Matrix Games Forums

Don't take this the wrong way, as I love UV and my USN Submarines (My only saving grace since my CVs are outmatched), but I do think one thing about the game is kind of ahistorical. In the UV timeframe, two kinds of US submarine torpedoes were standard. The Mark 10 Torpedo, used only on S, Barracuda (training subs), Argonaut, and Narwahal classes as a rule (they couldn't fire, or at least weren't issued the later torpedoes), and the Mark 14 torpedo for the larger fleet boats (P class all the way to the Tench boats in the post UV frame). These torpedoes were, to say the very least, horrible. Granted, they did achieve some victories, but usually failed miserably. Until the defect in the detonator was fixed in the Mark 14 in mid to late 1943, the largest ship sunk by a U.S. submarine was the cruiser Kako, sunk by the submarine S-44 using the Mark 10. However, several sub skippers resigned to their failure, and even Mush Morton lost his temper after putting several torpedoes into a freighter and not a one exploded. I just feel that perhaps my sub torpedoes are too effective, as my subs, (Scen 19, Japanese hist. AI, hist. options), have sunk at least 30 ships in the period between May 1 and August 1 1942. Just my thoughts.

Don't the "S" boats perform better than the newer boats in UV due to the functioning torpedo?

They seem to to me on some days. My Big boats have more endurance and torpedo load, but my S boats do seem to perform better(except for the S-46, which got sunk by a friggin' Daihatsu. Don't ask me how, but she did). Only problem with the S boats is they can't make it all the way to Truk and stay for very long.

The only thing my sub skippers have been good at is running from the escorts. They have not sunk one ship!

In two months in my late USN PBEM, my subs have sunk damaged Shoho, one damaged CA, one CL (3 torpedoes, my opponent scuttled it the same day) and a dozen AP, TK and PC.

All sinkings were done by S-boats, firing good Mark 10 torpedoes.

The newer subs manage to do some attacks but has been so far unsuccessful. Last turn, Grenadier attacked 3 times an invasion convoy off PM. One Maru was missed, the others took 1 and 2 torpedoes but were not reported on fire or with heavy damage. It may be all the hits were dud.

In my games against AI, Mark14 had some successes between Truk and Rabaul. It's easier to have a mid-ocean interception and if they are still unable to sink one ship on the spot as S and I boats can do, the ship will maybe not reach port.


Submarines successes are highly linked to the lack of ASW measures by any side. If any merchant ship or convoy is escorted, you will reduce your loss greatly. Same if you put many planes on ASW patrol. Of course all that reduces the number of DD available for frontline duties. Or you have to design a true convoy system.

S-boats in the game have long been recognized by most as being a bit on the more effective side vs real life. Primary reason is that subs in the game are only really defined by weapon mounts and fuel capacity. Facets that dont adequately cover the other attributes of the subs.

S-boats did indeed have one over their newer cousins in that they at least had torpedoes that worked. But that was the only thing. The boats limited ability to operate far from their bases, their generally marginal operating conditions (due mainly to age) and lackluster attributes (such as max diving depth/hull integrity, + ability to set up attacks would make them difficult subs to succeed with.

Remember that S-44's success........was due to extreme providence as well as skill. (i.e. the sub was sitting in the right place and right time when this unescorted CA, not zigzagging, fell straight into it's lap.) That negated all the factors listed above and allowed the one prime ability of the S-boat to take hold.....working Mk-10 torps.

Successes after that were few and far between and S-boat ops were generally phased out as quickly as possible once newer better conditioned boats arrived.

Hmm....

Beyond the Torp type which the MK10 was a WW1 Torp which was horrible and when you add an S-Type boat to all this you get miserable results which only then would be historical. An MK14 WW2 Torp and the newer boats did mucho better even on bad days. S-37 Vs Seadragon as an example, neither being amazing other then IIRC it was the S-37 that was first to sink a Jap DD!

How about changing the Torp capacity which is way off for both class subs?

Later,

Lrfss

Originally posted by Lrfss
How about changing the Torp capacity which is way off for both class subs?

Later,

Lrfss

How is it off? Is it too high? Are you saying the S boats didn't carry three full loads of torpedoes? If you are right, then it should be reduced.

I'm pretty sure the Gato class boats are correct, though.

Yamamoto

Yes, without a doubt the American subs are a bit too effective. Perhaps there was an intentional design tweak to give them some more playability. Who knows? But most of us are playing ahistorical scenarios anyway, so I don't know if I would fool with it too much.

I think that what is being said is that the US subs are too effective. The various reasons given right or wrong really
dont seem important compared to the ahistorical effectiveness.

Thanks to the new 2.30 rules though, sub effectiveness 'can' be reigned in so to speak by player tactics.

Port attacks which were the #1 cause of ahistorical-ness, are now penalized due to shallow water forcing players to conduct more realistic 'patrols'

I've found that i've been able to greatly curtail sub effectiveness by establishing differing convoy routes to and from Truk, along with judicious use of surface and air assets on ASW.

"Bottleneck" areas remain a problem, such as the one hex route between the Japanese and Allied sides of PNG. I was able to counteract that by using my carriers as mass ASW platforms....managed to sink one S-boat and heavily damage another in one game....chasing off the rest of them and preventing further attacks. Later in that same PBEM....sub attacks became far and in between and felt much more realistic. Mk-14 torp problem did the rest.

Japanese situation is different and if sub doctorine is turned off one can and should see a better influence played by that arm of the IJN. Their torps worked and at least until better trained and equipped USN ASW elements arrive in force, their sub force does contain a great potential to wreak some havoc on extended lines of supply. The risk is high though which is why i usually use my I-boats defensively. Experienced some success in my game with SoulBlazer using my subs that way. Bagged a damaged CA IIRC

As for the game design itself....the only real way to address it is to incorporate a greater detail level into the subs themselves and i dont see that happening due to the coding nitemares it would create. That and because at least with my experiences, its not a game breaker anymore due to the elimination of the mass wolfpack in the enemy harbor tactic.