Resolved: submarines are in need of a lot of help

[Elessar2]

While I have mainly played vs. the AI, I have recently been involved in my own vs. human matches in my WitP scenario, and have been following a number of vanilla AARs both here and on Youtube.

In that time I have become either perturbed or confused (depending on whether I was a participant or spectator) by the struggles that submarines often have when trying to raid convoy lines.  As someone who has been a big sub aficionado his entire life, this has proved to be rather disappointing.

Of the 2 historical sub fleets which had any success executing anti-merchant warfare, the Kriegsmarine typically has a somewhat better time of it than the United States Navy does.  But I'll declare that neither service in the SC game system can have a lot of success unless their opponent is completely asleep at the helm.  While you can of course say that about any of the strategic realms in SC, subs typically struggle with certain specific gameplay features which makes them less effective than historical, and that includes trying to damage or sink nonescort enemy warships as well.

Right to the core thesis: subs can be easily swarmed and sunk, and there's not much they can do about it.  Once a submarine is located by a significant number of enemy units, it is highly likely to die unless it gets very lucky or its tormentors get distracted by other units/subs.

OK, addressing the following argument right off the bat: yes, it often comes down to whether you win or lose the numbers game.  Have more subs than the enemy has escorts, and the Happy Times are here.  Have fewer, and it's gloom and despair.  That however fails to address the very real mechanical issues with the current code and settings.  Be a rather boring game if all you needed to do to win was have more units than your opponent, operational & tactical factors be damned. I'll address this in more detail below.

The issues are as follows:

Subs' max diving range, which is essentially their "retreat" range, is far too small [2] to be of any use.  In a land or fleet action, retreats can be useful to have a unit in danger scurry back behind the protection of its fellows.  But for a sub, usually operating in a solo manner on the wide-open sea, it typically proves to be a useless manuever.  Because...

Subs are much less stealthy than they should be.  Subs in "submerged" mode can be easily relocated and reattacked, because an enemy only needs to brush up against it to find it again.  Likewise a sub moving on its own turn while submerged will have its movement reduced by each encounter it has with an enemy vessel, even if it doesn't try to move into the same space as another unit.

Thus once located it can be attacked again and again with impunity.  The worst aspect of this is that an enemy ship which has already expended its attack can still be used to scout and relocate the sub for its fellows who still have attacks left to depth charge it again, and again.

The simplest solution to this would be to allow the Retreat settings in the Combat Data table be the sub's submerged maximum distance.  This way the sub would have more than a ghost's chance in heck of getting away from its tormentors.  I'd likely set it to 6 for Global, 8 for Euro, and 10 for the Pacific.

Addressing an objection I saw the last time I suggested this.  Yes, the chances of "sinking" the sub in question will be reduced, sure, but recall this isn't a single ship, but a wolfpack of ~4-8 subs.  This can thus be addressed by upping repair costs to 8-10% from the current 5, reflecting the real expense of building new subs.  [I'd extend this to destroyers too as well as MTB's-initial costs can be reduced to compensate]

Submerged subs specifically need to be more stealthy than they are now.  I am now wondering if something got changed in a recent patch, where before I swore I could sneak by enemy escorts without being slowed down by them, nor could they on their turn detect me unless they tried to occupy the same hex.

There's another issue however, and this one is operational in nature, one with no obvious solution.  And that has to do with operational tempo.  Typically a 3rd of the sub fleet would be on station hunting, 3rd in transit, and 3rd in port resting and refitting.

But what I've discovered is that an individual sub may spend quite a bit less of its time on station than what history would suggest.  And that has to do with the long transit distances and thus times to get to and from the Happy Hunting Grounds.

In the Atlantic (both titles) it may take at least 4 turns to get from Germany around Scotland and into the convoy lanes.  In World that is almost 4 months (Euro about 3).  A WWII sub would likely take no more than a month.  Of course you can put it on Naval Cruise, but that will eat up a supply point as well as make it take more damage if it encounters an enemy. 

[The World map makes it even tougher to sneak past Scapa Flow because Scotland is "leaning" too close to Norway, by at least a couple of hexes.]

This is even worse in the Pacific with its longer distances.  Escorts when in low supply and damaged can just dart into a nearby friendly port and a turn or two later they are as good as new.  Subs have a multi-turn odyssey to get back to their base, with no guarantee that they'll make it back past the gauntlet of ASW vessels and land-based air in the first place.  Go slow and take forever, or go Cruise and risk redetection and destruction (and a submerged but slow sub isn't guaranteed safe passage as indicated above). ASW units therefore typically can spend more of their time on station, thus increasing their effective numerical advantage. Thus a sub fleet needs to be larger than the enemy's ASW fleet to compensate.

Easiest remedy I can come up with is to remove supply losses for subs if in Cruise mode.  Just need an entry in the Combat Data table. ["naval supply loss from Cruise Mode"]  And while I an at it allow subs to cruise while submerged, using 1 supply point in this case and risking disaster if they run into something.

One more issue, one I wasn't actually aware of until today in point of fact, and that has to do with the Surprise mechanic, which is more relevant when subs are acting against warships specifically.  OK the devs have decided this mechanic is to stay, fine it is their game.

Ostensibly this mechanic gives an advantage to the nonmoving side when the moving side bumps into a nonspotted unit.

Every unit in the game (the 1939 WaW scenario) gets this bonus, except one.  THE one unit which historically was most able thanks to design and doctrine to most take advantage of an enemy which unwittingly stumbles across it...

You have one guess as to which unit it is.

Yep, submarines.

Allow the editor more leeway in sub dive distances, make them more stealthy, give them more time on station, and give them the surprise bonus that they deserve, and subs would no longer be mild annoyances to be pummeled into oblivion, but very real (but not invincible) threats to convoy and ship.

[Unfortunate Son]

Elessar2 your subject on the submarine game play is quite the manifesto. Well done.

If I may offer a solution which I believe is a good one if the game mechanics allow.

Now this was a big issue in a game I used to play as MP. The game is /was "Commander Europe at War" which used to be sold through Slitherine. In this game it had the same playing issue as you describe regarding subs in SC-WAW & SC-WIE. The game also had a modding community. I was part of a team for a while that did a lot of modding to the game. The solution to this issue regarding the relentless sub attacks and constant diving attacking again to the subs was to limit the attacks per turn, per submarine unit to two attacks.

I and others felt this was a very good solution to the issue. My 2cents.

Not sure if this can be done. I do not know enough about the mechanics so I will just stick to making counters.

[CaesarAug]

Interesting observations. I’ve also been giving a lot of thought to naval warfare for my mod. A general idea is to somewhat limit naval engagements from closing into to battle range (=adjacent hex) from a far distance, thus avoiding ganging up on a target from afar, and also avoiding hit and run tactics.

So for instance, a default general naval zone of control of +6 with default naval action points of 12 obliges being within 6 hexes of a target in a given turn. If then we consider sub dives and naval retreats, even by only 2 hexes, may put other units physically “out of battle range” if they are not nearby.

Obviously we must work within the game mechanics, though of course we can always make gameplay suggestions to the great developers

As Elessar2 has suggested, some generous retreat parameters for submarines can already be modded with the editor. Been experimenting with that myself.

Then of course, there is the naval positioning attack/defence evasion parameters that can be modded: this dynamic can provide sub “stealth” by varying percentages of evading damage each strike, while maintaining the sub in the hex it already occupies.

And then too, striking a good but “restrictive balance” of naval zone of control and naval action points can likewise limit those relentless sub attacks (like naval combat in general) in combination with all other parameters, i.e., sub dive %, anti-sub %, sub attack/defence naval evasion %, sub retreat.

[LoneRunner]

Great ideas Elessar. I especially liked your suggestions for increasing subs' retreat range and providing subs with surprise attack.

Another problem is sub technology. Sub tech improves attack and the chance of successfully diving from attack but does nothing for stealth. Around 1943 German subs were being fitted with snorkels to help them evade detection. The success of snorkels was marginal but sub tech should recognize the efforts to improve sub stealth.

The other problem is amphibious warfare technology. Each level of amphibious tech increases by 10% the chance of amphibious transports evading damage from naval units. That's huge. By 1944 Axis sub attacks are bouncing off transports at a 50% rate. Subs have only one attack per turn and if that attack bounces with no effect, in 1944, I've likely lost a sub for nothing.

Historically, Allied fleets surrounded transports with massive defense because they were extremely vulnerable to attack throughout WWII. I don't find any historical justification for improved transport defense against naval attack. However in WaW, I'm seeing unescorted transports sail across the Atlantic. Which is totally contrary to history.

And, as Axis, I no longer bother building subs to intercept transports because I'm not about to sacrifice a sub for a 50% chance of knocking a few strength points off.

[LoneRunner]

Elessar2 your subject on the submarine game play is quite the manifesto. Well done.

If I may offer a solution which I believe is a good one if the game mechanics allow.

Now this was a big issue in a game I used to play as MP. The game is /was "Commander Europe at War" which used to be sold through Slitherine. In this game it had the same playing issue as you describe regarding subs in SC-WAW & SC-WIE. The game also had a modding community. I was part of a team for a while that did a lot of modding to the game. The solution to this issue regarding the relentless sub attacks and constant diving attacking again to the subs was to limit the attacks per turn, per submarine unit to two attacks.

I and others felt this was a very good solution to the issue. My 2cents.

Not sure if this can be done. I do not know enough about the mechanics so I will just stick to making counters.

Interesting idea Unfortunate Son. If I understand correctly, are you suggesting that each sub could only be attacked twice a turn regardless of the number of surrounding Allied ships and air?

[Unfortunate Son]

Elessar2 your subject on the submarine game play is quite the manifesto. Well done.

If I may offer a solution which I believe is a good one if the game mechanics allow.

Now this was a big issue in a game I used to play as MP. The game is /was "Commander Europe at War" which used to be sold through Slitherine. In this game it had the same playing issue as you describe regarding subs in SC-WAW & SC-WIE. The game also had a modding community. I was part of a team for a while that did a lot of modding to the game. The solution to this issue regarding the relentless sub attacks and constant diving attacking again to the subs was to limit the attacks per turn, per submarine unit to two attacks.

I and others felt this was a very good solution to the issue. My 2cents.

Not sure if this can be done. I do not know enough about the mechanics so I will just stick to making counters.

Interesting idea Unfortunate Son. If I understand correctly, are you suggesting that each sub could only be attacked twice a turn regardless of the number of surrounding Allied ships and air?

LoneRunner that is exactly what I am stating only two attacks per turn against a sub unit regardless of the enemy ships / planes in close proximity. Obviously that includes all sub units in the game.

[BillRunacre]

Thanks for the great post and subsequent discussion!

I've read it through and thought I'd list here all the options that are currently possible with the engine as it is, and that might have some potential.

If you can think these over, possibly try out one or more to test them in action, that would be great as if we can find a solution that doesn't involve an engine change it will be much better, particularly as I cannot offhand say whether any such changes might be likely.

So here goes:

Advanced Subs Research

This could be given one or more of the following additional attributes:
– Increase subs action points
- Increase their de-moralization
- Increase their loss evasion when attacked


Combat Data

- Naval supply loss from Combat (Defender)
This is currently 1 point of supply. It could be set to zero, which would mean that only attacks, raiding and cruising use up supply, i.e. only active moves and actions by the sub.

- Hidden Attacker Readiness Bonus (%)
I think this was set to zero because if they attack before moving then they are a lot more powerful than attacking after moving. But other units have 15% so that is a thought.

- Retreat % (Non Resource Positions)
This is set to zero because they have the dive ability. It could be used, though admittedly the retreat mechanism doesn’t kick in unless its predicted losses will take it to half strength or lower.

[CaesarAug]

Question for Bill Runacre: if I am reading aright, setting the supply use of naval combat to zero for submarines will exclude sub attacks using up sub supply, i.e., so only raiding and cruising will use up 1 supply, correct? Your reference I think implies that a sub on defence will still use up 1 supply, or am I missing something?

Many thanks for your input!

[BillRunacre]

- Naval supply loss from Combat (Defender)

This is set to 1 which means that when a sub is attacked, unless it dives it loses 1 point of supply.

The possibility that exists would be to make it so that it never loses supply when attacked, only when it carries out an action, whether that be moving, attacking or raiding.

Hopefully that's clearer?

[Elessar2]

Yes Bill that is very helpful. The two mods which seem to have the most promise are the no supply drop when attacked, and the retreat thing. I had assumed that subs were hard-coded to not retreat, so very good news even if they won't retreat until 5+ damage. A healthy evasion % would help as well. All of that will help the operational imbalance I discussed. Ideally I'd still like to have a submerged distance in Combat Data tho.

Q Bill: does Hidden Attacker Readiness Bonus give a boost to a hidden unit when attacked? If so the name is a misnomer, should be Hidden Defender Readiness Bonus...

[BillRunacre]

Q Bill: does Hidden Attacker Readiness Bonus give a boost to a hidden unit when attacked? If so the name is a misnomer, should be Hidden Defender Readiness Bonus...

It does give a boost to the hidden unit, but in a surprise contact that hidden unit can become the attacker - which is why the one surprised generally doesn't enjoy the experience!

[BillRunacre]

Yes Bill that is very helpful. The two mods which seem to have the most promise are the no supply drop when attacked, and the retreat thing.

That's good to hear. It would be useful to hear a fair range of opinions on this so I'll post a link to this discussion in the other forums, so that such a change or two aren't quite so great a surprise if we implement them!

[Jazon]

Hi!
Excellent idea! As a fan of "Iron Coffins" book by Herber Werner(have you read it maybe?), I was dreaming about bringing Allies to their knees by large U-Boot fleet. All above mentioned ideas are great!
Personally I think Supply is the main issue, because you can easily wear off a submarine by attacking it with a Battleship.
Also damage evasion increase would do the job, reflecting that newer U-boots could dive deeper, and had higher underwater speed.
Please make those changes and let the wolf packs howl across the Atlantic!
Jazon

[CaesarAug]

Yes, among other ideas, eliminating the supply usage for subs on defence is good.

But then as to compensate, as it were, the naval defence rating of subs should be set to zero as well, since the only naval damage a sub should cause should be limited to when the sub attacks, not when trying to escape while being attacked.

This seems all the more reasonable if we not only eliminate sub supply usage on defence, but also give the sub gradual defensive evasion percentages and a generous retreat possibility, in addition to the sub dive % parameters it already has.

In other words, subs on defence are trying to avoid damage and should not be able to cause any damage to its naval attackers, only when the stealthy sub attacks its prey.

[Elessar2]

Good idea in principle CaeserAug, but I believe the defense parameter works both for when the unit is defending when it is attacked straight off, but also for when it is counterattacked after it attacks first.

Gonna try [World map] 50% retreat 8 hex max range, upping base dive % from 40% to 50%, no supply losses on defense, and +1 move per tech level. Would be easy to overdo it.

[CaesarAug]

Ah, very interesting, Elessar2! Is this your impression or does it indeed work that way?

Perhaps a developer can clarify exactly how the naval defence values work?

Good testing! I’m going to incorporate these suggestions and do some testing myself. Regarding sub retreat, test between 50%-100% non-resource max. 6 hexes on WaW. By the way, will you test naval defence evasion % research bonuses for subs?

[archmache]

The easiest way to fix submarines.

Sub on raid can be spotted by air and any ship.

Subs can be attacked on raid by any units.

Once attacked, subs will dive. Dived subs can only be discovered by destroyers. Destroyers can only discover / attack a sub once per turn. So the destroyer that attacks can't go find that sub again that is normally used.

Units that run "into" the sub that are not an active destroyer, the sub should be able to fire back multiple times per turn (now it is just one combat and done) - this would prevent using capital ships to discover subs etc.

Very simple fix ...

[mdsmall]

Hi - happy to join this discussion thread on the WAW Forum. I have mostly been playing the WW1 game where the sub vs ASW battle in the approaches to the UK in the Atlantic is a key strategic aspect of the game.

I agree that subs do need some help to carry out their strategic mission on distant stations from home ports. The tactic I would like to see curbed arises from the loss of one supply point by the sub whenever it is attacked. In the WW1 game, this leads to multiple naval units attacking a given sub - even dreadnoughts or pre-dreadnoughts - just to drive down the sub's supply to zero, at which point it can no longer dive and is easily killed.

Eliminating their supply loss on defence across the board would make a big difference, though I worry it might make too big a difference. What would be ideal, if the game system allows it, is if subs would not lose a supply point if they dive. Then as subs increase their chance of diving per each increment of Advanced Sub tech, it would increase their survivability as it would enable them to be supplied for longer. If there was some way to make it that subs automatically dive when attacked by ships other than destroyers, light cruiser and torpedo boats, it would curb the pernicious tactic mentioned above.

I agree that also giving subs an enhanced ability to evade combat losses when attacked would help too. It would make the most sense if the chances of evading combat losses were the same as their chance of diving.

Making them more stealthy would also help. Is there a way that their positions can not be revealed by spying an intelligence if they are on silent mode? Or if they are not raiding? Some greater irregularity to the frequency or accuracy of the ? marker that pops up to show where subs have been raiding convoy lines would also add to their stealth.

I agree with Elissar that subs should be able to turn tables and attack if surprised makes sense. I also agree that amphibious transport tech should not increase transports ability to evade attack.

[CaesarAug]

Well, sub diving already does not consume a supply point, which is good. Also, sub diving is already preset to go up by 10% per Advanced Submarine Research, with the offset of a 10% per Anti-Submarine Research. But the base dive 40% can easily be modded as well as the % increments of both sub diving chance and anti-submarine warfare.

Removing the supply point usage while a sub is defending itself is a key aspect that can easily be modded.

Sub naval defensive damage evasion can likewise be easily modded, which, although does not move a sub out of its currently occupied hex, is an “alternate stealth” mode that can go a long way for avoiding damage by the problem of gang-up multiple attacks. It’s just a question of how much base % of defensive evasion should be given plus research bonuses, i.e., comparable to the dive %?

Along with these modifications, another issue is a sub’s naval defence values… not sure about how to mod that… set to zero or some positive, research upgradeable value?

Certain other interesting suggestions are outside the current game engine.

[mdsmall]

Thanks for the correction about subs not losing a supply point when they dive. I should add that in principle I like Elissar's idea of increasing their movement when they dive. I think 6 hexes is too much but even making it 3 hexes will increase significantly the amount of water that has to be searched to find a dived sub and thus would add to their stealth.