RE: U-boats ... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Commander - Europe at War Gold



Message

Bossy573 -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 3:03:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

SC2 is only marginally different - once a sub is located it gets hammered. teh difference is that subs attack convoy routes instead of convoys themselves, so you don't know where on the route the sub is.


If anything, an effective sea campaign is more difficult in SC2. But, the idea of penalizing the Allies in a general way for having subs in the shipping lanes does have merit. It makes economic warfare (theoretically) viable.

I guess the thing to remember is that by 1943, the Allies had a hammer lock on the Atlantic anyway. So tinkering with the subs to make them more powerful indeed travels a slippery slope as it could have the effect of having super-subs running amok and giving the Allies no chance.

I would suggest a closer look at the naval tech tree and making advances by one side or another more potent. The war at sea did seem to turn on better tactics and technology. Perhaps give convoys built in defenses at a cost, etc.



Major Victory -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 4:26:19 AM)

The sub/convoy system works quite well in my opinion if used correctly, you have a big map with multiple areas to hide and attack from. I don;t think the idea is to outright destroy every convoy, but to peck away and retreat etc.

By the time any 1 sub is destroyed, you will hopefully have attritioned enough build points to justify the loss, or if the allies pours massive builds into ships/tech, then you accomplish your goal anyway. (no land units or air elsewhere)



Fred98 -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 9:39:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Victory

By the time any 1 sub is destroyed, you will hopefully have attritioned enough build points to justify the loss,



The thing is its not possible because the allied naval counterattack will badly damage or destroy the sub immedaintly.
-



firepowerjohan -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 12:06:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe 98

quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Victory

By the time any 1 sub is destroyed, you will hopefully have attritioned enough build points to justify the loss,



The thing is its not possible because the allied naval counterattack will badly damage or destroy the sub immedaintly.
-



Depends where you are attacking. The Atlantic is large so it is impossible to have all Allied navy around every spot on edges of map. But against the AI if AI has handicap then they will have more navy than in human vs human games and it will then also become more difficult to find spots with weak Allied escorting.





JudgeDredd -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 1:10:07 PM)

I'm not sure I follow people on the "placement" of subs?

If you position your subs at the extremes of the map (as I think is being suggested) then how are you meant to destroy anything.

Also, it was mentioned that you should attack out of reach of naval power....the problem there seems to be (from the games I've played) that my subs always get attacked. Is there a specific "row/column" of hexes that are "out of range"?

Here's what happens whenever I attac with subs:
  • attack with sub
  • immediately on allied turn I am surrounded and destroyed
  • if I'm not destroyed, I move away, but I am immediately found again (I think, if memory serves)
So I just simply do not see the use of them for the cost in resources and time.

IIRC Germany starts with 2? subs...whenever I play (and I've always played as Germany) I send the ubs out to attack convoys and they die. When they die, that's my sub campaign over.

Now that might just be bad gaming strategy (I am most definitely not a mini Patton), but because of their apparent lack of use and high resource cost, I see little point in taking the strategy further.

I'm going to start a game tonight and put my main effort into the navy (subs) and see what happens. I expect it won't be too different...I may have more subs (but only if I hold them in harbour until I have enough for a pack...so they'll be hold up for several months), but they'll still get surrounded and destroyed over time...ultimately I'll lose the battle for the atlantic AND the ground war.

How's that for a pessimistic outlook.

On another note, who has successfully (as Germany) employed a "wolfpack" sub doctrine and did well from it and how did you do well?



firepowerjohan -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 1:28:12 PM)

In 1939 , Allies have also the french navy so it is very hard with just 2 subs. Later on after the fall of France when you have built up 4-5 Subs, say you sail to the South Atlantic and see a convoy size 20 show up, you sink it with 3 subs and keep 2 subs adjacent and invisible. Now, any Allied navy in the North or Mid section of Atlantic cannot reach the south Atlantic in one turn so normally if they have 8 ships maybe 2 can reach you. Likely one of them will run into surprise attack and the second might be able seriously hurt one Sub but hardly sink it, unless the Allies have 8 destroyers but that should be impossible since they only start with 1 destroyer rest of them are BB or Carrier and Subs are doing ok against anything else than destroyers.

Map is 150x72 and ships normally move like 18 hexes so if you are at row 60 then ships must be at 42-72 to reach in one turn. Row 42 is the north of Spain so a majorrity of Navy should not be south of that at leist not before your strike. Most ppl that get destroyed are striking in the centre of the map between New Foundland and Ireland and there often 3-4 Allied ships can reach you, use the areas near NW edge, W edge and S edge of map and try to have at leist 3 but hopefully 4-5 subs before you try to get serious about the war in the Atlantic [;)]




HansBolter -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 1:34:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: firepowerjohan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe 98

quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Victory

By the time any 1 sub is destroyed, you will hopefully have attritioned enough build points to justify the loss,



The thing is its not possible because the allied naval counterattack will badly damage or destroy the sub immedaintly.
-



Depends where you are attacking. The Atlantic is large so it is impossible to have all Allied navy around every spot on edges of map. But against the AI if AI has handicap then they will have more navy than in human vs human games and it will then also become more difficult to find spots with weak Allied escorting.






A design that requires you to hang out around the edge of the map to avoid escorts also means you are avoiding the convoys and since every move of the sub drains your strategic oil reserves the very act of moving to the edge of the map is counterproductive from the get go.

FPJ you need to pull your head out of the sand on this one, admit it is poorly designed, and get one board with the people who are telling you it needs revamping. The majority of the people posting in this thread have been some of your biggest suporters. Please demonstrate the presence of mind to listen to them. I can appreciate if you don't want to listen to me or Targul, but the Judge....come on! He is spot on with his last post and it is exactly what I was saying right after the game's release.



JudgeDredd -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 1:34:55 PM)

Will give it a go Johan...thx

FWIW I am one of those that try to attack in mid-atlantic...but that's generally because that's where the convoys are, is it not? Surely I have to venture into the shipping lanes of mid-atlantic to get the convoys, regardless of where I sit my subs prior to/post attack?




firepowerjohan -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 1:37:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Will give it a go Johan...thx

FWIW I am one of those that try to attack in mid-atlantic...but that's generally because that's where the convoys are, is it not? Surely I have to venture into the shipping lanes of mid-atlantic to get the convoys, regardless of where I sit my subs prior to/post attack?




try bieng the Allies and you will see that your convoys always emerge in the edge of map. Having a few subs placed can cover alot of area and enable you to see when they appear. Being idle does not use up oil also.



HansBolter -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 1:37:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: firepowerjohan

In 1939 , Allies have also the french navy so it is very hard with just 2 subs. Later on after the fall of France when you have built up 4-5 Subs, say you sail to the South Atlantic and see a convoy size 20 show up, you sink it with 3 subs and keep 2 subs adjacent and invisible. Now, any Allied navy in the North or Mid section of Atlantic cannot reach the south Atlantic in one turn so normally if they have 8 ships maybe 2 can reach you. Likely one of them will run into surprise attack and the second might be able seriously hurt one Sub but hardly sink it, unless the Allies have 8 destroyers but that should be impossible since they only start with 1 destroyer rest of them are BB or Carrier and Subs are doing ok against anything else than destroyers.

Map is 150x72 and ships normally move like 18 hexes so if you are at row 60 then ships must be at 42-72 to reach in one turn. Row 42 is the north of Spain so a majorrity of Navy should not be south of that at leist not before your strike. Most ppl that get destroyed are striking in the centre of the map between New Foundland and Ireland and there often 3-4 Allied ships can reach you, use the areas near NW edge, W edge and S edge of map and try to have at leist 3 but hopefully 4-5 subs before you try to get serious about the war in the Atlantic [;)]




Methinks you need to study some of thoes WWII atlas books with the maps full of little dots representing the locations of uboat attacks.



firepowerjohan -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 1:52:37 PM)

This is a pseudo example with FoW off just to show the positions. As can be seen, the new convoys always appear on edges of map, Axis Subs are placed so that they can spot (again not evident since FoW is off) them and you see the mid and the south convoy can here be attacked by at leist 2 subs. If Axis here attacks the Sub in the South edge of map there is just one BB within reach and after losing like 20 PP from 2 attacks the BB comes in and do maybe level score with the Sub and the total economic cost is in the example clearly larger for Allies.

Allies also here have almost all their navy in the Atlantic yet cannot reach any edge with more than 1-2 ships and this means that for this strateggy Italian navy would be uncontested in the Mediterranean providing good support for their units in Africa. Quite usually Allied navy travel to Mediterranean to help out and this mans tghe escort lines are so thin that sometimes even a incoming escort can be outnumbered and sunk by Subs so there are several ways the Sub wars can happen

http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=34100#34100

If we are to simulate realistic hit areas of real WW2 as Hans suggest then we also need to consider that movement rates, size of the Atlantic also need to be changed and then we would not have a 150x72 map but perhaps a 220x72 map and with movement rates where a ship moves 60 hexes so it all has to be compromised into gameplay somewhere to make it playable. We could have some special Sub rules in addition to their invisibility and we will see what is done about it in the future.

The problem is, we have received very little detailed reports from screenshots and AAR from players so means it takes longer time before sorting out exactly why problems occur and someone saying "I attack a convoy and then all my subs are sunk" does not explain the cause of it hence we do not jump to conclusion until we have more facts but we are working on it. But I would not say that Subs are totally useless as is now just very hard to learn and further improvements are just fine tuning. I have seen successfull sub strategies in tcpip used.



HansBolter -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 2:44:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: firepowerjohan

This is a pseudo example with FoW off just to show the positions. As can be seen, the new convoys always appear on edges of map, Axis Subs are placed so that they can spot (again not evident since FoW is off) them and you see the mid and the south convoy can here be attacked by at leist 2 subs. If Axis here attacks the Sub in the South edge of map there is just one BB within reach and after losing like 20 PP from 2 attacks the BB comes in and do maybe level score with the Sub and the total economic cost is in the example clearly larger for Allies.





Have you added the economic cost in oil to Germany of moving the subs to the south edge of the map? After doing this, is the economic cost to the for the action you described still greater for the Allies?

The link doesn't work. I was actually curious to see what you mean about the convoys and the edge of the map. Your written description is a little cryptic to me.

I'm afraid I have to agree with the Judge's approach as it is exactly the approach I took. The main convoy route between the U.S. and Britain is the naturally intuitive location for early sub operations. In the early part of the war, before the Alies put together an effective convoy escort system the uboats raped the Allied merchant marine along this route. This is the natural approach most players will take.

It appears the convoy escort system is far, far too effective in the early game. The Germans didn't disperse to make their emphasis on the periphery until after the convoy escort system started to dominate the central lanes. Players, at least some of us, aren't ever going to be willing to accept the answer "you have to attack the periphery". We shouldn't HAVE to attack the periphery to be effective until 1943. Up until then we SHOULD be able to implement a viable strategy attacking thye central lanes. This is what the game mechanics need to reflect.



JudgeDredd -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 3:00:41 PM)

Well, I'm not really interested in "historically this happened" or "historically that happened" and so don't want to get into that.

What I would liek is a workable "sub" solution, either in the form of workable tactics with the game as is, or with a change where it is workable because, as I've been playing it, it isn't workable. But I will give what Johan says a go and see what the results are.



firepowerjohan -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 3:20:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Well, I'm not really interested in "historically this happened" or "historically that happened" and so don't want to get into that.

What I would liek is a workable "sub" solution, either in the form of workable tactics with the game as is, or with a change where it is workable because, as I've been playing it, it isn't workable. But I will give what Johan says a go and see what the results are.



I hope you find the way to make em work [:)]
p.s I managed to link in the screenshot now.
http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=34100#34100
Anyone who knows how I post the screen directly here on Matrix instead of link, help would be appreciated



Vypuero -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 4:30:40 PM)

Subs can spot navies without any concern for being attacked until they are ready.  Just attacking anything you see is yes, a waste.  You need to plan and make sure the allied ships are out of range, or not get greedy and make a single pass, then run and wait for the next convoy or move elsewhere when the escorts come around.  It is quite possible as the navies cannot cover everything.  If they spread out too much, then a larger group of subs can even smash them as well. 



JudgeDredd -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 4:36:12 PM)

From that screenie, johan, it looks like you have positioned your subs way south of the convoy lanes though (where I would expect the convoy lanes to be between the US and UK)...so how would they be effective in an attack?



firepowerjohan -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 5:32:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

From that screenie, johan, it looks like you have positioned your subs way south of the convoy lanes though (where I would expect the convoy lanes to be between the US and UK)...so how would they be effective in an attack?


The north convoy appear in the northwest edge of map.
Mid convoy appear on US east coast or abit below.
South Convoy appear on the south edge of map.

Since you can use Subs spread out to scout large areas being invisible you can soon have an impression whether there are areas with few Allied ships around.



SeaMonkey -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 9:18:11 PM)

Why not allow subs a shoot and scoot option.  Give them the benefit of attack->move, or move->attack->move->attack up to the exhaustion of there movement allowance which allocates some movement to the attack action.

In this manner subs can get that surprise first attack in(perhaps multiple attacks allowed) and then hopefully move away and hide.......   unless of course warships are in the vicinity/adjacent or get bumped into revealing the subs and stopping their movement that phase.

The allied player will be aware of the subs movement allowance and be able to compute a known area where the sub could possibly move to which instigates, "The Search" by the allied vessels and air units(CV spotting)(landbased operated in to spot).  This will also guide the Allied player to use his warships as escorts.

Institution of a mechanic like this might require adjustments to all naval vessels' movement allowances and air unit spotting, but that should be easily moddable.



Syagrius -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 9:46:20 PM)

It would make the subs too powerfull, I think subs are balanced as it is.



JudgeDredd -> RE: U-boats ... (10/17/2007 10:53:27 PM)

Ok Johan.

I tried a "sub" strat and it kind of works.

It's currently 2nd week in May 1940, I taken Poland, France and I have 8 subs...all sitting spaced out in the NA from the top of the map to the top of North Africa and I can, with some success, attack the odd convoy...but I have to be very careful, because if any allied shipping is present I am dead meat.

One problem that does exist though (and I think it's brought to light in this thread http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1591246 )...an allied battleship stumbled into my sub hex and a battle ensued....funny thing is, even though the battleship was the surprised one  and I lost 2 sub points to the battleship 1 (my sub had not attacked anything for a couple of turns and was just sitting in a hex...also it had moved AFTER it had attacked about 3
turns previously)

Now from what you say, I wouldn't mind losing 2, 3 maybe even 4 subs to a normal attack by a destroyer....but a surprised battleship? I do not like coming off worse in that scenario.

Anyway, I will keep testing the sub theory, because I have to try and attack more convoys and see the results...I have a sneaking suspicion I could lose all my subs by the end of 1941/42.

Another issue....it's not really worth the "distance and oil" to get a damaged sub back to base for repairs...so I suspect, at this stage, that the sub issue still needs a little bit of tweaking to be viable...

Anyway, I just wanted to post my findings.

Oh, and also, I am playing with max axis benefit



davetheroad -> RE: U-boats ... (10/18/2007 1:51:39 AM)

Why do convoys have 100% efficiency? When my subs attack it might give me a potential convoy loss of 13-14 but the actual combat never achieves this!

dave



SMK-at-work -> RE: U-boats ... (10/18/2007 4:29:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Well, I'm not really interested in "historically this happened" or "historically that happened" and so don't want to get into that.


pffttt....why bother with a "WW2" game in the first palce then??

quote:


What I would liek is a workable "sub" solution, either in the form of workable tactics with the game as is, or with a change where it is workable because, as I've been playing it, it isn't workable. But I will give what Johan says a go and see what the results are.



how do you define a "workable" solution if not by comparing it with history plus assumptions of what might be reasonable alternatives??



Major Victory -> RE: U-boats ... (10/18/2007 4:46:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe 98

quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Victory

By the time any 1 sub is destroyed, you will hopefully have attritioned enough build points to justify the loss,



The thing is its not possible because the allied naval counterattack will badly damage or destroy the sub immedaintly.
-



If your attacking convoys in the South Atlantic, theres no way the allies have that many ships to attack your subs the next turn! between the fall of France and US entry, the Brits only have so many ships and even if they use all available BB & CV units, more than likely its to guard the larger North Altantic convoys, so if you notice this large ASW commitment, move on South,

Not to mention in this scenerio, your Italians must be having a field day in the Med, and Norway might be tempting!



SMK-at-work -> RE: U-boats ... (10/18/2007 5:33:28 AM)

it only takes a couple of cruisers to make the Sth Atlantic uneconomic - it's a long way back to Germany to repair wounded U-boats before France falls, and even after that happens the RN can spare cruisers and still leave BB's and CV's to take care of the Italians without tmuch bother.



Major Victory -> RE: U-boats ... (10/18/2007 5:45:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

it only takes a couple of cruisers to make the Sth Atlantic uneconomic - it's a long way back to Germany to repair wounded U-boats before France falls, and even after that happens the RN can spare cruisers and still leave BB's and CV's to take care of the Italians without tmuch bother.


If Britain's got "spare" cruisers in 1940-41, then I would assume that every build point they have received to that point has gone to building them, I might also assume that the Axis are kicking their butt everywere else on the board.

My expierence (human play only) is that usually 3 cruisers are on board on average in that period, they cannot be everywere at once.



SMK-at-work -> RE: U-boats ... (10/18/2007 6:45:47 AM)

 they don't have to be everywhere at once - their only job in life is u-boat hunting - they should not be anywhere except the Atlantic. 



firepowerjohan -> RE: U-boats ... (10/18/2007 1:43:14 PM)

Since there are 3-6 convoys on map at most times, I do not see how 3 DD can cover them and especially if 4 subs is attacking somwhere if just one DD is withing range that is no trouble it might even get sunk by the other subs before new DD's arrive. If you have 4 subs, and you used 2 of them to sink the damaged DD then you can place the remaining 2 to protect your flanks and being invisible they can almost match the nest turn incoming DD. If all 3 DD are withing range though, then the 4 subs will be in deep trouble as should be.

The toughest job for the Subs is if UK decide to put all their navy in the Atlantic but then they are also giving up on Africa.



Vypuero -> RE: U-boats ... (10/18/2007 4:11:29 PM)

People are making assumptions without enough playing experience - esp. Hans, for example.  You cannot just try a few times and decide it does not work when in fact it is simply a matter of better strategy.  The allied fleets can be spotted by the uboats, and the uboats are invisible to the allied fleets, and the convoys are not under their control either.  If you can't use that to your advantage, you are not trying hard enough.



HansBolter -> RE: U-boats ... (10/18/2007 4:51:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Vypuero

People are making assumptions without enough playing experience - esp. Hans, for example.  You cannot just try a few times and decide it does not work when in fact it is simply a matter of better strategy.  The allied fleets can be spotted by the uboats, and the uboats are invisible to the allied fleets, and the convoys are not under their control either.  If you can't use that to your advantage, you are not trying hard enough.



That is probably a fair assesment. I actualy stopped "trying" a long time ago as I haven't played this game since my hiatus from posting here started some time ago. I routinely pointed out from the get go that the game can be won easily by the Axis, playing against the AI, with absolutely no participation in the "naval game" at all. SMK threw down the gauntlet and challenged me to "prove" I could win against him while ignoring the naval game. What he persistently failed to realize is that I was predicating all of my criticisms on games against the AI. I would have been terribly disappointed if he COULDN'T have done better against me than the AI, which wouldn't have proven anything regarding my criticisms of play against the AI. I'm not trying to slam him here, I just guess he missed my point.

In light of the release of a patch, I decided to "look in" here again and found myself drawn into the discussion because I now see so many other people coming around to the very same conclusions I arrived at from the start. I find it rather ironic that the Judge is making the same critical assesments I made several months ago when no one seemed interested in listening to me.

All of the "the enemy can't have that many ships and they can't be everywhere" contentions seem to overlook the fact that we have been told by the designers if we want to play against the AI we should be giving the AI advantages which automatically means they WILL have "that many ships" that do seem to be able to be everywhere. FPJ already alluded to that caveat somehwere above.

The simple fact is the designer can't "have his cake and eat it to". It isn't fair to players playing against the AI to tell them that viable naval strategies only work against human opponets with neither side having an advantage while at the same time telling players playing against the AI that they have to give the AI advantages that will preclude a viable naval strategy. I can only hope you see my point.



JudgeDredd -> RE: U-boats ... (10/18/2007 4:53:23 PM)

It's probably fair to say that because I didn't/don't know how to use subs in this game that I made assumptions that something needed changing.

However, as I pointed out above, the way the mechanics have been explained, it does not work that a battleship can be surprised by my sub by inadvertantly entering the sub hex only for the sub to suffer a hit of 2 to the battleships 1.

Also, I play with fog of war on (always), so perhaps I have to play with fog of war off for a while, because I'd swear the allies have more naval units than those described. Certainly in my example above, the allies managed to get to a sub of mine and damage it to the point where it wasn't worth taking it all the way back to Germany (a good 3 or 4 turns + oil + cost of fixing + lower effectiveness due to replacements?)

I have placed my subs in a "line" north west to south east Atlantic so they can see what's coming and going and another 3 (8 in total) sitting behind this "wall" for interception...but I rarely see a convoy which doesn't have some sort of escort up it's arse.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.828125