Submarines strategy?

[kerog]

One of the big problems I had with WiF when I used to play it was that it didn't seem feasible for the Germans to bother with submarines. The cost of taking a naval impulse always seemed too great, especially once at war with Russia. Can someone describe how they make it work?

[Angeldust2]

A common tactic seem to be, Axis player is using Italian Naval/Combined actions and Italian subs to initiate searches with German subs in same sea zone to be included in combat, if search is successful. This minimizes the number of Naval/Combined impulses needed by Germany to stil harrass Allied convoy lanes.

[Joseignacio]

And you can move your subs especially when the climate is harsh so you wouldn't attack and need no (naval) or few (combined) naval moves. Remember subs can be moved more than 1 location with a nav move subject to certain restrictions.

And, yes, the Italians should activate them.

Also, one sub per seaor two won't be decissive, but CW cannot cover every sea with unlimited cruisers, so if you select one objective and concentrate there with many wolfpack you may disrupt the line and not let it be reconstructed later.

Accept some losses. You may damage seriously the Allied economy, each conv is 1 BP and 8 months to rebuild, plus a resource or BP which will not reach. On the other side, your subs only take 1 point to repair and in the worst case 2 points to rebuild and one year of time.

To take losses and not become weak you should need to produce most of the time all the possible subs. They are cheap, though.

[Centuur]

The problem with the SUB war is that from 1942 onwards, they become very vulnerable.
Also: the British have a couple of very nice Sunderlands which they should build as soon as they can. From that moment on, the Euroaxis will need to spend 4 surprise points to even get a submarine combat.

I don't like to spend a lot of build points on submarines. It usually ends up to be a bad decision. I rather spend those build points on FTR's and pilots, to protect the factories in Germany and Italy. That seems to be more costs effective IMHO.

[rkr1958]

There's always this whole "threat in being" thing and the impact of allied (especially CW & later US) play. As the axis, I look at the benefit of building out German & Italian subs as more that a simple cost to cost comparison. For example, I spent X BPs on sub and these subs cost the allies Y BPs in CP and production losses. If X < Y then I win. I personally DON'T look at the sub war that way.

I look it as the CW, and eventually the US, player has to meaningfully cover with ASW patrols (i.e., ships/planes in higher boxes) and escorts (i.e., ships & planes in 0-box with the CPs) every sea where they have CPs, or significant number of CPs, against the threat of axis subs. This means that they have to take at least one naval per turn and have to spread out their seemingly large fleet(s), diluting their ability to concentrated to their choice (e.g., against the Italians in the Med). And, if they don't cover a vulnerable sea area, then that's definitely the time to pounce. Rest assured that the allies won't have the ASW patrols and escorts up to the level that they'd like in every vulnerable sea area. It's those sea areas that are second on my list to strike. The first being unprotected ones if they leave any. Also, the sub threat can force the US player to take (11) East Coast Escort, (29) North Atlantic Escort, (20) US Land-Based Escort, etc. entry options while neutral to help the CW player combat the sub threat.

A threat in being if employed properly can be a powerful tool for the Euro-axis to curb CW focus on taking on the Italians in the Med.

As the allied player I love almost nothing more, especially early game, not to have to worry about the axis sub threat. Even in late game when the allies have a significant ASW advantage if the axis still have subs on the board I still worry about them taking a shot, getting lucky as scrambling my convoy lines. Worse yet, sinking a transport loaded with an arm or HQ-A. When I play the allies; especially the CW, I certainly can related to Winston's fear of the German U-boat threat keeping him up at night.

[kerog]

Activating with Italian subs doesn't do anything about the need to get them out to sea. If based in Germany they can't get far out and stay at sea with a decent chance of being effective, can they? Is the idea to base them in Brest or somewhere in Africa? If they stay at sea, then the CW knows exactly where to cover, and they are less likely to be able to find their opponents, right? If they don't stay at sea, then you have to take a Naval action to move to more than one location in a turn. If you move first, you have exactly one impulse to engage at good odds, and your chances of actually finding anything are not great compared to the expense of having taken a combined or Naval impulse. I still don't see it.

[Joseignacio]

ORIGINAL: kerog

Activating with Italian subs doesn't do anything about the need to get them out to sea. If based in Germany they can't get far out and stay at sea with a decent chance of being effective, can they? Is the idea to base them in Brest or somewhere in Africa? If they stay at sea, then the CW knows exactly where to cover, and they are less likely to be able to find their opponents, right? If they don't stay at sea, then you have to take a Naval action to move to more than one location in a turn. If you move first, you have exactly one impulse to engage at good odds, and your chances of actually finding anything are not great compared to the expense of having taken a combined or Naval impulse. I still don't see it.

The idea uses to be Brest.

Yes, the'd need one naval move in a turn (usually when there is bad weather).

And then the IT can activate themselves and the GE. Of course, then the UK can reinforce and you need to keep some subs in reserve to menace other vulnerable areas, and even then assume you'll have some (cheap and comparatively fast to replace) losses. You have to do this consistently so that the CW gets short of convoys and cannot replace the lost ones, losing production as well, or you have to do the main attacks at the end of the turn meanwhile, with the hope he won't have opportunity to refill. Sometimes he may not have serious forces to escort, so the mere presence of subs will avoid it.

Even at a surface combat, subs can inflict serious losses to SCSs which are more expensive and much more slow to build.

Subs can disrupt the CW deployment of forces, through TRS or AMPH unless they are heavily escorted, and can menace return to base of weak units or stragglers as well.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: kerog
then you have to take a Naval action to move to more than one location in a turn.

Not true. Subs moving from the same base to multiple sea areas only counts as 1 naval move. So Germany can use a combine to move subs say from Brest to multiple sea areas (e.g., BoB, CSV, North Atlantic).

[Joseignacio]

True, bro.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

True, bro.

[8D]

[Shannon V. OKeets]

I use a German engineer to repair Brest (back to a major port) so the German subs based there are invulnerable to port attacks. Then I keep an Italian HQ within two hexes of Brest so the German subs are always in supply.

Eventually I use an Italian engineer to repair Bordeaux (back to a major port) and base the Italian subs there - it requires another HQ to keep them in supply.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

I use a German engineer to repair Brest (back to a major port) so the German subs based there are invulnerable to port attacks. Then I keep an Italian HQ within two hexes of Brest so the German subs are always in supply.

Eventually I use an Italian engineer to repair Bordeaux (back to a major port) and base the Italian subs there - it requires another HQ to keep them in supply.

I take it Steve you like to play with the optional rule construction engineers. Personally, I try to avoid playing with that rule like the plague. [:D]

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

I use a German engineer to repair Brest (back to a major port) so the German subs based there are invulnerable to port attacks. Then I keep an Italian HQ within two hexes of Brest so the German subs are always in supply.

Eventually I use an Italian engineer to repair Bordeaux (back to a major port) and base the Italian subs there - it requires another HQ to keep them in supply.

I take it Steve you like to play with the optional rule construction engineers. Personally, I try to avoid playing with that rule like the plague. [:D]

+1. Especially since the counter mix isn't historically correct for construction engineers at all. Germany should have at least 2 more at start of the war, but with no combat factors. Construction engineers and fighting engineers were two different parts of the German army. And the same is true for the Soviets and the French too...

[Joseignacio]

+1