-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
theokrat said:-><-
(Yes click it)
Oh my god he kinda Emu'd THE EMU!
THE END IS FUCKING NIGH!
submarine + naval bomber= rule the sea.
submarines are hard to kill unless the enemy get in range, and, your naval bombers should wipe anything out trying to kill your subs.
submarines are hard to kill unless the enemy get in range, and, your naval bombers should wipe anything out trying to kill your subs.
I must give credit to Blue-Emus finding that large number of subs is important.
Though I still think subs are underpowered.
But If player(example GER) invests in submarines to achieve numbers around and more than 60 flotillas (300 subs in real) we can lok on this as a treshold of Britain ASW collapse.Simply this is to much subs for british navy to deal with.
Still,I have objection that even those numbers of subs gives no real result in declining number of enemy warships.Historicaly german subs did sunk fair numbers of destroyers,but my 60 subs allmost never sunk any destroyer.
Yes subs are made for sunking convoys,but still they should be able to defend themselves more actively and send at least some enemy ASW ship to the bottom of the sea.
Historicaly on every 6-8 sunked subs by Allies,at least one Allied destroyer was sunk by subs actively defending themselves(even in worse times for german subs).I think subs are underpowered.
In my current game, my 62 subs did crippled Britain in 1941.
I understad my loss of 18 subs in campaign that lasted for 8 months,I replaced those losses easily.
And yes(bleu emu) it is cost efective way to strike enemy.
But- why only one(1) british lvl 1 destroyer was sunked by my defending subs ?
To weak sea atack/defence of subs is.
the catch is that so large number of subs is spread to every corner of Atlantic so British ASW is in chock,and many subs are out of reach.
But I propose to test my statement by sending all 60 subs only to Atlantic north from Equator and around coast of North America(historical disposition).
Then sub losses are to haevy by my expirience.
Though I still think subs are underpowered.
But If player(example GER) invests in submarines to achieve numbers around and more than 60 flotillas (300 subs in real) we can lok on this as a treshold of Britain ASW collapse.Simply this is to much subs for british navy to deal with.
Still,I have objection that even those numbers of subs gives no real result in declining number of enemy warships.Historicaly german subs did sunk fair numbers of destroyers,but my 60 subs allmost never sunk any destroyer.
Yes subs are made for sunking convoys,but still they should be able to defend themselves more actively and send at least some enemy ASW ship to the bottom of the sea.
Historicaly on every 6-8 sunked subs by Allies,at least one Allied destroyer was sunk by subs actively defending themselves(even in worse times for german subs).I think subs are underpowered.
In my current game, my 62 subs did crippled Britain in 1941.
I understad my loss of 18 subs in campaign that lasted for 8 months,I replaced those losses easily.
And yes(bleu emu) it is cost efective way to strike enemy.
But- why only one(1) british lvl 1 destroyer was sunked by my defending subs ?
To weak sea atack/defence of subs is.
the catch is that so large number of subs is spread to every corner of Atlantic so British ASW is in chock,and many subs are out of reach.
But I propose to test my statement by sending all 60 subs only to Atlantic north from Equator and around coast of North America(historical disposition).
Then sub losses are to haevy by my expirience.
Last edited:
1. Your subs rarely sink DDs because ASW does not work; it takes other ships (or aircraft) on other missions to actually detect the subs, only then will the ASW-DDs engage.
2. A pack of 10 subs eat 2 DDs for lunch without leaving any crumbs for dinner, if they win the positioning roll. The Vanilla naval stacking- and OCL-penalties are so low concentration of force is by far the best strategy.
2. A pack of 10 subs eat 2 DDs for lunch without leaving any crumbs for dinner, if they win the positioning roll. The Vanilla naval stacking- and OCL-penalties are so low concentration of force is by far the best strategy.
he said " if you win positioning rolls" ..! No, bigger stacks would mean losing more subs when you run into aircrafts or CV's and lose position against DD's, and you would rarely gain anything at all! Those warships you so desperately want to kill are meaningless, if they cannot keep the supply lanes open! So just sink the convoys with your subs, and take the subhunters that stray into reach of your planes..And be satisfied! ..by the way, if i recall correctly, the Japanese strategy with subs was to use them (mostly) against warships, while the German strategy was to go for the Merchant shipping.. Guess who sank more tons pr sub?liebgot said:
More subs per stack means:
- A higher chance of detecting a convoy.
- A lower chance of a detected convoy being too heavily protected to dare attack (may be insignificant in Vanilla, since the AI does not build enough escorts).
- More sunk ships per convoy attacked.
- Longer time at sea due to convoy raiding attrition being more spread out; unfortunately it is perfectly OK to keep a sub at sea for 10 years.
- An insignificantly increased risk of enemy CVs passing by detecting your subs (the size of the CV fleet is far more important).
- Less damage sustained in naval battles due to lower MTE (the stacking penalty is insignificant because all combat values are truncated).
- More damage dealt to enemy ships if the subs close in during surface engagements.
- An increased risk of having to manually promote seawolf admirals.
Altough those point do not really apply when comparing lets say 10 stacks a 6 subs vs 20 stacks a 3 subs.Wobbler said:
Perhaps not 1 and possibly not 3, but definitely 2.theokrat said:
4 never really applies, it was just added to further point out the lack of significant negative effects of concentrating ships in fewer but larger stacks.
Big flotillas get killed by aircraft carriers, i lost 2 stacks of 6 and 5 before i got my naval attack planes to their french and spanish bases.
My 3 stack flotillas have never had a too heavily protected convoy.
My 3 stack flotillas have never had a too heavily protected convoy.
The message pop-up is off by default; have you turned it on?Timmetie said:
Btw, adding a serial of, say, 500 escorts in the UK's production queue in the scenario definition file makes quite a difference on the Atlantic war - it will suddenly be possible for the AI to resist (see my posts on the subject a few pages back).
Wobbler said:
This sounds reasonable.Thanks .
I will try this.
From the biggining of Doomsday I used 3 stack subs.
except for : with 60 subs in stacks of 6, you can cover 10 areas. With stacks of 20, only three areas. With stacks of 3, its 20 areas. So if you concentrate too much, the convoy-ai will reroute around you, and you will find zero convoys..Wobbler said:
I would like to tell al little story of my own sub campaing.
I am playing as Germany on hard/furious with DAIM installed. Furthermore I have also set the houserules of not building any normal infantry, brigade everything, use both fighters and interceptors and not to do sealion untill after I have invaded the sovjet.
Since I had to use quite alot of IC on mobile troops, brigades and other nice stuff to help me fight a successful land- and air- war i could not (and did not want to) build a large fleet. All in all I was trying to recreate the real WW2, but still trying to win.
I have found that the four, I repeat only FOUR, sea areas between portugal and greenland is what you need to patrol. I used 2x3 subs pack in each area mounting up to enormous 24 subs needed. I had 36 at the start of the war so I could keep a few in spare and also patrol around the Azores, a great hunting ground for convoys.
After only four months of convoy hunting (I put the subs on hunting both day and night) I have reduced the british convoy numbers from 1050(including new builds) down to 570. Similair numbers for the escorts: from 180 down to 60 left. I have lost 4 subs and damage a few DDs and the occasional transport. I always retreated as fast as I could.
My sub numbers are now up to 48 so I will start convoy raiding in the areas between south america and africa soon, creating two lines of interception of any convoy(gibraltar will fall along with rep. spains soon).
The british trading efficiency with the US is down to 52%.
Only strange and slightly annoying thing is that UK has not started building any large numbers of convoys or ship to try to hunt my subs yet, perhaps sinking half of their merchant fleet in 4 months was to fast for them to react, perhaps it is DAIM.
My conclusions: Subs are great and you dont need as many as 60 of them to wage a successful war with them, infact 24 + a few spare is more than enough at the start of the war, even on hard difficulty. As you build more subs you can extend your hunting grounds and sink even more convoys.
I am playing as Germany on hard/furious with DAIM installed. Furthermore I have also set the houserules of not building any normal infantry, brigade everything, use both fighters and interceptors and not to do sealion untill after I have invaded the sovjet.
Since I had to use quite alot of IC on mobile troops, brigades and other nice stuff to help me fight a successful land- and air- war i could not (and did not want to) build a large fleet. All in all I was trying to recreate the real WW2, but still trying to win
.I have found that the four, I repeat only FOUR, sea areas between portugal and greenland is what you need to patrol. I used 2x3 subs pack in each area mounting up to enormous 24 subs needed. I had 36 at the start of the war so I could keep a few in spare and also patrol around the Azores, a great hunting ground for convoys.
After only four months of convoy hunting (I put the subs on hunting both day and night) I have reduced the british convoy numbers from 1050(including new builds) down to 570. Similair numbers for the escorts: from 180 down to 60 left. I have lost 4 subs and damage a few DDs and the occasional transport. I always retreated as fast as I could.
My sub numbers are now up to 48 so I will start convoy raiding in the areas between south america and africa soon, creating two lines of interception of any convoy(gibraltar will fall along with rep. spains soon).
The british trading efficiency with the US is down to 52%.
Only strange and slightly annoying thing is that UK has not started building any large numbers of convoys or ship to try to hunt my subs yet, perhaps sinking half of their merchant fleet in 4 months was to fast for them to react, perhaps it is DAIM.
My conclusions: Subs are great and you dont need as many as 60 of them to wage a successful war with them, infact 24 + a few spare is more than enough at the start of the war, even on hard difficulty. As you build more subs you can extend your hunting grounds and sink even more convoys.
Again, I will have to refer to my posts several pages back for a remedy.martin_haag said:
Wobbler said:
I am sorry, but I cant find the post you are refering to (you did post quite a few you know
).I read through the entire thread before starting my own game, but that was some weeks ago so cant guess what you are talking about. Could you provide a link to your post or repost it for me? Thanks.
- Status