Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

I am finding that Central Power subs do well against the AI in 1915 and 1915 in the Atlantic and against the Russian convoys. They start to struggle from 1916 onwards as Entente subs start to have more advanced Tech, except for in the Mediterranean where they can still prosper in the later years of the war.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

I am finding that Central Power subs do well against the AI in 1915 and 1915 in the Atlantic and against the Russian convoys. They start to struggle from 1916 onwards as Entente subs start to have more advanced Tech, except for in the Mediterranean where they can still prosper in the later years of the war.

Yeah I do ok against the AI but against the human player forget about it. The whole allied navy is forced onto one little sub with no supply after it gets attacked over and over...I just can't keep any alive...

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

I am finding that Central Power subs do well against the AI in 1915 and 1915 in the Atlantic and against the Russian convoys. They start to struggle from 1916 onwards as Entente subs start to have more advanced Tech, except for in the Mediterranean where they can still prosper in the later years of the war.

Yeah I do ok against the AI but against the human player forget about it. The whole allied navy is forced onto one little sub with no supply after it gets attacked over and over...I just can't keep any alive...

"One little sub"?

Your U-boats are being sent down to Neptune's Grotto because your admirals decided to swarm the English Channel here in late spring early summer 1915 while I was trying to get troop transports out and General Hamilton to his destination. That's why you are experiencing this.

They were just a nuisance before, skulking around, nibbling on our convoy routes, threatening the possibility of Unrestricted Submarine Warfare, and the like. But enter The Channel, and we will box you in and destroy everything we can find, from the air and sea.

One benefit to the Central Powers though, is that the Entente had to loosen the blockade (for now) and look at renewed interest in maxing out our ASW research a little more, thereby diverting money from some other enterprise (money is still short in London with all the propping up and long term investments in other enterprises, plus the costs of transport and amphibious adventures.)

cheers

Edit: In answer to "Why are subs so much worse in this game vs WiE", I surmise thats because Submarine Warfare is still in its infancy. Strategic and tactical doctrine was still being worked out, the technology was new, and then the political and moral implications of the use of this new weapon were only becoming evident at the early stage of the war.

Btw, while it may be wise to keep your subs in harbor until they go up in level, remember that the Entente will also be researching ASW as a counter. The submarines gain experience early in the war if used on convoy lines or raiding, not just in combat with ships, and the combination of experience plus tech level can make them lethal. Its a matter of getting them out there, using them for interdiction and the like, and surviving all that to get home and upgrade. A challenging task indeed!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka
I was forced to go into the channel because you run out of supply so quickly it is the closest way home.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka
They just can't go far enough and back to cause any damage without being destroyed with no supply by the endless hordes of allied ships that reduce supply with each attack.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

Tanaka,

I have been absolutely wrecked by the Central Powers U-boats circa 1915 in previous matches...and have done the wrecking too. It all depends on the current circumstances however, and I as the CP have aborted operations before if the Entente is particularly frisky. In this match with you, your valiant submarines almost caught a transport carrying a valuable HQ on his way to a critical destination. With that, and seeing numerous other U-boats gathering, I pulled down part of my blockade to deal with this threat with extreme prejudice.

Edit: I just pulled my turn and looked at the reports: You lost 3 subs during that multi-turn fandango, and had a few more that were severely damaged but by excellent seamanship made it out of my net. I have some severely damaged vessels including a Battle Cruiser which will be expensive to repair. It could of been far worse because I just got ASW1. The thing is, money is extremely tight for Britain, and we can't afford to have a major disruption of a port like I thought might happen. The situation on the continent is stabilized somewhat, but the Central Powers are dangerous, and my blockade on Germany is super important to keep her National Morale down..its all give or take..and I'm sure an evolution in your U-boat strategy will be the result of your hard knocks, which is how evolution works.


1775Cerberus,
Thanks for that link..a very entertaining, informative, and sometimes humorous episode on the early history of submarine warfare and early counter measures. "Long lining them like tuna"..lol

Chernobyl,
Yep, 1914 to 1915 is the window of opportunity for the U-boats..and maybe later on in 1916-17 if the surviving subs max out to lvl 3 experience and go back out in a planned operation, possibly in conjunction with surface vessels like mine carrying DD's and/or the IGN.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka
I was forced to go into the channel because you run out of supply so quickly it is the closest way home.

A secret is if the sub is in silent mode it doesn't lose any supply when moving. It's slower but considering that a sub's supply level is so vital, worth it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka
They just can't go far enough and back to cause any damage without being destroyed with no supply by the endless hordes of allied ships that reduce supply with each attack.

It's even worse later in the game when (someone correct me if I'm wrong) spying and intel will auto detect your subs even if they are in silent mode. It's quite ahistorical considering the greatest sub campaign of all time was arguably German WWI subs especially in 1917. As it is in game, subs are probably strongest in 1914-15 and then afterwards it gets too dangerous against a smart opponent.

Someone should probably start a thread about sub warfare rebalance. I have several ideas :)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

I have to conform that through testing but I feel it's true.

Regarding the intel detection, you say it's 2% per unit. So I take it that I don't need to shuffle my units around? I thought there was a % chance of detecting a unit, and then the game selects an undetected unit. Because front line armies and previously intel-detected units are already visible, it tends to select other, unseen units (often ships at sea). But you're saying this is NOT how it works, that EVERY unit has a 2% chance, and if it is already seen by the opponent then no intel-detection event happens even when the 2% rng returns true. In that case, it doesn't benefit me to maximize the number of undetected units (I don't care if it spots one of my recon bombers or detachments but I DO care very much if intel detects one of my subs or a Marines being transported)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

I think we would lean towards the idea that even though subs can be designated as 'Silent' they did have to re-surface, and did often surface at night to communicate, e.g. broadcast and receive messages, that tended to give away their positions, from time to time, as subs still needed to get info on convoys somehow.

For example, in game terms, situations like these would arguably qualify for a spotting Intelligence hit, e.g. Ultra vs Enigma and in these instances would probably be no less than a sub not running in 'Silent' mode.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

Wikipedia says Room 40 didn't provide much real time sub location intelligence. It sounds like if the Admiralty had been more openminded, then more may have been possible, but in reality the information was rarely transmitted in a timely fashion convoys or warships at sea.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

Perhaps the existing FOW function which notifies the Entente player if a German sub has been convoy raiding could be adapted to S&I effects against subs in Silent mode anywhere on the board. The FOW function (as far as I can tell) gives you a good idea of where an enemy raider was two turns ago. It's a clue, but not one you can rely on to find a sub and kill it, provided it has moved in the intervening turn. If S&I reveals a sub (either in Silent Mode or perhaps in both modes), there also could be a one turn delay before notification. It does not exempt them completely from being revealed, but it would help their survivability a great deal. This seems justifiable to me, since S&I seems to have a much bigger effect in practice in exposing naval units on the high seas, versus land units behind the front lines, to enemy attack.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

Incidentally the S&I detection also eventually finds all your opponents minefields which makes them worthless. Not sure if that was the intention or not.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

I have a bit of a bias as a Central Powers player :)

Anyhow I did some testing. Yes intel/signals does detect subs. Out of port. Either silent or cruise mode both get detected.

It wasn't quite as often as I thought, but still could easily result in a few sub losses over the course of a game, mostly depending on where the sub happens to be located relative to your destroyer death ball.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor
it can be a game changer if said transport had a HQ unit on board.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor
it can be a game changer if said transport had a HQ unit on board.

Does one sub attack really ever do 10 damage to a transport?