Slitherine

I have often seen italian fleets of submarines of 8 sub units. And now that they are cheaper I am afraid that it will be possible to build even larger submarine fleets. I see an issue here with a MTO with such italian submarine fleet.

I like task force rule. It will help the players to move their naval units without being so "afraid" at port because of the submarine threat.

I'm for 'task force' rule.

I have to say that I'm not a fan of the task force rule. What about something simpler ...

When a u-boat attacks a DD or even when a DD attacks a u-boat (or sub) the DD fires first, the sub takes its damage and loses effectiveness and the sub return fires using the reduced strength and effectiveness.

rkr1958 wrote:I have to say that I'm not a fan of the task force rule. What about something simpler ...

When a u-boat attacks a DD or even when a DD attacks a u-boat (or sub) the DD fires first, the sub takes its damage and loses effectiveness and the sub return fires using the reduced strength and effectiveness.

This is a good idea, if possible to implement.

I just came back & found this topic . Although I am the sub blob maker , I do agree to do some adjustment about it . It is really rediculous to meet a situation of DD escort DD & all RN stay in the port & let all convoy sunk by subs ! But I don't agree to let the DD to have ability to attack sub after move , It will be too hard for the sub .

Someone came with a suggestion where the DD (only) would fire BEFORE the sub fires in combat instead of at the same time. That means that going after DD's for subs can be devastating because the subs will only fire with their reduced strength instead of their full strength.

An even simpler solution could be that DD's (only) have +2 survivability against sub attacks. That would lower the damage on DD's from subs.

Hi I like the idea of the plus survivability addition, but I also believe that DD's should start with a base ASW value of 5 instead of 4.

DD's was the preferred platform to be used in WWI against subs so not a lot was changed between the wars when war broke out in 1939.

Stauffenberg wrote:An even simpler solution could be that DD's (only) have +2 survivability against sub attacks. That would lower the damage on DD's from subs.

Which was my initial idea

I vote yes to increase starting DD ASW level from 4 to 5 and also vote yes to increase DD´s survivability +2 against sub attacks. With such changes DD´s should be able to start escorting right from 1939 as it was in the real war. Subs should be effective against convoys and unescorted capital ships but subs should much less effective against DD´s as they are now in the game. DD´s were the main way to fight against the sub threat as Paul has pointed.

Stauffenberg wrote:Someone came with a suggestion where the DD (only) would fire BEFORE the sub fires in combat instead of at the same time. That means that going after DD's for subs can be devastating because the subs will only fire with their reduced strength instead of their full strength.

I vote yes

If we increase the start ASW for DD's from 4 to 5 then we need to lower the tech advances with ASW by 1 so the end level doesn't get too high.

Stauffenberg wrote:If we increase the start ASW for DD's from 4 to 5 then we need to lower the tech advances with ASW by 1 so the end level doesn't get too high.

Yes，sir . But actually the Allies DD was already very effective after late 1943 . The Axis sub should be only a threaten during the 1940-1941 .

Stauffenberg wrote:If we increase the start ASW for DD's from 4 to 5 then we need to lower the tech advances with ASW by 1 so the end level doesn't get too high.

Sounds reasonable to lower the tech ASW advances if we have more effective DD´s from the start both by setting 5 as the initial tech level and by increasing survivability +2.

I think survivability is the way to go of we think its broken. The tech change is back to 'normal' right?

richardsd wrote:I think survivability is the way to go of we think its broken. The tech change is back to 'normal' right?

But can we change the code so that the survivability is only vs. subs? We don't want DD's to be tougher to sink than BB's.

Actually DD's should be harder to sink than BB's and CV's. That is why if the change is made only DD's will gain the advantage.

The DD's are the hunter's of U-Boats they are faster can accelerate and turn quicker than the large Capitol ships. The DD's are on the look out with the Hydrophones and later when radar is upgraded which for naval vessels it can be Radar or Sonar depending upon unit.

It may also add survivability because the enemy can be detected and defensive measures taken.

Diplomaticus wrote:

richardsd wrote:I think survivability is the way to go of we think its broken. The tech change is back to 'normal' right?

But can we change the code so that the survivability is only vs. subs? We don't want DD's to be tougher to sink than BB's.

I agree what Paul wrote on this. We want DD's to be tougher for subs to sink than BB's. The change that Borger is proposing will accomplish this.

But I'm thinking why adding +1 ASW at the beginning? Won't it make DDs too powerful? I think the concept is that they are hard to sink but cannot retaliate much early in the war.

I'd be on board with doing ONE of the following, not both:

1. Giving DDs +2 survivability against subs
2. Letting DDs fire first when they are attacked by subs

From my own (admittedly limited) experience and reading the AARs, it seems like we need a relatively minor fix, not a major overhaul. That's why I think we should start with only one change and see how it goes.

One more thing - neither of these rules should apply when a sub manages to ambush a DD while it's moving. The DD is caught completely unawares, so the sub should be able to fire first and the DD shouldn't get a survivability bonus either.