They scout fairly well in game, at least in groups of one but requires a lot of micro unfortunately. They suck at sinking convoys by themselves yes. They can't sink capital ships but that is mainly due to broken retreat mechanic not specific to subs. No kind of navy can sink ships if the enemy is microing. If the capitals do not retreat and actually engage, subs will destroy unescorted capital ships.
U boats pointless?
- Thread starter Lumpy
- Start date
-
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.
Yes, but in reality ( and in any game where your facing a sane player or reasonable AI ) no Capital ship would be totally unescorted.
Subs should have a shot at sinking capital ships or convoys even if they are escorted, and especially if their escort is light compared to the amount of ships they try to cover.
One of the big HoI4 issues with subs is that they instead try to fight the Destroyers ( which ends up disastrous unless the subs have a massive superiority in both numbers and techs )
Yes the game was released with incomplete navy and air mechanics. It's not just a sub issue. The whole navy combat system is broken.
Well the specific issue that submarines engage the wrong target most certainly is a submarine issue only though
(For CLs for example which are supposed to mainly be targeting destroyers the current targeting priority works just fine).I really dislike calling any large system like this "broken" though because it means radically different things to everyone, and parts of the systems do work as intended.
I agree that Navy needs alot of improvement, but some of the things it actually does really well and even greatly surpasses the previous HoI games Naval model, like for example:
- How sufficiently large fleets can block invasions.
- How Capital ships with lots of armor take reduced damage from smaller guns
- How Carrier airwings can be tailored to their task ( from figters to win over enemy CV fleets, Naval bombers to punish fleets and CAS to support landings outside of own aircover )
- How different Carriers can have unique and different deck size / airplane capacity
- How land based air superiority can counter Carrier fleets fully
- How portstrikes can be defended against by air superiority cover
- How torpedo attacks have their own mechanics and stats such that DDs can easily dodge them while they do much damage vs Capital ships
- How aircover boosts naval detection greatly
- How larger invasions need to be prepared in advanced and can't be launched at impulse
- How resources import flows overseas can be disrupted from day of the war one by sinking convoys on the route, and how this directly impacts production of relevant equipment.
- How smooth split of repair / return to mission or new ships joining Fleets on missions works without any micromanagement needed
- How damaged individual ships try to retreat from battle instead of always fighting on until sunk
Yes there are issues, but the base system is vastly more complex and promising then Naval war in HoI3 or HoI2 was.
Well the specific issue that submarines engage the wrong target most certainly is a submarine issue only though
I really dislike calling any large system like this "broken" though because it means radically different things to everyone, and parts of the systems do work as intended.
I agree that Navy needs alot of improvement, but some of the things it actually does really well and even greatly surpasses the previous HoI games Naval model, like for example:
- How sufficiently large fleets can block invasions.
- How Capital ships with lots of armor take reduced damage from smaller guns
- How Carrier airwings can be tailored to their task ( from figters to win over enemy CV fleets, Naval bombers to punish fleets and CAS to support landings outside of own aircover )
- How different Carriers can have unique and different deck size / airplane capacity
- How land based air superiority can counter Carrier fleets fully
- How portstrikes can be defended against by air superiority cover
- How torpedo attacks have their own mechanics and stats such that DDs can easily dodge them while they do much damage vs Capital ships
- How aircover boosts naval detection greatly
- How larger invasions need to be prepared in advanced and can't be launched at impulse
- How resources import flows overseas can be disrupted from day of the war one by sinking convoys on the route, and how this directly impacts production of relevant equipment.
- How smooth split of repair / return to mission or new ships joining Fleets on missions works without any micromanagement needed
- How damaged individual ships try to retreat from battle instead of always fighting on until sunk
Yes there are issues, but the base system is vastly more complex and promising then Naval war in HoI3 or HoI2 was.
I agreed with you, I mention this back when they testing the game live. When that dude losing his submarines in the Atlantic while playing the Germany. The submarines need a role to choose from, attack warships, convoy, etc. You can choose that role by convoy raiding, when the enemy see that sub, the sub race in for the attack, rather than run silent, run deep.
Apart from actual combat I think the convoy raiding itself is also not done properly. AFAIK submarines are slower than freighters, HOI4 kind of simulates this by making submarines chase freighters for weeks sometimes. It would be better to just have an engagement chance, get a chance to fire once per convoy and sub and then the convoy should be dead or escaping.
from a multiplayer prescriptive with teamspeak/discord rules if you know what your doing submarines can be absolute cancer for the allies/axis to deal with more so allies and japan specifically.
Let me clarify this further. I usually only use mass submarine fleets as sweden or italy and i dont bother with any other nations.
1. know where the important trade routes are. Alot of the time people just stand random submarine fleets to every tile to the Atlantic and expect something to happen but shipping lanes don't use ever sea zone. for example as italy once you take the suez u can raid the entire Indian ocean but the only area u need to raid is the cape of africa where all allied rubber shipping will travel through after suez is taken, for sweden just raid the coastline of norway, and the barant sea (one game i sank over 2000 allied conveys to the point the USA couldn't do d-day invasion due to no convoys)
2. if your enemies are sending fleets to sink your submarines u must build naval bombers. if you throw enough naval bombers onto a sea tile it will decimate any fleet operating in there within a month. try to keep your subs where u have nearby airbases.
3. build radars u dont need a lot just a few good strategic ones for example you can naval invade Madagascar as italy from ethopia secure it with 4 divisions and build some rader covering into the cape of Africa.
4. naval doctrine....
if you do these 3 tips your subs will be complete cancer for anyone to deal with
Let me clarify this further. I usually only use mass submarine fleets as sweden or italy and i dont bother with any other nations.
1. know where the important trade routes are. Alot of the time people just stand random submarine fleets to every tile to the Atlantic and expect something to happen but shipping lanes don't use ever sea zone. for example as italy once you take the suez u can raid the entire Indian ocean but the only area u need to raid is the cape of africa where all allied rubber shipping will travel through after suez is taken, for sweden just raid the coastline of norway, and the barant sea (one game i sank over 2000 allied conveys to the point the USA couldn't do d-day invasion due to no convoys)
2. if your enemies are sending fleets to sink your submarines u must build naval bombers. if you throw enough naval bombers onto a sea tile it will decimate any fleet operating in there within a month. try to keep your subs where u have nearby airbases.
3. build radars u dont need a lot just a few good strategic ones for example you can naval invade Madagascar as italy from ethopia secure it with 4 divisions and build some rader covering into the cape of Africa.
4. naval doctrine....
if you do these 3 tips your subs will be complete cancer for anyone to deal with
For me sadly U-boats are pointless. I have tried different tactics with them some work some times some don't, but they can be lost very quickly if not treated with respect. For me I find your naval effort is better spent on a surface fleet, but hopefully with the new patch they will have given subs a bit of love so my U-boats can be the menace they ought to be.
Agree with all the above.
As Germany focus on surface fleet and don't go too far in the Atlantic.
Try to conquer the UK after France (you have the necessary divisions) so you need air supremacy if you want to paradrop then capture some ports and just transfer navy (don't bother with naval invasion as you won't easily get naval supremacy)
As Germany focus on surface fleet and don't go too far in the Atlantic.
Try to conquer the UK after France (you have the necessary divisions) so you need air supremacy if you want to paradrop then capture some ports and just transfer navy (don't bother with naval invasion as you won't easily get naval supremacy)
I think you mean that it can be effective if your enemy has no idea what they are doing?
If you send 40 submarines to raid an area where the allies convoys have to pass through all they need to do is send 20-30 odd lvl 1 Destroyers there and within a few days you just lost all 40 subs, congratulations!
And no, naval bombers will not be able to save your submarines against a sizeable DD fleet, they might be able to sink 1-5 DDs in that battle at best, but your subs will be slaughtered down to the last.
The strategy to get naval bombers and radars within range also assumes that the enemy with naval superiority let's you invade nearby airfields and islands, and that they let your planes and subs sit there and sink your convoys for months or years on end before they can rack up meaningful amounts sunk.
A decent player who cares about the naval war side of things won't allow you to do either.
So vs the AI or someone who doesn't bother to even try to defend their convoys properly, yes submarines can be effective... vs everyone else, no not really.
Another thing to add is that in this case, even a small surface fleet will do better than all the subs in the world. If your enemy doesn't care, there is no need to use subs, since they are a covert weapon. If trading lanes are unprotected, your surface fleet will sink several times as many convoys as U boats would. If your enemy protects his lanes (due to being a mildly competent human player, for instance), your subs will be sunk anyway, and your surface fleet will have a better chance of conducting hit and run tactics. In both cases, surface ships are superior in every way. There is no niché for U boats in the current system, and thus they are redundant.
Well if you like, you could try experiment with it. I doubled the firing range and increase the speed on the subs, came out pretty good. But I know it isn't realistic though. Least have something useful for those submarines.
Yes something like that.
Subs positions should be more "unknown" in the battles but they should still be able to fire and evade.
Currently only DDs, LCs and aircraft have the possibility to attack and that's fine but they all lump together and subs caught in the open results in the entire sub fleet starting at the 0yard line with all DDs in engagement range and the result is slaughter.
Also the week long convoy battles need to be addressed.
Air superiority should affect subs greatly, maybe not in sunk subs per-se but in their ability to successfully converge on a convoy. The same with escorted convoys. It should hamper the ability for subs to catch up to the convoy as they couldn't run around surfaced with enemy destroyers on the prowl.
I would be fine with subs having unknown positions and being hard to spot and kill without considerable effort but with the tradeoff that they don't all converge in great numbers every battle.
Then there's the problem of not turning it into a message spamfest or micro management hell. Something like the air warfare system would do for most sub->convoy engagements with background statistics instead of battle popups.
You can build a few. If you manage to find a good spot you can deal some damage for cheap. Just do not stack them.
If you don't want to use the airfields you can just run the Befriend Denmark focus and then ask for military access. It gives you the same. This is the only use of that focus. An advantage is that Denmark remains officially neutral so the Baltic Sea remains a killing zone (Denmark strait not closed).
I agree subs aren't terribly useful. I've lost a good few to pure air attack, which doesn't make sense in an era lacking good sonar-equipped torps.
I do find subs useful for convoy raiding when I have a S&D surface fleet in the same area. But I've not used DDs to raid so I can't compare.
I do find subs useful for convoy raiding when I have a S&D surface fleet in the same area. But I've not used DDs to raid so I can't compare.
Weren't a great many u-boats sunk by air attack by aircraft of RAF Coastal Command using bombs and depth charges, when they were on the surface or at periscope depth? A submarine isn't that hard to see from the air if it's only at periscope depth.
Meh. Maybe doctrine would make them harder to detect. I just usually ignore the sub game now.
I am afraid you are not, as things are currently set up, going to be able to conduct a U-Boat offensive that will keep Winston awake at night. It is another aspect of the naval absurdity of this game as it currently is. You cannot easily intercept trade, LL or troop convoys. Neither can the allies re-route their convoys so they will still happily take a suicide route through the Mediterranean with the Italian fleet crawling all over it. This game does not permit accurate naval warfare. It is possibly because you do not get much activity in the Baltic...
K
K