aircraft.

The research lottery is #3 on my irritant list atm.

[SeaMonkey]

Bill, I can lay this out in detail if you wish, but I'm trying one more perspective to see if I can find any significance in this script.

I'm waiting for someone else as well, my viewpoint is not enough.

There is one thing that can immediately remedy the problem.......anti-air upgrades that are effective against carriers as well as bombers.

[Rannug]

I don't see any problems with this DE as such. Sure the UK can bomb it if they want to do this but then they can't do other stuff and if you (as Axis) don't think the DE is any good...just say no thanx to it. The one thing that I thinks needed to be changed is the price of the DE. 100MPP's is a lot and as SeaMonkey points out it doesn't protect you if the Allies really wants to hammer it. The best solution would be a new type of harbor tile simular to a fortification with a higher air/carrier defence but not too high it should still be possible to bring it down but at a higher cost for the attacker.

[xwormwood]

Bluestew, you need to add more infos when you report your problems with subs/DD or research.

If you lvl 3 Sub has a bad morale or low supply or no experience and the DD is fully supplied, and / or high morale or with better experience, than the whole story gets a different reading.

If have no such problems, i don't feel that there is a problem regarding this issue.

Same goes for research. How many chits did you invest into ASW, how high or low was your inteligence lvl?

General Guderian once said "nicht kleckern sondern klotzen", meaning something like "don't take half-measures, but do things in a big way instead". Concentrate your research on ASW if it is important for your navy, use all the three possible chits into it. And don't neglect inteligence, as it is interweaved with your overal research results.

@Bill101

I think the Brest idea is good and it works pretty well & realistic.

If Seamonkey decides to bomb it turn after turn, than i would call this "history repeats itself", at this is exactly what the UK did to Brest, while Germany spent tons of money to build the precious sub bunker.

But why not place the strongpoint at Bordeaux / La Rochelle?

This way the UK would need better planes with longer range to have the opportunity to bomb the harbor. Or maybe Brest AND La Rochelle / Bordeaux instead of only Brest?

[Snowstorm]

Bluestew,

If what XW is saying doesn't do enough in the end, you can always go to the game editor and "fine tune" the research parameters more to your liking when it comes to being more "research competitive" with the other major powers.

[Scook]

I thought I should post some observations here, as this is the relevant thread, and Hubert might make changes based from here, and not the newer convoy thread just started.

1) I have had issues with "surprise contact" occurring from the Allied side of having level 3 anti-sub destroyers contacting level 0 subs and taking huge losses. Next time I get a situation like that, I will save it and send it to you, Hubert. And of course, the opposite does not hold true: computer controlled contact takes very few losses.

2) Now, the tricky part, that I cannot get to repeat from one saved turn played more than once: Not all contacts are surprise contacts. In fact, I played 2 games as Axis I thought the Allied navies were not playing with Fog of War Rules, as destroyers would contact subs and blow them out of the water. I had to use F4 to see if there was something I was missing, and no, destroyers were at least 5 tiles away so they didn't have the AI spotting advantage range. Once I can get a repeatable turn, I will send that off too.

3) In relation to what I have read in this thread, if you make DDs not surprised ever with contact with subs, it is a very lopsided, and will also produce very ahistorical results. Generally, the seas are swept clean of subs by early 1942; ships take a little longer.

4) Sorry, just running with my thoughts, this relates to #2. Relating to what I thought was a "Fog of Woe" issue, I then have had some surface contact initiated by me that should have been surprise contact, but wasn't. I thought I was seeing things, but I had it happen 3 or 4 times for me in a game. I don't ever remember seeing this in any other SC game.

The above has not been consistent from game to game. I can throw my 2 cents in, and ask that you make contact a 50/50 shot, either a "surprise contact", or the naval unit stops moving, and the person is given the option to attack. Modify it by 5% for every level difference in Naval Combat, or Sub level vs. Anti sub level. That would make a maximum advantage of 65% for superior tech.

[SeaMonkey]

Here's the way I play the Brest situation. Its not so much the two, UK/Canadian, bombers that decimate the port efficiency as you have a counter, you can research anti-air and apply it, but it only enhances bomber defense, its the CV defense value, or lack of, that is the problem.

See, I can spot the Brest entry or any other port for that matter, by parking a sub in proximity then I'm able to take out anything at the docks with my Carrier Air Groups which are double strike with a high naval attack CTV. That's OK too, but there is no counter other than using intercepting fighters that only have one intercept so you need two fighters to counter one CV group attack. How many CVs does the UK have at there disposal? How many fighters do the Axis have to counter with?

See the imbalance? Now you see why I'm an advocate of anti-air that can be applied to CV defense? Good combat mechanics dictate that for any attack feature there is an effective counter potential, this is where GC falls short.

[Bill101]

2) Now, the tricky part, that I cannot get to repeat from one saved turn played more than once: Not all contacts are surprise contacts. In fact, I played 2 games as Axis I thought the Allied navies were not playing with Fog of War Rules, as destroyers would contact subs and blow them out of the water. I had to use F4 to see if there was something I was missing, and no, destroyers were at least 5 tiles away so they didn't have the AI spotting advantage range. Once I can get a repeatable turn, I will send that off too.

Could it be that the enemy had had an intel hit telling them the location of the sub?

Or any airpower (carriers or bombers) nearby with the range?

[xwormwood]

Scook, you are probably playing on "expert" difficult lvl, where the AI gets a slightly better view range than the human player, could this be the reason?

[Bluestew]

1) I have had issues with "surprise contact" occurring from the Allied side of having level 3 anti-sub destroyers contacting level 0 subs and taking huge losses. And of course, the opposite does not hold true: computer controlled contact takes very few losses.

Exactly what I've been saying. And XWorm, on that level 0 Soviet DD, I don't know what it's supply was but both my level 3 subs were at 9 supply and they still lost the battle. I replayed it and it turned into a 9-8 exchange with the Soviet DD still winning. When I was UK, my L0 destroyers were repeatedly slaughtered by L2 subs.

3) In relation to what I have read in this thread, if you make DDs not surprised ever with contact with subs, it is a very lopsided, and will also produce very ahistorical results. Generally, the seas are swept clean of subs by early 1942; ships take a little longer.

Scook, if you look back, you'll see that I suggested a "no suprise" option for destroyers moving and encountering subs. I also suggested that when the subs are doing the attacking, that there would be no change. In addition, I suggested that the chance for the subs to dive away be increased if the "no surpise" option was implemented. I believe it would be a more entertaining and realistic "sub hunt" aspect for the game.

Also Hubert, after finishing another game I have to say that the research lottery is creeping up from #3 on my irritant list. It is at least #2 and possibly #1 now. I was the Axis and it was mid 1943 before I got my first advance in tanks and it was ugly in the east.

[jon_j_rambo]

Way too much whinning in this thread. If you can't take the heat, stay out of the Atlantic. Dirty Pool tactics is war, just the way it is. Technology has always ruled the battlefield.

[SeaMonkey]

Hubert, whatever happen to the feature that allowed subs to pass through capital ships, other than Destroyers, when they were in "silent" mode. Now if a sub ended its movement next to an enemy naval asset then it was revealed.

Did I just dream this or was it once a game mechanic? Seems like it was not working in one of the other versions, perhaps WaW, and you fixed it, and I tested it and it worked from then on. Was it dropped for the later versions?:confused:

[Bluestew]

Way too much whinning in this thread. If you can't take the heat, stay out of the Atlantic. Dirty Pool tactics is war, just the way it is. Technology has always ruled the battlefield.

Way too much whining in the above reply. If you can't tolerate reading feedback, stay out of the thread. Hubert encourages feedback, just the way it is. Customer input has always been part of business.

[Hubert Cater]

Bluestew, I agree and have issued Rambo a warning.

[Hubert Cater]

Hubert, whatever happen to the feature that allowed subs to pass through capital ships, other than Destroyers, when they were in "silent" mode. Now if a sub ended its movement next to an enemy naval asset then it was revealed.

Did I just dream this or was it once a game mechanic? Seems like it was not working in one of the other versions, perhaps WaW, and you fixed it, and I tested it and it worked from then on. Was it dropped for the later versions?:confused:

It is still in place and I've only corrected a few errors that arrived from implementing this feature. For example, if you do end your movement next to an enemy ship you have not successfully "passed through" and if your movement path does not allow you to finish your movement without ending up on the same tile as an enemy unit then you are stopped at the last "good" tile where there is no enemy unit.

If you've found otherwise send me a turn and I'd be happy to take a look.

[SeaMonkey]

OK HC, I'll check it a little closer to make sure the subs weren't previously revealed by intel or an air spotting unit. If I took a spotted sub and initiated silent mode like at the beginning of the move as required and ran into an enemy vessel other than a DD unit, then it should pass-through?

CVs wouldn't uncloak it, only DDs, right? Any other scheme you know that would prohibit the pass through?