Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

Subs in silent mode should probably not be spottable by adjacent enemy ships. It should take a direct encounter to find the damn thing.

Subs should probably do a super alpha strike to any BB,CC,CA or DN that runs directly into them when they weren't already spotted. Think 7th Cruiser Squadron 1914, HMS Barham... Central Powers submarines sunk 10 battleships and 18 cruisers during the WWI! They shouldn't do this alpha strike to DD or Torpedo Boats though. DD should stop and spot them if they attempt to cruise over an enemy sub hex.

But similarly subs in silent mode should be blind. They shouldn't be super scouts. Historically the Germans (and Japanese in WWII etc) attempted to use sub flotillas to locate enemy fleets, but the results were usually poor to mediocre at best. Certainly not reliable. Wikipedia also implies that WWI subs had worse visibility while submerged. Maybe someone who knows the naval history could confirm or deny this. While "silent mode" doesn't equate precisely to submerged, it does partly. So that helps to justify why silent subs could not have vision of adjacent hexes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka
Another idea is subs not being attacked by ships with no ASW such as battleships

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka
So now should I go again through the English Channel of death with them

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka
Another idea is subs not being attacked by ships with no ASW such as battleships

Yes I really support this. Unfortunately I can't figure out a way to make this happen in the editor. The best I can do is eliminate the ridiculous BC/CA/CL +1 sub attack from anti-sub tech upgrades. I would prefer to make it so Battleships simply aren't allowed to attack subs*

*This change would require some further rebalance, particularly with respect to the Russian sub in the Black Sea which is already a little overpowered against the puny Ottoman destroyer.

Since I can't do that, I am experimenting with giving subs a defense value of 1 in my mod (in vanilla it starts at 0 and stays at 0 even if you upgrade your subs). In that way, battleships might be deterred from contributing to the anti-sub gangbangs. You can still do it, but you might take damage. I increased DD starting anti-sub damage from 1 -> 2 and increased their anti-sub upgrades to the following: 2, 3, 3, 4 while sub defense will get something like 1, 2, 2, 3.

The biggest change I am considering is lowering submarine vision to 0 to prevent it from acting as a super scout. I'd love to lower the sub-searching vision of vessels and aircraft but there doesn't seem to be any way to selectively alter vision. I even briefly considered lowering all naval vessels to 0 vision but I think that might create other big problems.

Note: I can't seem to find any information about WWI Light Cruisers and depth charges. Did they typically carry ASW weaponry? I know WWII Light Cruisers often had some depth charges but I can't find any solid WWI info on this point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

Note: I can't seem to find any information about WWI Light Cruisers and depth charges. Did they typically carry ASW weaponry? I know WWII Light Cruisers often had some depth charges but I can't find any solid WWI info on this point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

Because submarines get gangstomped if they attempt to convoy raid (vs humans, you can raid vs the AI pretty darn effectively), I tend to use them for what they actually do best: advance fleet scouts.

Subs prowling around in the Baltic can detect Russian mines or Russian subs that might try to raid the Sweden convoy, then your fleet can pounce and give the Entente some of their own medicine with your DD

Subs in the Med can convoy raid quite close to certain ports in Turkey and Greece if you conquer Greece. Raiding once or twice might force the Entente to keep a bunch of ships around waiting near Greece/Egypt and think twice about doing some micro landing (though they can usually scout ahead with their own subs so it's not too tough). But there's not much space and it's pretty obvious where your subs will go if they intend to raid. Also there are some chokepoints if you attempt to return home to port especially if you attempt to raid in an unpredictable location (tough to make it home safely if you raid in the western Med) and you CAN easily lose subs even if they raid close to home ports.

HOWEVER the MAIN effect of subs in the Med is that they can sail to Constantinople and provide scouting for your modest Turkish fleet. If the Russians blockade Zonguldak with their own submarine, your lone destroyer can't damage it fast enough to make it retreat, and it will do substantial economic damage to Turkey (whose MPP are more valuable simply because Turkey has few MPP). You really need to use your whole Turkish fleet to attack the sub to lower its supply by 4 each turn (and even then it may still be worth it for Russia to repair a sub but cause MPP damage to Ottomans). HOWEVER attacking the sub with all your ships can be extremely risky to do because the Russian player can keep a DN or BB hidden at sea along the path to their sub. So ysou need a scout to make sure the sea path is clear to the Russian sub off Zonguldak. You can do this with aircraft too but it's less reliable due to the weather and I find I don't have any aircraft to spare in 1915. So anyhow, if your submarine detects their Black Sea fleet, you actually have a really good chance of sinking their DN especially if you repaired your BB. Furthermore, the sub can also provide scouting for any brave Entente vessels that stray too close to the Dardanelles from the Aegean side. This provides opportunities for "free" damage to enemy naval vessels (you get to retreat safely to port or to the Sea of Marmara).

Overall this kind of scouting is actually far more beneficial to your war effort than any convoy raiding you might do, and FAR less risky.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

Against the AI I can get A-H subs into the Mediterranean once I have taken Cetinje. Even then they do come under considerable pressure, but deploying (higher Tech) German subs at Pola really helps and you can do a lot of damage to Entente convoy routes.

I think the relationship between destroyers/light cruisers, ASW Tech and submarines is OK, but Maritime Bombers are too powerful against submarines. Basically, I think they should be used for reconnaissance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

Maritime Bombers were already reduced and is one of the few defenses you have to try and clear a path though allied doom fleet hordes lol. I actually think Blimp naval attack should be stronger. Mainly talking about MP though...

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

Maritime Bombers were already reduced and is one of the few defenses you have to try and clear a path though allied doom fleet hordes lol. I actually think Blimp naval attack should be stronger. Mainly talking about MP though...

I am talking specifically about Maritime Bombers and submarines, not other shipping. Hardly any subs were sunk by Maritime Bombers/Seaplanes in WW1 although they did help to identify their positions for friendly shipping to go after them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete
Maritime Bombers are too powerful against submarines. Basically, I think they should be used for reconnaissance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka
Subs in the Med? How do you even get them out of the Adriatic or Dardanelles

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka
Subs in the Med? How do you even get them out of the Adriatic or Dardanelles

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka
Subs in the Med? How do you even get them out of the Adriatic or Dardanelles

I've had some success sneaking subs out of the Adriatic early game but I think this is mostly due to errors on my opponent's part. If they kept a decent patrol going they would have detected my sub. Once again, part of the issue is that submarines are too good at scouting for little risk. The Entente can use its own submarines as effective detectors (tripwires) during the Centrals' turn, and then on top of that still search an area, returning to its optimal tripwire/spy cam hex at the end of every turn. You can't run past them and you can't sneak past them either.

Now once you conquer Greece it becomes easier to break out of the Adriatic with submarines and the Entente does have to retreat a little bit from the zone where your surface vessels could possibly hit and then return to port in one turn.

But I don't think it's possible to do much raider damage with them. MAYBE after Greece falls you can do a bit of Egypt convoy damage near your new ports, or at least force the Entente to commit more vessels to the area.

But you're not going to be roving the Med doing hundreds of MPP points of damage. It's pretty obvious where your subs will be (all they have to do is patrol the red lines and have a gank team on standby).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete
Maritime Bombers are too powerful against submarines. Basically, I think they should be used for reconnaissance.

Reconnaissance is honestly what is too powerful against subs. Any ship (including submarines), blimp or aircraft can easily search/patrol for subs coming in and out of the Atlantic, and it quickly becomes impossible to head out to sea without being detected and gangstomped. Even if the Allied player does not commit mines or vessels to the Channel, a submarine attempting to silent move back to Antwerp will be detected by Entente aircraft and then battered by vessels which were patrolling the unrestricted warfare NM hex area.

I haven't really been able to come up with an idea to make sub raiding in the Atlantic viable. Subs simply need to be more difficult to detect but there's no way to do that in the editor besides give them a monstrous movement speed. This would make them too powerful (especially as scouts themselves).

So as it is, the German subs will mostly stay in port (or the Baltic) vs a human player.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka
impressed if you have conquered Greece

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka
impressed if you have conquered Greece

Really? Do you play against opponents who reinforce Greece immediately? In my experience Greece has always been left to crumble immediately.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

As I recall, the only tactical difference is that subs in the WW2 game have a slightly longer range (21 APs versus 18), which makes sense given technology improvements. Since sonar was a WW2 era invention, I wonder if ASW tech should be as strong as it is in the WW1 game? A slight shift in the balance between Advanced Subs and ASW tech would increase the survival rate of German subs.

Most of the differences are the strategic ones you have already listed. But you overlook a major strategic difference with the WW2 game - which are the NM hexes off the British coast and the possibility of shutting down British ports. That strategy does not exist in the WW2 game and it makes the attractions of investing in sub capability much greater for the German player in WW1, even if you have to keep building new ones to replace losses.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

So I went and compared the subs in the editors.

WIE: 20 AP NA:5 ND:5
WW1: 18 AP NA:3 ND:3
WAW: 16 AP NA:5 ND:5

I'm assuming AP is adjusted to map size.

Conclusion: Since WW1 subs were the most deadly of all eras NA and ND should be raised to 4 or 5.

Agree? Disagree?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

As I recall, the only tactical difference is that subs in the WW2 game have a slightly longer range (21 APs versus 18), which makes sense given technology improvements. Since sonar was a WW2 era invention, I wonder if ASW tech should be as strong as it is in the WW1 game? A slight shift in the balance between Advanced Subs and ASW tech would increase the survival rate of German subs.

Most of the differences are the strategic ones you have already listed. But you overlook a major strategic difference with the WW2 game - which are the NM hexes off the British coast and the possibility of shutting down British ports. That strategy does not exist in the WW2 game and it makes the attractions of investing in sub capability much greater for the German player in WW1, even if you have to keep building new ones to replace losses.

So I went and compared the subs in the editors.

WIE: 20 AP NA:5 ND:5
WW1: 18 AP NA:3 ND:3
WAW: 16 AP NA:5 ND:5

I'm assuming AP is adjusted to map size.

Conclusion: Since WW1 subs were the most deadly of all eras NA and ND should be raised to 4 or 5.

Agree? Disagree?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

Subs in the Med? How do you even get them out of the Adriatic or Dardanelles and keep them alive? Impossible! ASW seems much more powerful in the WW1 game. You can say subs were in their infancy but so was ASW...

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

As I recall, the only tactical difference is that subs in the WW2 game have a slightly longer range (21 APs versus 18), which makes sense given technology improvements. Since sonar was a WW2 era invention, I wonder if ASW tech should be as strong as it is in the WW1 game? A slight shift in the balance between Advanced Subs and ASW tech would increase the survival rate of German subs.

Most of the differences are the strategic ones you have already listed. But you overlook a major strategic difference with the WW2 game - which are the NM hexes off the British coast and the possibility of shutting down British ports. That strategy does not exist in the WW2 game and it makes the attractions of investing in sub capability much greater for the German player in WW1, even if you have to keep building new ones to replace losses.

So I went and compared the subs in the editors.

WIE: 20 AP NA:5 ND:5
WW1: 18 AP NA:3 ND:3
WAW: 16 AP NA:5 ND:5

I'm assuming AP is adjusted to map size.

Conclusion: Since WW1 subs were the most deadly of all eras NA and ND should be raised to 4 or 5.

Agree? Disagree?

I've been pondering the same issue (threads like this are always very useful ) and in the WWI game the subs have a naval defense value of 0, whereas in both WW2 games it is 1.

Increasing this to 1 would therefore help them survive attacks better.

With Maritime Bombers, they can currently upgrade to level 2 in Naval Weapons and 3 in ASW, which with hindsight seems rather generous. The next question to consider is therefore a more appropriate level of upgrades.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bavre

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

Subs in the Med? How do you even get them out of the Adriatic or Dardanelles and keep them alive? Impossible! ASW seems much more powerful in the WW1 game. You can say subs were in their infancy but so was ASW...

Build Airships and Naval Bombers. Use Airships to scout the blockade and once you found it, do hit and runs with your fleet. Your DD hitting their Subs, your DN and CC hitting their DD etc...
Just make sure you can get back to port! This will force the Entente to move their blockade at least some hexes back. Once you have Montenegro and Albania you should be able to slip through if your airforce scouts for the subs. Staying alive while raiding however ...
Alternatively don't raid and use your subs for hit and runs too, if there are capital ships around. And as already mentioned in this thread, getting 1 sub to Constantinople is highly beneficial for the turkish fleet.
Btw: Naval Bombers can raid too. Took me a while to get it but you just have to set them to raider and they will each turn attack the nearest convoy route that is within strike range. Their raiding efficiency however seems to just be about half that of subs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

As I recall, the only tactical difference is that subs in the WW2 game have a slightly longer range (21 APs versus 18), which makes sense given technology improvements. Since sonar was a WW2 era invention, I wonder if ASW tech should be as strong as it is in the WW1 game? A slight shift in the balance between Advanced Subs and ASW tech would increase the survival rate of German subs.

Most of the differences are the strategic ones you have already listed. But you overlook a major strategic difference with the WW2 game - which are the NM hexes off the British coast and the possibility of shutting down British ports. That strategy does not exist in the WW2 game and it makes the attractions of investing in sub capability much greater for the German player in WW1, even if you have to keep building new ones to replace losses.

So I went and compared the subs in the editors.

WIE: 20 AP NA:5 ND:5
WW1: 18 AP NA:3 ND:3
WAW: 16 AP NA:5 ND:5

I'm assuming AP is adjusted to map size.

Conclusion: Since WW1 subs were the most deadly of all eras NA and ND should be raised to 4 or 5.

Agree? Disagree?

I've been pondering the same issue (threads like this are always very useful ) and in the WWI game the subs have a naval defense value of 0, whereas in both WW2 games it is 1.

Increasing this to 1 would therefore help them survive attacks better.

With Maritime Bombers, they can currently upgrade to level 2 in Naval Weapons and 3 in ASW, which with hindsight seems rather generous. The next question to consider is therefore a more appropriate level of upgrades.