U-boats ...

[Irish Guards]

Is it ever gonna be possible for these vaunted German U-boated to .. ummm .. say maybe .. ah ..
Go under the surface ... like as in submerge or evade .. besides the fact of when they go under for the obvious reasons ...??? [X(]
IG

[Dion]

I think one counter of U-boats equals one fleet of U-boats, and I think they are cosidered unspot-able unless they attack or an enemy unit enters their hex, so in a sense they submerge automatically. The more tactics that are added would change the scale and ease of play to much.

[SMK-at-work]

And what do they do if they don't attack??  [8|]
The u-boat rules are nonsense.

[Dion]

I believe the U-boats would just be spotted until they move to a new hex.

[davetheroad]

I think the u-boat rules work reasonably well in simulating a battle between rival research/production strategies. In a PBEM I am playing as axis a low priority U-boat strategy has resulted in the allies concentrating their navies on supporting amphibious operations. In the mirror match the high u-boat production, I keep sinking them, he keeps building new ones, results in allied naval activity concentrated on u-boat warfare. The allied submarine has performed valuable service as a spotter and resulted in the destruction of german surface units by lurking on the transit routes from germany. My opponent must have found this irritating as he built a high tech destroyer, fortunately for me when he finally found my sub he left it with 2 strength points so I could rebuild and even better left his destroyer in range of a high tech carrier and strat bomber, bye bye destroyer.
 
Dave

[Vypuero]

I built the DD by accident

[davetheroad]

Accident!!!!!
 
Only I build stuff by accident and load units on ships by mistake cos the buttons are too close together.

[Irish Guards]

Well ... I have had my subs surrounded in 1 turn by attacking allied fleets ... Probably my own fault ... but ... [:'(]
I guess what I would really like to know ... Is anyone building subs or fleet consistently with the Axis .. and tech ???? 1 or 2 naval labs for the Axis ...
I am finding there is not much naval war in many games ..... [X(]
IG

[JudgeDredd]

I don't bother building subs...too useless and too expensive.
 
I wonder if it could be tweaked that there is a "probability of finding" check PRIOR to surface ships being able to attack subs.
 
Anytime I employ sub tactics, I attack a convoy and BANG! the unit is surrounded and destroyed. They are supremely useless for their cost.

[Bossy573]

ORIGINAL: Irish Guards
I guess what I would really like to know ... Is anyone building subs or fleet consistently with the Axis .. and tech ???? 1 or 2 naval labs for the Axis ...

The German navy is worthless and an effective submarine campaign in the Atlantic is impossible. I don't even bother and usually bring the sub in the shipping lanes home at the beginning of the game. I use it to shield the invasion of Oslo, sink the Russian Battleship at the beginning of Barbarossa and maybe make a suicide run at the Allies on D-Day. Other than that, as has been pointed out previously, the return on investment stinks.
The Italian navy is somewhat more useful and can give the Allies problems in the Med. but will ultimately meet its doom as well.

So the short answer is no. A viable Axis naval strategy in CEAW is non-existent.

[firepowerjohan]

For future patches we might adjust the prices slightly, perhaps making Sub abit cheaper to build. A Sub campaign can be pulled off but often it depends on what Allies do. If Allies spend alot on air and put many ships in the Medieterranean to defat Italy in Africa a good counter can be to counter this with air battles and sub action since UK cannot afford as much warfare as Axis can in the mid game before Russia join. It can in fact make UK weak and prevent them from affording much research since all their money goes to buying destroyers or repairing air units.

[Irish Guards]

OK .. I kinda agree .. but since the convoy system is in effect from Sept 1, 1939 ..... It comes down to initiative ..
In order for subs to be offensive as they are intended .. I have to believe there should be some suprise action .. I mean I have seen a BB or DD or CV run into a sub that was hidden and do enormous damage before the subs even get into play ....
All I am really saying is that with combined arms .. and WWII being difficult to encorporate a balance between Land .. Air and Naval ... This is a huge theatre of the game that rarely gets the attention needed .. Means the overall flavor is lacking in some way ... [X(]
IG

[firepowerjohan]

No problem, we will just reduce the Sub price so you can have more of them. It also mean you can scout a larger part o the Atlantic when having more Subs and you can also easier cover your attacks by having hidden subs.
 
Why hidden subs?
The naval combat works opposite of other, the attacker strikes first so if you run into a hidden sub it will fire its attack on the ship first and then ship fires back.
 
 

[Irish Guards]

Give the Ger subs + 1 ..
And since I dont build em .. I dunno ... they take 4 turns now ..???
IG

[YohanTM2]

Sweet Jesus, a completely coherent analysis from IDG!

ORIGINAL: Irish Guards

OK .. I kinda agree .. but since the convoy system is in effect from Sept 1, 1939 ..... It comes down to initiative ..
In order for subs to be offensive as they are intended .. I have to believe there should be some suprise action .. I mean I have seen a BB or DD or CV run into a sub that was hidden and do enormous damage before the subs even get into play ....
All I am really saying is that with combined arms .. and WWII being difficult to encorporate a balance between Land .. Air and Naval ... This is a huge theatre of the game that rarely gets the attention needed .. Means the overall flavor is lacking in some way ... [X(]
IG

[Fred98]

The real problem is that when the subs attack they cannot move away in the same turn they attack.
 
As a result, the allied convoy system means the subs are destroyed the next turn.
 
Ergo the German player gets no return on investment.
 
 
 
 

[SeaMonkey]

Talk about Deja Vu..... bet you can't guess what forum this exact exchange of ideas happened in.... about two years ago, ...hmmm maybe more like four?

Look Johann, get your preorder in for SC WaW and then you'll get some ideas...on the fast track...where this game needs to go.

Sure, all won't apply, SC is not CEaW, exactly....just a permutation.

Now at least with this naval emphasis we are getting along in the right direction.

Think PTO![8D]

[SMK-at-work]

SC2 is only marginally different - once a sub is located it gets hammered.  teh difference is that subs attack convoy routes instead of convoys themselves, so you don't know where on the route the sub is.
 
both ideas are wrong.

[SeaMonkey]

SMK...did you not observe the WaW after the SC2 acronym?

You have played WaW?

Once again another flawed jump to conclusions.

[SMK-at-work]

did I mention WaW?  No - I was referring to SC2 - WaW isnt' available to the general public yet, so I wasn't talking abouty it.

That's why I said SC2 and not SC WAW.

[8|]

however that said AFAIK from the WAW forum there's no great difference in how subs will work - except there's now "destroyers" as a ship type - cruisers and battleships will ahve little effect vs subs whereas destroyers will be the new wonder weapon able to both bombard and kill subs.....& subs will leave a "trace" where they last attacked a convoy route....

Have I missed anything?