Are Submarines Worthless?

[MartinBG]

To be honest I didnt observed closely convoy sinkings. I was under impression of how big Wolpacks(20 subs) can hurt surface fleets.
They certainly are sinking convoys significantly but I dont know is wolfpack more efective in that.


Whatabot atack range?
Big stacks of subs are now realy more powerfull than before,and are more dangerous for surface fleets?It is andenieable this fact.
I dont know why but I guarantee concerning my long expirience in playing with subs that subs in big stacks are now more powerful in naval combat.

Why do you want to make subs weaker when are they perfectly balanced now?

I have no results concerning wolpacks yet. May be you misunderstod me because of my poor english. :wacko: :rofl:
I plan to do some tests in as clean as possible environment - custom scenario and many modifications to modifiers, unit stats etc... Something like what I do currently to test if convoy_def_eff is broken, insignificant, or just useles :rofl:

 

[unmerged(54763)]

I have no results concerning wolpacks yet. May be you misunderstod me because of my poor english. :wacko: :rofl:
I plan to do some tests in as clean as possible environment - custom scenario and many modifications to modifiers, unit stats etc... Something like what I do currently to test if convoy_def_eff is broken, insignificant, or just useles :rofl:

Sorry, I didnt understand you,it is not your English writing, but mine reading
My personal opinion is that convoy sinking allways was of queastionable value(in game as it is).
Now, when Wolfpacks can damage navy of atacked country(expencive ships),only now is clearly visible impact of subs.
Combination of sharp "Wolfpack"atacks to weaken enemy ASW capabilities(navy),and then convoy sinking now realy gives strategical impact expected from subs.

 

[unmerged(19915)]

Yesterday I attempted Blue Emu's original wolfpack methodology, with the 300 subs divided into 3 sub groups spread across the Atlantic. I had normal German naval techs and subs, unmodded in any way shape or form.

They were slaughtered wholesale. I lost most of the subs to 2-3 surface ship raiding parties spread across the same sea zones I was working in. It seems that the AI was able to predict its weaknesses and preemptively build ASW missions in the sea zones where shipping was occuring. I suspect that the AI identifies which sea zones its shipping is flowing through and sets up ASW missions in those areas.

Consequently I think Johan read Blue Emu's thread here and decided to defeat this approach. A submarine-based strangling of Allied shipping across the north and central Atlantic is no longer a viable option for a long term game. Perhaps using targeted and micromanaged sub groups you could achieve a good result, but the AI's ASW activities are now very effective.

After I realized this strategy failed I changed it up and captured the Azores, using them as a Naval Bomber base. That method lead to the complete annihilation of Allied shipping within a few months. The British then began losing divisions used to guard their home shores to attrition and shipping off to Africa and India, making themselves easy pickings.

In conclusion, the sub method of British strangling is no longer viable, but the naval bomber method still is.

 

[Gormadoc]

Yesterday I attempted Blue Emu's original wolfpack methodology, with the 300 subs divided into 3 sub groups spread across the Atlantic. I had normal German naval techs and subs, unmodded in any way shape or form.

They were slaughtered wholesale. I lost most of the subs to 2-3 surface ship raiding parties spread across the same sea zones I was working in. It seems that the AI was able to predict its weaknesses and preemptively build ASW missions in the sea zones where shipping was occuring. I suspect that the AI identifies which sea zones its shipping is flowing through and sets up ASW missions in those areas.

Consequently I think Johan read Blue Emu's thread here and decided to defeat this approach. A submarine-based strangling of Allied shipping across the north and central Atlantic is no longer a viable option for a long term game. Perhaps using targeted and micromanaged sub groups you could achieve a good result, but the AI's ASW activities are now very effective.

After I realized this strategy failed I changed it up and captured the Azores, using them as a Naval Bomber base. That method lead to the complete annihilation of Allied shipping within a few months. The British then began losing divisions used to guard their home shores to attrition and shipping off to Africa and India, making themselves easy pickings.

In conclusion, the sub method of British strangling is no longer viable, but the naval bomber method still is.

The convoy raiding mission makes the subs raid in the convoy routes as seen on the supply map mode. The same way the ASW mission makes the taskforces only hunt subs in the same convoy routes. So yes they now where the subs are because thats how the missions work.

 

[unmerged(54763)]

Yesterday I attempted Blue Emu's original wolfpack methodology, with the 300 subs divided into 3 sub groups spread across the Atlantic. I had normal German naval techs and subs, unmodded in any way shape or form.

They were slaughtered wholesale. I lost most of the subs to 2-3 surface ship raiding parties spread across the same sea zones I was working in. It seems that the AI was able to predict its weaknesses and preemptively build ASW missions in the sea zones where shipping was occuring. I suspect that the AI identifies which sea zones its shipping is flowing through and sets up ASW missions in those areas.

Consequently I think Johan read Blue Emu's thread here and decided to defeat this approach. A submarine-based strangling of Allied shipping across the north and central Atlantic is no longer a viable option for a long term game. Perhaps using targeted and micromanaged sub groups you could achieve a good result, but the AI's ASW activities are now very effective.

After I realized this strategy failed I changed it up and captured the Azores, using them as a Naval Bomber base. That method lead to the complete annihilation of Allied shipping within a few months. The British then began losing divisions used to guard their home shores to attrition and shipping off to Africa and India, making themselves easy pickings.

In conclusion, the sub method of British strangling is no longer viable, but the naval bomber method still is.

How strong beliefs are.
Of course you didnt read my tactics and worning posts and prediction on this forum first day after release of 1.2. I am talking for days that subs status in game is changed upside-down like never before but I think nobody takes that for true. o (Liebgot, who is that )
Subs are now balanced so change is needed in tactics.http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=346308. Small sub stacks in 1.2 are history in circumstances of praesence of capable enemy ASW fleets.
But you are forgeting despite strenghtened ASW, that balance was made by improved logic that identifies "Wolfpacks".
Now in. 1.2. use subs in wolfpacks(stacks) of 20 or so.
Send those to convoy riding.
Of course you cant make a "net" anymore troughout ocean.
Now is the tames of"Hot areas" of german Wolfpack activity.Thank Good such ahistorical thing as massive naval bomber activity is not required tomake strategic impact with subs.
Learn to use Wolfpacks people.

 

[Gormadoc]

It could be interresting to go back and locate the last version where ASW-mission-Wolfpack logics where working. The go forward from there and see what changes that have been done to subs to balance them vs surface ships. It could very well be that because they where unaware of the broken game code made subs to strong.

 

[unmerged(19915)]

How strong beliefs are.
Of course you didnt read my tactics and worning posts and prediction on this forum first day after release of 1.2. I am talking for days that subs status in game is changed upside-down like never before but I think nobody takes that for true. o (Liebgot, who is that )
Subs are now balanced so change is needed in tactics.http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=346308. Small sub stacks in 1.2 are history in circumstances of praesence of capable enemy ASW fleets.
But you are forgeting despite strenghtened ASW, that balance was made by imrpoved logic that identifies "Wolfpacks".
Now in. 1.2. use subs in wolfpacks(stacks) of 20 or so.
Send those to convoy riding.
Of copurse you cant make a "net" anymore troughout ocean.
Now is the tames of"Hot areas" of german Wolfpack activity.Thank Good such ahistorical thing as massive naval bomber activity is not required tomake strategic impact with subs.
Learn to use Wolfpacks people.

Full of yourself much?

I read your thread prior to my post above, and agree with your conclusions. My objective was to test Blue Emu's methods that were successful previously against the new 1.2 AI, and post my results here so that others with similar questions could see my results. And that was it.

And I do not pretend to understand the exact methods that the AI was altered, but rather the end result was that 3 sub stacks are no longer effective. Is this more historical, in terms of hot zones and the like? That was not the question I meant to answer.

And I never realized the supply mapmode could be used that way, Gormadec. Thanks!

 

[unmerged(54763)]

It could be interresting to go back and locate the last version where ASW-mission-Wolfpack logics where working. The go forward from there and see what changes that have been done to subs to balance them vs surface ships. It could very well be that because they where unaware of the broken game code made subs to strong.

I think ASW and Wolpack logics never worked.So there is maybee no reference point.
As I am concern subs are now perfectly balanced.
You can sink ships with Wolfpacks.But you must invest in subs.
It is not anymore a game of bumplashhh,micromanagement,and counting convoy sinkings,and..nothing else.
Now is battle for the Atlantic alive again.

I will repeat my tactics ans short AAR used in 1.2.
I started war in 1939 with 60 subs.by late 1941 i built in game tottaly around 100 sub flotillas.
I used them only in Wolfpacks of 20 or more.
I lost by late 1941 arund 50% of subs.
But I crippled Royal Navy to such extent that in 1942 I begun to sunk convoy freely using smaller stacks becouse RN had no ships to form strong ASW fleets.
Thus I totaly controled Britain.Britain used its IC to repelnish its navy,and its convoys.That is what I call strategical defeat.
Without naval bombers.
Without manual retreat.
With strong activity of subs only in some naval "routes"not in hall areas, which is even historical.
I am enjoying to play like this very much.

 

[unmerged(54763)]

Full of yourself much?

Strange that only a full whished and withnessed subs to be balanced.

 

[MartinBG]

A quick off-topic question: is there any stacking penalty for subs when used in big stacks (like there is for other ships)?

I'm more and more curious what is hidden behind the game term "wolfpack". Is this a simple hidden bonus/modifier based of their number (like +2% for every sub) or is something more? Can't wait to do some test to find-out!

 

[unmerged(54763)]

A quick off-topic question: is there any stacking penalty for subs when used in big stacks (like there is for other ships)?

I'm more and more curious what is hidden behind the game term "wolfpack". Is this a simple hidden bonus/modifier based of their number (like +2% for every sub) or is something more? Can't wait to do some test to find-out!

30 subs for Grand admiral.Such 30 stacks can now in wright circumstances defeat surface fleet of similar size(not allways,but at least can).
I want to test 12 subs stacks.
I dont know what "Wolfpack" size is,or does Wolfpack exists at all in game.
Just I know that from now on (1.2) small stacks of subs(especilay 1,2 or 3 subs) are now easy prey,and stacks I tested(20 +) are now capable to inflict damage and even defeat large surface fleets.
ASW more efective,and larger sub stacks much stronger than before-those are two changes that happend synchrounously in 1.2.

Further testing is needed haevily.

 

[Caesar_Augustus]

Yes, indeed, the "ASW vs. Wolfpack" addition (?) that the 1.2 Readme mentions is most intriguing. And although we do not really know what this actually means in game terms, we are enjoying it, whatever it is!

As for sub stacking penalties, as far as I am aware, the same rule applies with surface ships, at least that was how it always was, if I'm not mistaken. But then again, who knows if now, with 1.2, this "ASW vs. Wolfpacks", has changed it? Let's keep investigating (what a great game, eh?)

 

[Alex_brunius]

Just I know taht small stacks of subs(especilay 1,2 or 3 subs) are now easy prey,aand stacks I tested(20 +) are now capable to inflict damage and even defeat large surface fleets.

testing is needed haevily.

Last night in my game, (1942) a lonely german submarine in the mediteranian encountered an american taskforce of 3 Carriers. To my big surprise they were totally unescorted and the sub surprised them in nightcombat.

Now USS Enterprise lies on the ocean floor of the italian coast and my heavilly mauled sub is repairing at Taranto after narrowly escaping the airgroups of the famous carriers two friends.

This is the first time in any patch or build that ive seen the realistic event of a lonely sub sinking a Capital ship. Arma 1.2 no mods.

 

[unmerged(54763)]

Last night in my game, (1942) a lonely german submarine in the mediteranian encountered an american taskforce of 3 Carriers. To my big surprise they were totally unescorted and the sub surprised them in nightcombat.

Now USS Enterprise lies on the ocean floor of the italian coast and my heavilly mauled sub is repairing at Taranto after narrowly escaping the airgroups of the famous carriers two friends.

This is the first time in any patch or build that ive seen the realistic event of a lonely sub sinking a Capital ship. Arma 1.2 no mods.

Good news.
Than even deeper are changes than I understand them.
I dont understand much about how game mechanics and logics works, but it is I think obvious now that dev. team and Johan invested significant effort in reprogramming things about subs and ASW in 1.2.
"They brought a balance" I beleieve.

 

[Manziel]

just to get a clear answer, as i could not really read it from the posts. how do small sub groups (up to 6 units) perform in convoy-raiding now? can they reliably survive or will they all be slaughtered?
and what has exactly been changed about the subs? org? chance to close to range?
how do subs perform if used together with a normal fleet, will they close to their range or will they stay at gunrange of the larger ships?

 

[unmerged(19915)]

just to get a clear answer, as i could not really read it from the posts. how do small sub groups (up to 6 units) perform in convoy-raiding now? can they reliably survive or will they all be slaughtered?

My tests indicate that small sub stacks are now much more vulnerable to ASW activities. It seems that now the most effective submarine warfare method is using large stacks, ie wolfpacks, and attempting to control a sea zone with it.

and what has exactly been changed about the subs? org? chance to close to range?

Submarine logic, org, etc do not appear to have changed, rather the AI ASW logic has changed. It is now much more effective against small stacks of subs.

how do subs perform if used together with a normal fleet, will they close to their range or will they stay at gunrange of the larger ships?

I have not tested this, but I suspect it has the same range and fleet composition restrictions they have always had. In other words if you have a fleet carrier (not escort carriers) the whole fleet tries to stay at CAG range, and thus subs will not be effective as either offensive weapons or as escorts. It is possible that fleet composition and range logics have changed in 1.2 as well, but I have not seen this written anywhere yet.

 

[unmerged(54763)]

Submarine logic, org, etc do not appear to have changed, rather the AI ASW logic has changed. It is now much more effective against small stacks of subs.

To all that you sad I agree.Except this.

Large stacks of subs are behaving diferently than before.
Those large stacks are simply more powerfull now.

It is nicely observable by comparing clashes betwen for instance large surface vs large submarine fleet.
In 1.1. such naval battle will last for days with usualy slow decrease of subs strenght and finely subs will be anihilated,with usualy no damage on surface fleet.Green-red "battle slider" was static during clash and slowly moving against subs until defeat.

In 1.2 such battles lasts much les time, are violent and green-red slider goes during battle left and wright many times before resolution of battle .And odds that surface ships will be damaged or sunk by those large sub stacks are now much higher.
From pure simple observation is obvious change of nature of sub battles.

What most interests me now is behavior of 6 and 12 subs stacks(no big,no small),which are from practical view most interesting for gameplay.

EDIT- there is of course chance that new ASW logic changed all that, as we sough there are players reporting of single sub scored sunk of lonely carrier or battleship now, So drasticaly historical.
Testing needed.

 

[blue emu]

I feel that a complete re-test of this strategy is needed. As soon as I can find the time, I will do so. I'm currently tied up testing my "Anschluss of Everybody" strategy on my modified difficulty level.

EDIT: Speaking of my semi-AAR test games... I've been considering doing a German Air-Power AAR... all I've got so far is a catchy title: The Reich Stuff!

 

[unmerged(37194)]

EDIT: Speaking of my semi-AAR test games... I've been considering doing a German Air-Power AAR... all I've got so far is a catchy title: The Reich Stuff![/QUOTE]

or another title could be "Top Hun"

 

[Monarch1st]

I feel that a complete re-test of this strategy is needed...

...I've been considering doing a German Air-Power AAR...

Coool! I'm on pins & needles waiting for these already...