Are subs utterly useless?

[unmerged(34917)]

Its june 1939 and i just send out a pack of 9 type IX subs in the North Sea under command of Donitz. They got intercepted by a similar size fleet of British battleships and destroyers. Within an hour 6 subs were sunk and the remaining subs very heavily damaged. No British losses.

So thats just worth months of investments down the drain. This seems unrealistic. Whats your take on this? I think it sucks. I wont be building any more subs with Germany

edit: it was june 1939 instead of 1940, sorry

 

[Alex_brunius]

Subs could do damage to warships in 1.2 but not much to convoys, Now they can't do damage to warships at all. But instead are a little better against convoys.

Subs are still far to expensive (both in IC and in techs) compared to other ships and convoys to be of much use Imho.

 

[Timmetie]

The occasional sunk DD or even capital ship was the only thing making subs even a little worthwhile.

IC wise you have to sink 135 convoys for every sub. If you make a lot of subs and get a lot of technical bonusses this ofcourse decreases but it still takes a lot of research points and manpower that convoys don't.

 

[unmerged(131628)]

Subs could do damage to warships in 1.2 but not much to convoys, Now they can't do damage to warships at all. But instead are a little better against convoys.

Subs are still far to expensive (both in IC and in techs) compared to other ships and convoys to be of much use Imho.

this.

IMO nations should need more convoys for what they are shipping and convoys should be much easier to kill.

I just build BBs and CVs

 

[Darth Moose]

Considering my subs are dying like flies swimming in DDT, I have to agree. The main problem is that the AI can easily detect them. They should be really difficult to detect until 1943 or so, unless they attack a convoy (or fleet) within the prior 24 hours...

Also, air attacks (port strick or naval strike) are simply too effective against subs in 1939. They shouldn't be. Subs were very difficult to sink in both environments, being relatively small & hard to target.

 

[unmerged(106255)]

Subs should be completely worthless as line ships. That's not what their purpose is. They should be totally ineffective against escorts, and only get a small chance of sinking a capital ship in the first hour of combat. Though, I think there should be an option to engage enemy warships or to escape if contact is made.

Convoys are sort of a failure as well. I was playing as the UK and lost a dozen convoys and my resources were still pegged at 99999. I would prefer if convoys were alot more expensive and each one carried alot more resources. If one is sunk, it should mean much more in terms of resource loss than what it does now.

 

[unmerged(34917)]

i have now build 12 IX subs, and nine have already been sunk without any enemy casualties to show for it. the other 3 are virtually dead. This is just dumb. There is no point in building subs because you will lose all of them the minute they put to sea.

 

[Headshotcatcher]

I had a group of 12 subs with a level 3 rear admiral with the Sea Wolf trait, they shredded every group that consisted of 10 or less units, except for the group with just cruisers which killed them D:

 

[LaDoncella]

The main problem of submarines, is the fact that the amount of convoy ships needed for each route is only dependant of the distance and ignores the amount of cargo (as it comes determined exclusively by the size of ports).
So for example transporting all the resources from uk to france will take only a single ship.

Making hard to sink much convoy ships at any given time.
And then you have to keep in mind the insane damage that subs will take trying to kill a freaking lone convoy ship.

Furthermore convoy ships as they are now are too cheap. If the convoy system remains as it is, convoy ships should be at least 15 times more expensive.

 

[ddiplock]

Its june 1940 and i just send out a pack of 9 type IX subs in the North Sea under command of Donitz. They got intercepted by a similar size fleet of British battleships and destroyers. Within an hour 6 subs were sunk and the remaining subs very heavily damaged. No British losses.

So thats just worth months of investments down the drain. This seems unrealistic. Whats your take on this? I think it sucks. I wont be building any more subs with Germany

But it was Donitz himself who stated that the submarine was a weapon to be used in commerce raiding, not against enemy warships perhaps that's his words ringing true there.

 

[unmerged(34917)]

true, but they were underway to start convoy raiding in the Atlantic, but like this they will never arrive alive anywhere. So thats the problem really

 

[Timmetie]

true, but they were underway to start convoy raiding in the Atlantic, but like this they will never arrive alive anywhere. So thats the problem really

You can flee battle. Or order naval bombers to reinforce.

I think a wolfpack supported by naval bombers should do quite some damage to a small fleet.

 

[whiran]

dunno about you guys but i built a IX+ it finished march 1939, did all sub tech upto 1938/39 and had donits command of a single IX+

set the thing to convoy raid the giblator(sp?) channel entrance, within the first 2-3 months I had sunk over 20 convoy's including a french destroyer and swedish cruiser light or heavy can't remember.

thats a single U-Boat mind you, if you included the other 5 IX+'s i built you got yourself a bunch of AI countries losing national unity faster than opera loses weight.

 

[xtfoster]

Its june 1939 and i just send out a pack of 9 type IX subs in the North Sea under command of Donitz. They got intercepted by a similar size fleet of British battleships and destroyers. Within an hour 6 subs were sunk and the remaining subs very heavily damaged. No British losses.

So thats just worth months of investments down the drain. This seems unrealistic. Whats your take on this? I think it sucks. I wont be building any more subs with Germany

edit: it was june 1939 instead of 1940, sorry

I'm sure it has been said 100 times in this thread already but

1) NEVER send out subs in groups that large, EVER.
2) Subs should be operating in groups of AT MOST 3, I actually use single sub flotillas and have no problems. It allows me to cover more ground. I almost NEVER get detected (but when I do that sub usually dies...just like in real life.)

 

[TheLoneGunman]

When dealing with detection, I wonder if each individual unit in a fleet gets its own roll or what. If so, then the larger your fleet is, the higher the collective chances of being detected would become.

Obviously not something good if you want to be doing commerce raiding.

 

[Headshotcatcher]

I'm sure it has been said 100 times in this thread already but

1) NEVER send out subs in groups that large, EVER.
2) Subs should be operating in groups of AT MOST 3, I actually use single sub flotillas and have no problems. It allows me to cover more ground. I almost NEVER get detected (but when I do that sub usually dies...just like in real life.)

Big sub groups are good though, my group of 12 got lots of kills and only died to cruiser hands..

 

[Myndpyre]

I just build BBs and CVs
]

CV's good for convoy raiding?

I am glad they are good for something, because sinking ships with them is a very rare occasion.

German Subs in the North Atlantic and the carrier war in the Pacific are some of the biggest stories in all of WW2, but they do not seem to mean anything to the outcome in HOI3.

How inaccurate and unentertaining naval warfare is in HOI3 is the main reason why I stick with land powers in this game.

 

[griswolds686]

When posting AAR for submarine warfare how many of you finish all the radar techs with subs too? Also, what level do you put your subs on(passive, defensive, aggressive)? This may help if they encounter surface ships(help them get away w/o figthing). The radar and naval techs are essential for subs to survive. I havent followed through with 1.3 yet but when I played 1.2 with subs my best vet was groups of 5-6. They were strong enough to engage convoys and not lose much strength.

 

[unmerged(131628)]

CV's good for convoy raiding?

I am glad they are good for something, because sinking ships with them is a very rare occasion.

German Subs in the North Atlantic and the carrier war in the Pacific are some of the biggest stories in all of WW2, but they do not seem to mean anything to the outcome in HOI3.

How inaccurate and unentertaining naval warfare is in HOI3 is the main reason why I stick with land powers in this game.

I dont bother with convoy raiding most of the time - just get naval superiority and invade enemy.

When I want to sink convoys I use NAVs and TACs.

 

[Summoner]

The occasional sunk DD or even capital ship was the only thing making subs even a little worthwhile.

IC wise you have to sink 135 convoys for every sub. If you make a lot of subs and get a lot of technical bonusses this ofcourse decreases but it still takes a lot of research points and manpower that convoys don't.

Where/how do you get 135:1 from?

In late 1939 with a mix of 1940/43 techs and 1937/39/41 doctrines my subs cost 4.61*294 = 1355 IC*days. A transport costs 40*2 = 80. This gives a 17:1 exchange rate.

Unless the cargo is supplies it's hard to quantify the value of what's sunk short of being able to shut down trade entirely.

How many ICdays of supply can a transport carry?