RE: U-boats not a menace

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: U-boats not a menace

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> RE: U-boats not a menace

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/19/2017 4:19:15 AM

Sugar

Posts: 926
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline

What`s the situation now after the 1.03 patch?

The situations in Egypt and Russia are still the same, there`s nothing to hold f�r the allies. It`s totally enough to send 1 fighter and tact. bomber in addition to the DAK, then one can see what happens to their 2-3 tanks. The axis is superior in every kind of warfare.

And with the strengthenup of the subs it has become even worse. The bill does not go, because you get lots of subs for free. In silent mode (which is automatically entered after first fight) the predictions for carrier- and lightcruiserattacks are 0 damage, even at good weather. If britain looses around 50 mpp/turn, they won`t hardly be able send any reinforces to egypt.

Compared to the elder versions of strategic command, the axis now is clearly in favor.

(in reply to battlevonwar)

Post #: 31

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/19/2017 12:07:54 PM

vonik

Posts: 262
Joined: 4/8/2011
Status: offline

Yes I think that the Subs in silent mode are now completely overboard .
A level 1 sub in silent mode with 0 supply, 0 moral, 0 readiness will routinely survive 15 + level 1 high moral and high readiness destroyer attacks with 0 damage .
After a few turns the destroyers start to grey out, receive damage (even if the predictor says 0:0) and have to return to port while the sub sails unscathed happily away with a much bigger XP :)

There seems to be something very wrong mathematically .
If the probability to do 0 damage is P, then the probability to do 0 damage in 10 strikes in a row is P^10 .
As this is what is routinely observed (actually even for more than 10 strikes in a row) , we have to have P^10 of the order of 1 . Say 0.9 .
Then P^10 = 0.9 and we get P~0.99 .
That means that the probability to damage a sub in silent mode REGARDLESS of its moral, supply and readiness is of the order of 1/100 .
So you'll need about 100 attacks before damaging a sub by 1 but your destroyers will run out of supply and readiness long before they can do 100 strikes ...

< Message edited by vonik -- 4/19/2017 12:27:33 PM >

(in reply to Sugar)

Post #: 32

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/19/2017 1:53:22 PM

Leadwieght

Posts: 327
Joined: 2/23/2017
Status: offline

So it seems we have come around 180 degrees from where this thread started. At first, the concern was that u-boats were too easy to kill.
Now, it seems people are saying u-boats are too hard to kill (at least in Silent mode).
What I haven't seen in the discussion of the u-boat campaign as it is simulated in the game is the question of cost to the Allies beyond the direct cost of convoy losses.
It's an obvious point, I suppose, but if the Allies spend MPPs on ASW research chits and lots of destroyers, there is a substantial opportunity cost.

(in reply to vonik)

Post #: 33

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/19/2017 2:31:44 PM

Sugar

Posts: 926
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline

The issue is, if you change one of the game mechanics, it may be ruining the balancing.

This isn`t a game about historycally acuressnes, it`s all about MP-Balancing. Given an at start more or less historically situation, what happens if the belligerents do not the same mistakes as their predecessors? The before patch 1.03 given situation enables the axis to do economical damage to the Brits by convoyraiding, together with a Battle of Britain and the threat of Seel�we (or gamewise the opportunity to take whole France with Franco joining) this has serious consequences for the Middleeast theater. That would have been okay, and worked fine in the elder versions of SC.

But there has been no DAK in those versions, which totally changes the balance of powers.

I highly appreciate the developers reaction to their costumers wishes, and I also like the idea of improving naval gamemechanics, but this went into a wrong direction in terms of balancing I guess.

(in reply to Leadwieght)

Post #: 34

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/19/2017 4:41:08 PM

johanssb

Posts: 78
Joined: 1/2/2012
Status: offline

You hold Egypt by taking away Axis supply using the UK navy and air.

(in reply to Sugar)

Post #: 35

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/19/2017 5:07:14 PM

vonik

Posts: 262
Joined: 4/8/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: johanssb

You hold Egypt by taking away Axis supply using the UK navy and air.

Neither UK Navy nor air can do anything about supply .
As the German and Italian HQs sit in towns, if you bring those towns down to supply 0, at the start of the next turn it will be 1 and everything is supplied fine .
Not mentionning the possibility to bring a second Italian HQ and chaining supply .
Actually in the game the Brits struggle with supply much more than Axis because they have a single lousy O Connor HQ while the Axis has 2 (or 3) .

Besides your BBs will take damage when shore bombing and you can ill aford to waste MPPs on reinforcing them every turn .
On top if the Brit is not careful, he'll run in a sub in silent mode and loose his BB :)

(in reply to johanssb)

Post #: 36

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/19/2017 5:38:31 PM

johanssb

Posts: 78
Joined: 1/2/2012
Status: offline

At supply of 1, your maximum becomes 8 and not 10 for your lead HQ and the supply and morale of your front line units will be less (maybe 5 if they are a couple of hexes from the HQ ?).

Agreed, the UK should have more than 1 HQ in Egypt.

Agreed, the BBs should not take damage from bombarding. I don't agree with this game mechanic or the strength loss of units from shore bombardment, infrastructure yes, but not units...

The Brit should be careful with his navy but still must use it.

Maybe the sub will be found by a destroyer first and then visited by a naval bomber ???

(in reply to vonik)

Post #: 37

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/19/2017 6:21:49 PM

vonik

Posts: 262
Joined: 4/8/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: johanssb

Maybe the sub will be found by a destroyer first and then visited by a naval bomber ???

Well as says a previous post, a sub in silent mode can be visited by 10 naval bombers and just shrug it off without damage .
And as for the immobilised destroyer, he'll be killed by the RM next turn:)

(in reply to johanssb)

Post #: 38

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/19/2017 6:55:54 PM

johanssb

Posts: 78
Joined: 1/2/2012
Status: offline

So mission accomplished then. We've forced the RM to sortie and engage us in battle

(in reply to vonik)

Post #: 39

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/19/2017 7:33:17 PM

Sugar

Posts: 926
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline

quote:

At supply of 1, your maximum becomes 8 and not 10 for your lead HQ and the supply and morale of your front line units will be less (maybe 5 if they are a couple of hexes from the HQ ?).

You can keep Rommel directly behind the frontline within 2 hexes of the next HQ in a town, this creates a supplychain and Rommel delivers 10 supply.

And also within the Allied turn, if the town is reduced to 0 supply, Rommel will deliver 8 cause the minor HQ delivers still 5 afaik.

(in reply to johanssb)

Post #: 40

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/20/2017 3:35:24 AM

battlevonwar

Posts: 1041
Joined: 12/22/2011
Status: offline

You are all wrong about Egypt and right. It's hard to take Libya and it's hard for Germany and Italy together to take Egypt. If the UK commits to it's defense. I do not feel that Sea Lion is much of a danger with half the UK Navy in place with the amount of Tactical Air and Fighters the UK Receives and the HEAVY MPPs she gets you are doing something wrong. Like defending France? Imagine if you will BEF in Egypt? The UK can afford ASW and another Home HQ! That or just a ton of Corps to blanket her country side.

Then to take Egypt the Germans have to commit several Air, 2 HQ, and likely 2 Tanks. Add up the cost MPPs and these will probably not be in Russia in June '41?(Naval Transport alone is expensive) Cause if you slowly retreat out of Egypt and with the reinforcements and 2 Armor you get you can make the Germans wait till '42 somewhere to get to Persia.

UK can operate pretty much as she wishes in and out 2 fighters/2 Tactical Bombers to help out achieve this goal. I have seen a player do it and I really could only turtle to Persia!

As for Submarines, the goal is achieved! You don't ever kill them, which is just sort of odd. Though they cannot escape and just bump enemy Destroyers constantly without ASW even. I usually end up with several U-Boats so battered they never raid much!

In a recent game of mine: Allies raiding 1100 German Convoys in 3 years of war

I raided almost 400 as Axis! Wow, I wonder what the cost in planes, ship replacements, ASW and the burden of all those clicks has been like? To raid successfully you need a surface fleet due to the spotting and discovery dynamic of U-boats/Submarines.

They cannot dive under the opponent during a movement so they just go, slap!

(in reply to Sugar)

Post #: 41

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/20/2017 3:55:01 PM

Hubert Cater

Posts: 5199
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

Thanks for the feedback here gentlemen and for the portion discussing subs and the v1.03 changes there I was hoping I could get some clarification on the potential issue as we didn't' feel the recent changes would have had such a great impact.

For example, for v1.03 the only change we made regarding subs was that their damage from combat would be halved if in Silent mode. Subsequently any return damage given to let's say an attacking Destroyer would also be halved.

Running tests on my end, with Subs at Level-1 and Destroyers at Level-1 and even with Subs at 0 supply and Destroyers at good supply all indicates that the subs should take some damage. Is this really not the case and if so can you provide some screenshots of the status of the units in question as well as the predicted combat results when hovering over the sub with the target cursor?

One thing I did notice is that if a sub in Hunt mode was showing a potential of 3 strength point losses, the new formula for subs in Silent mode would show 1 strength point loss, i.e. 3 / 2 = 1.5 rounded down to 1. I can could change the rounding up to 2 if that helps?

Hubert

_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/pages/Fury-Software/233842800005900

Join our Steam Community:
http://steamcommunity.com/groups/strategiccommand3

(in reply to battlevonwar)

Post #: 42

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/20/2017 4:35:12 PM

vonik

Posts: 262
Joined: 4/8/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

Running tests on my end, with Subs at Level-1 and Destroyers at Level-1 and even with Subs at 0 supply and Destroyers at good supply all indicates that the subs should take some damage.
Is this really not the case and if so can you provide some screenshots of the status of the units in question as well as the predicted combat results when hovering over the sub with the target cursor?

Hubert

Happy to oblige, here you have 1 example of end of turn .
As you see the Sub in silent mode is supply 0, moral 8 %, readiness 24 .
It was attacked during the turn 14 times . The sub took 0 damage, the destroyers 2 . All combat odds were showing 0:0 .
I think during all those strikes the Sub's XP went from 1 to 3 (not sure to remember exactly what XP it had when it started but it was near 1) .
Now I am 2 turns later, the sub took farther 28 strikes, only 1 lucky damage and the destroyers are starting to get low on supply so that they take turns to resupply and return .
So here a single sub is pinning down my whole destroyer fleet for months ...

When the subs are in hunt mode, it's OK .
They take damage but you better kill them in 1 turn because if you don't , they go silent next turn and what happens is what you see on the screen shot .

< Message edited by vonik -- 4/20/2017 4:40:40 PM >

(in reply to Hubert Cater)

Post #: 43

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/20/2017 5:53:43 PM

vonik

Posts: 262
Joined: 4/8/2011
Status: offline

And here I just took another SS in a current PBEM .

As you see the destroyer is Supply 8, Readiness 95 %, Moral 90 % while the Sub is supply 0, Readiness 22 % , Moral 4 % .
The predictor says 0:0 .
Of course as the die rolls, the result was sub took 0 damage, destroyer took 1 damage :)

(in reply to vonik)

Post #: 44

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/21/2017 12:08:11 AM

Sugar

Posts: 926
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline

And not to mention the possibility for the sub to escape if surrounded; I think that`s also new in V1.03.

But many thanks to you Hubert for your response and caretaking!

(in reply to vonik)

Post #: 45

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/21/2017 1:56:06 PM

Hubert Cater

Posts: 5199
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

Hi Vonik,

Thanks for the replies and the first two things that immediately popped out from your screenshots is that the Axis sub is at Advanced Subs Level-2 while your Destroyers are all at Anti-Submarine Warfare Level-0 and a few at Level-1.

Right off the bat your Destroyers are at a disadvantage for any combat calculations so in most cases it would make sense that you would be looking at 0:0 losses or the possibility of even 1:0 depending on the order of your attacks and once the sub started to gain experience.

Under the old system when the combat losses would not have been halved for a defending sub in Silent mode then perhaps you would be looking at 1:1.

In the second screenshot it looks like you are attacking the sub in stormy seas and so a 0:0 odd predictor would also make sense as combat losses are halved in this case for both sides once again.

That being said I will change the formula for combat losses to round up instead of down once the values are halved when attacking a sub in Silent mode, and this will likely have more results with at least 1 loss in a similar situation... but your best bet is to definitely try and match your opponent's research levels and even to surpass them as that will have the biggest impact.

Hope this helps,
Hubert

_____________________________

(in reply to Sugar)

Post #: 46

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/21/2017 3:26:49 PM

vonik

Posts: 262
Joined: 4/8/2011
Status: offline

Well the tech difference is one thing but the HUGE difference in moral , supply and readiness should be another .
You'll surely agree that a totally unready, demoralized and out of supply sub which takes 14 (!) attacks would simply either try to surrender or die from exhaustion :)

(in reply to Hubert Cater)

Post #: 47

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/21/2017 5:59:39 PM

Guderian1940

Posts: 191
Joined: 2/24/2017
Status: offline

I agree tech level is and issue but subs ran out of torpedoes and would usually save them for trnasports not DD's. I attacked subs ate leve 3 with 29 units and loss 3 and no hits on subs which have been surrounded for many turns. Not only that the subs attack and sink more ships every turn. It's simply not working right. Wait for tech level!!! There is a balance issue here between tech level and supply as mentioned.

That is another issue since it is random it could take a year or two and use the few points you have while the Uboats wreak havoc. Air kills need to be increased. If an aircraft spots a sub it usually should not be able to dive and get away. Air can see the shadows in many case. Carries have little if no effect. Regardless of upgrades. Air killed more subs than surface yet air is ineffective.

If the idea is for the Allies to start being effective by 43 and let the Germans a free hand before that you still need to survive till then. England and Russian can be knocked out by end 42 or start 43. No point in continuing the game.

It seems any rational balanced strategy the Allies use does not make much of a difference. The German roll over everything thing till 43. The subs are just an example of the problems.

(in reply to vonik)

Post #: 48

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/21/2017 10:23:35 PM

MemoryLeak

Posts: 491
Joined: 12/4/2000
From: Woodland, CA USA
Status: offline

I was looking at the screenshots and I thought the latest version is suppose to have
additional selections in that little strip towards the bottom of the screen. Re-enforce, sleep and upgrade.
I don't see it in the screenshot so what version is he using?

_____________________________

If you want to make GOD laugh, tell him your future plans

USS Long Beach CGN-9
RM2 1969-1973

(in reply to Guderian1940)

Post #: 49

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/22/2017 2:53:12 AM

jakemon

Posts: 15
Joined: 1/11/2017
From: Vancouver WA USA
Status: offline

I just purchased this title, did the in-game upgrade check, and got Version 1.03. The information panel is the same as that displayed in the previous post- just the 5 hide /show icons. This doesn't match the image on page 17 of the Strategic Command Manual.pdf. That one seems similar to MemoryLeaks's description.

So far, the early naval war seems to be a fair simulation. The convoy raiders are poaching an average of 9 MPPs each per turn, and are taking some hits when they encounter DDs. Traveling along a convoy route seems to result in slamming into a DD half the time, and getting blundered into by a capital ship the other half. I did notice subs diving 2 hexes to escape an encounter.

Does anyone have any tips for countering an Allied raider on the Norway route? My DD sent to chase it off ran into an enemy DD at the mouth of the Skagerrak. I sallied some cruisers in a rescue attempt, which were met with more and larger enemies. Luckily, I had a sub patrolling, and a half strength sub returning to port: they sunk the HMS Reknown and my surface ships escaped back to port. It was fun, and felt like a victory, but probably wasn't worth the repair points.

(in reply to MemoryLeak)

Post #: 50

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/22/2017 3:34:56 AM

sPzAbt653

Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline

As I understand it, the in-game upgrade check is only for official releases, and will not work for Beta releases.

(in reply to jakemon)

Post #: 51

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/22/2017 8:30:02 AM

Leadwieght

Posts: 327
Joined: 2/23/2017
Status: offline

I don't so much mind that subs are hard to kill in Silent mode. What bothers me more is that they can continue to cause significant convoy losses in "Hunt" mode, even with supply level zero. I suppose the mere presence or possibility of a sub on a convoy route causes disruption as merchant ships have to be re-routed. So I don't mind zero-supply subs doing some MPP damage, but the formula seems a bit out of whack.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 52

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/22/2017 10:39:35 AM

Sugar

Posts: 926
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline

quote:

Does anyone have any tips for countering an Allied raider on the Norway route?

Raiding in norwegian waters will cause some diplohits into the axis direction. If you don`t want to risk your Kriegsmarine, a marinebomber could be very helpful. They are cheap, have a great range and can attack twice. They`re also the only unit except carriers with a very high seedetection.

(in reply to Leadwieght)

Post #: 53

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/22/2017 3:44:20 PM

MemoryLeak

Posts: 491
Joined: 12/4/2000
From: Woodland, CA USA
Status: offline

My point is I upgraded to the latest version and I have all of the new functionality. Upgrades, sleep and reinforcement.
The three new ones work for me. The reason I mentioned it is, if he is not testing the latest
version then he will not be testing the latest naval warfare updates either.

_____________________________

If you want to make GOD laugh, tell him your future plans

USS Long Beach CGN-9
RM2 1969-1973

(in reply to Sugar)

Post #: 54

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/24/2017 9:32:11 AM

Benedict151

Posts: 596
Joined: 3/4/2016
Status: offline

SPZ' is correct
The in-game upgrade check is only for official releases, and will not work for Beta releases

If you wish to try the latest beta (at time of writing v1.03.01) you will need to visit the members or public areas of the
Matrix website and manually download it

regards
Ben Wilkins

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 55

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/24/2017 2:32:17 PM

Hubert Cater

Posts: 5199
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

In terms of low morale, supply and readiness having an effect on surrounded Subs, I'd argue that it is still having an effect but primarily in terms of the Subs' ability to effectively fight back and therefore the zero potential losses that an attacker is likely to receive. This is significant considering the tech level disparity shown in the example above where the Destroyers are outclassed by the Subs.

Previously, and before we halved the losses for Subs that were running in Silent mode, what we would have had in the example above would have been something nearer to 1:1 in terms of potential losses. In this case and with enough Destroyers it would make sense that a Sub would be eventually destroyed and especially so after 10+ attacks.

However, with the new formula, the tech level differences are magnified in the sense that a Sub, even at low morale is not likely to take any damage and off hand I'm not so sure that this is a bad thing. Wooden sword versus a steel sword sort of thing when it comes to the tech level difference and once the tech level differences are eliminated that low morale, supply and readiness Sub should be more ripe for the picking as it is still not going to be hitting back against attacks.

I can still change the formula to round up versus down, and this will help, but the tech level difference should (I would still argue) and will still come into play.

_____________________________

(in reply to Benedict151)

Post #: 56

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/24/2017 2:34:47 PM

Hubert Cater

Posts: 5199
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

For raiding convoys, one way to prevent a sub from raiding is to have one of your naval units adjacent to it, otherwise we can look into the formula for effective raiding at low supply as well but it does currently take into account a Subs strength as part of the convoy MPP loss calculation.

_____________________________

(in reply to Hubert Cater)

Post #: 57

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/24/2017 3:35:09 PM

vonik

Posts: 262
Joined: 4/8/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

However, with the new formula, the tech level differences are magnified in the sense that a Sub, even at low morale is not likely to take any damage and off hand I'm not so sure that this is a bad thing. Wooden sword versus a steel sword sort of thing when it comes to the tech level difference and once the tech level differences are eliminated that low morale, supply and readiness Sub should be more ripe for the picking as it is still not going to be hitting back against attacks.

I can still change the formula to round up versus down, and this will help, but the tech level difference should (I would still argue) and will still come into play.

Well I would disagree that it is a good thing from the strategical point of view .
What you should notice is that this single desperate sub is able to tie the WHOLE destroyer fleet for months .
What can you do ? Go away and let this sub travel home with a much higher experience ? Or stay and let all the other subs to sink whatever they want ?
Both are evil .

I know that this is a game but let's remind the reality all the same .
The tech differences have everything to do with detecting-escaping but nothing much with fighting .
Once you have a sub detected, it hides somewhere in the depths .
But then even a fishing boat (e.g tech 0) can cast barrels with explosives and a fuse (and it did historically) .
The sub wouldn't and couldn't think to fight if it was surrounded by 20 fishing boat destroyers !

So basically in such a situation the destroyers should always take 0 damage . This is now not the case because in the 2nd SS the destroyer is at tech parity, has much better moral and readiness yet the odds show 0:0 .
I agree that a better tech (e.g stealth) should enable the sub to escape/dive better but not to survive 50 + strikes with 0 loss .

(in reply to Hubert Cater)

Post #: 58

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/24/2017 4:36:13 PM

Hubert Cater

Posts: 5199
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

Don't get me wrong, I can understand the frustration, it is just a matter of what we have in place are general formulas and this is the same for all units. Essentially the tech level upgrades will either improve your ability to attack or defend against other units relative to their ability to attack or defend. If a unit outclasses another unit based on its tech levels, and this has a noticeable result in combat, then this is all I mean in terms of this is not necessarily being a bad thing and I believe that in most cases we want this to play a significant role in game.

In both the examples above, and looking at the 3rd slot of research upgrades all the Destroyers are either at Level-0 and a few at Level-1. In the first example the Sub is at Level-2 and in the second example it is hard for me to see what level of ASW the attacking Destroyer has but it is also attacking during a storm and as mentioned this will mostly nullify the losses for both sides.

We could look to change the model of ASW to simply represent detection, but then the counter balance would be to maintain the increasing evasion %s for Subs with higher levels of Advanced subs, so in the end this might still result in similar levels of frustration if your Destroyers continue to be outclassed by higher level Subs, i.e. if they are able to continually evade attack or detection.

Currently the ASW and Advanced subs levels effect detection, evasion as well as attacker and defender losses so I don't think we are too far off.

But that being said, one change I will make for the next build based on this feedback is to round up and so in effect if your Destroyer has a chance of at least inflicting 1 strength point of damage versus a Sub running in Silent mode, instead of it then being halved and rounded down to 0, it will be halved and rounded up to 1 so at a miniumum a Sub will then likely take at least 1 strength point loss in similar situations to your first example above. This will provide an improvement for outclassed Destroyers, but on the flipside I think this will be balanced out by the new ability of any subsequently surviving Subs to escape from being fully surrounded so it should work out well.

The plus from the ability of subs to escape from being completely surrounded is that it will still encourage the upgrading of Destroyers to higher levels of ASW so as to be able to fully destroy the sub before it can escape on the following turn.

< Message edited by Hubert Cater -- 4/24/2017 4:38:08 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to vonik)

Post #: 59

RE: U-boats not a menace - 4/24/2017 5:05:50 PM

vonik

Posts: 262
Joined: 4/8/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

Don't get me wrong, I can understand the frustration,

Just to avoid misunderstandings . I am not frustrated at all . If I was, I wouldn't play the game :)

The techs matter and they damn should . It adds a whole strategical dimension which is (at least for me) in the core of the game .
Correctly managing the research is a good half of the strategy .
The problem is the unholy ability of a single silent sub to IMMOBILIZE 10 or 15 destroyers for MONTHS .

This leads to a gamey tactics - I didn't want to give it but some players will have found it sooner or later anyway .
As the German has much more MPP and an advance in sub tech, he will ALWAYS (or at least up to 43) have 1 tech advance to the Allied ASW .
So he simply sends a silent sub in the middle of Irish sea (or another convenient place) and paralyzes the whole RN .
He can do that near the US too .
As soon as the destroyers come, the German kills them one after the other with his surface fleet and other subs waiting just behind by hit and run .

The result ? 10 rounds later the silent sub still lives with XP 3 and the Allied lost all his destroyers .
This is bad .
I'd surely prefer a 1: 2 or even 1:3 because that way I would at least know that the sub won't survive 10 strikes regardless if I am ready to bear the losses .

(in reply to Hubert Cater)

Post #: 60