Page 1 of 1

Something wrong with naval

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 10:58 am
by Numdydar
The picture below should explain it all.

Needless to say, my sub is dead. Which is totally wrong since my sub can go under the DD's so should not be trapped like this. Especially in the middle of the ocean.

I see two possible solutions to this.

a) Simple - If DD's can move after attacking they always should. That would have at least left a hole for my sub to escape.

b) Complex - DD's should have two modes like subs, maybe Escort and Search. In Escort they have full movement but cannot attack subs and should ignore them. I.E. Subs ZOC's would not stop DD's in Escort mode and the DD would not expose a sub unless it actually physically ran into it. The sub also could ignore DD's in Escort mode unless they too actually ran into one. So both the sub and the DD would ignore each other while the DD was in Escort mode.

In Search mode, the DD would have only half (maybe a third?) of it's movement. Then the game would work as it does now as the DD is now spending its turn searching each hex for a sub versus going 30 knts and rushing in for an attack as what seems to be occurring now.

In SC2 I could have 10 subs that could raid successfully. Just like RL, a third would be in transit, a third would be in port and a third would be on station. This worked really well, I would occasionally start losing more sub as the war went on, but I could get this model to work as the Germans up until late '43 pretty well. Not in SC3. So this is an areas that definitely needs something to be done as it feels totally out of whack with the rest of the game.




Image

RE: Something wrong with naval

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 12:39 pm
by Templer_12
The 'Escort/Search' idea sounds interesting.

RE: Something wrong with naval

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 12:53 pm
by Jim D Burns
I had my German navy blocking the entrance towards Leningrad three hexes deep. An enemy sub in the Baltic moved through my fleet and attacked one of my CA's on the Leningrad side of the fleet, so it is possible to go under ships with subs. Try changing your mode and see if you can move out.

Jim

RE: Something wrong with naval

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 1:11 pm
by Goodmongo
Have you tried changing the mode to silent and then moving? The sub still has a chance of being spotted just like in real life.

RE: Something wrong with naval

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 3:57 pm
by Numdydar
The mode is set for Silent and the sub cannot move [:@]

It may be that to help the AI that their subs may follow a different rule set [&:]

RE: Something wrong with naval

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 4:10 pm
by xwormwood
ORIGINAL: Numdydar

The picture below should explain it all.

Needless to say, my sub is dead. Which is totally wrong since my sub can go under the DD's so should not be trapped like this. Especially in the middle of the ocean.

Image

I'm not sure that a sub can simply dive under attacking destroyers and get away with it it. Not if the ration sub / destroyers looks like 3 : 50 or 1 :13 (imagine 13 destroyers hunting one single sub).
My guess would be that this sub would have to be lucky, pretty lucky to get aways from such an occasion.
:)
But I get your point: you would at least have a try to do so nevertheless, even if the attempt would end in the destruction of the sub, right?

RE: Something wrong with naval

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 4:47 pm
by TheBattlefield
ORIGINAL: Numdydar

The picture below should explain it all.

Needless to say, my sub is dead. Which is totally wrong since my sub can go under the DD's so should not be trapped like this. Especially in the middle of the ocean.

I see two possible solutions to this.

a) Simple - If DD's can move after attacking they always should. That would have at least left a hole for my sub to escape.

b) Complex - DD's should have two modes like subs, maybe Escort and Search. In Escort they have full movement but cannot attack subs and should ignore them. I.E. Subs ZOC's would not stop DD's in Escort mode and the DD would not expose a sub unless it actually physically ran into it. The sub also could ignore DD's in Escort mode unless they too actually ran into one. So both the sub and the DD would ignore each other while the DD was in Escort mode.




There may be a third solution to this.

c) Simple - The already available emergency diving process could ignore the surrounding ships... [:D]

RE: Something wrong with naval

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 6:12 pm
by Numdydar
Unfortunately the emergency diving only occurs when the sun is attacked. So it is outside player control. One other point is the did dive after being surrounded but the engine would not move it away since there was no opening for it to go through.

To be fair the same thing occurred in SC2 as well. But nowhere near as often. Which is why I wanted to bring it up.

RE: Something wrong with naval

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:13 pm
by TheBattlefield
ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Unfortunately the emergency diving only occurs when the sun is attacked. So it is outside player control. One other point is the did dive after being surrounded but the engine would not move it away since there was no opening for it to go through.

To be fair the same thing occurred in SC2 as well. But nowhere near as often. Which is why I wanted to bring it up.

I meant exactly this with "ignore the surrounding ships". Stroke the hardcoded order "crouch like a duck" and put in the new order "outbreak to the next free hex field". I think the hunting fleet should limit the free (player contolled) journey of the sub quite considerably. All other would be too much gamey from my view. However, the dependent on chance and research emergency diving (in higher stages of sub development not once in a blue moon!) could simulate one of the rare but possible outbreaks from such a massive embrace by destroyers. [;)]

RE: Something wrong with naval

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 9:24 pm
by Numdydar
Well that certainly would work too [:)]