Slitherine

Schnellboote are auxiliary units in a few scenarios near the coast, like Norway.

I think their stats are off, future content might see them used more than right now (hinting at the upcoming DLCs).

They are not very strong and only have two ammo. Given how ammo is re-supplied for naval units.
Some 30-60 ammo are the norm, even transports have 6.
Interestingly Schnellboote have almost as much fuel as a destroyer (140 vs 170) while not being "schnell" (fast) at all: Speed 6 - just like destroyers.


The 2 shots could mean "torpedo boat". But then they should get a stronger punch for their one moment of glory - they will use up their 2nd round in the next turn when a destroyer attacks them anyways and any light or heavy cruiser will inflict crippling losses on them at range.

Well the German Schnellboote only carried two torpedoes and only had a single 2cm gun on board which counts for its lack of ammo.

I think they should be given recon movement.

Any schnellboote that actually manages to make an active attack is an exceedingly successful schnellboote in my mind!

(Instead I consider their real value to be that of an expendable decoy. Any enemy ship that fires at a schnellboot does not fire against another target that round. If you can get your schnellboote fired upon by cruisers or battleships that's a real victory, if a short-lived one...)

That their ammo reflects their two torpedos is fine to me. I'm guessing the ones who built them realized their limited life-span too, and went "why give them more ammo than they would ever use"...

Molve

PS. Of course, if you could actually purchase naval units, they would probably be severely underwhelming and pointless. But since you can't, I don't mind the nice touch of including them, even though they play a very minor role.

Try them against submarines.

Shrike wrote:Try them against submarines.

Great idea .
Why not use them against bombers?

I have a serious problem with torpedo boats that have two ammunition, but use a graphic of some sort of quick firing 2cm gun as their attack animation.

Kerensky wrote:I have a serious problem with torpedo boats that have two ammunition, but use a graphic of some sort of quick firing 2cm gun as their attack animation.

Maybe it has ammo only in the magazine attached to the gun? Be imaginative

skarczew wrote: Maybe it has ammo only in the magazine attached to the gun? Be imaginative

Oh, I was very imaginative. I imagine their ammo at 10 all the time. lol

skarczew wrote:

Shrike wrote:Try them against submarines.

Great idea .
Why not use them against bombers?

Your sarcasm was uncalled for, but I should perhaps have quoted Molve, as my post was meant as a remark on his:

Molve wrote:Any schnellboote that actually manages to make an active attack is an exceedingly successful schnellboote in my mind!

Then please - can you explain your remark Shrike? What do you mean?

A schnelleboote is classed as a destroyer and can therefore attack subs. I think that is Shrike's point.

It is my point, but I also seem to get better results in sub attacks than with destroyers. Might be a coincidence.

Okay, that makes sense.

But wait, how is that a comment on what I was saying?

I mean, if a schnellboot actually sinks something, let alone lives long enough to even find a foe to pick a few strength points off of, that's cause for a national holiday!

(Keep in mind u-boats are tin cans. They really have much less defense than surface ships. Even the smallest deck cannon can rip them to shreds. The problem is catching them at the surface; otherwise you have a real problem...)

Motorboats actually managed to sink some ships, even the heavier ones.

On the other side, saying that they were better at sinking submarines is a PzC joke/bug, it seems .

U-boots may have been cans, but they were able to dive to 200+ metres (quite nice for a tin can), and were equipped with 88mm gun, while motorboats usually just packed heavy machine guns and light cannons.
Not to mention that it did not take a lot of time to hide beneath the water .

2 × 53.3 cm (21 inches) torpedo tubes, with room for 2 more torpedoes (for reloading).

Doesn't this mean they should have a ammunition count of 4?

Also if PzC would support more than one ammunition count, then you could have the Torpedo count at 4 and the 20mm/40mm ammo count at 40+?

Fimconte wrote:2 × 53.3 cm (21 inches) torpedo tubes, with room for 2 more torpedoes (for reloading).

Doesn't this mean they should have a ammunition count of 4?

Also if PzC would support more than one ammunition count, then you could have the Torpedo count at 4 and the 20mm/40mm ammo count at 40+?

Well by that logic aircraft with bombs as payload should have ammo equivalent to bombs that can be dropped independently. In other words, one, for the most part.
Obviously this causes immense game play issues, so aircraft have more arbitrary ammunition amounts. I tend to think of the schnellboot in the same capacity, which is why you see it with more than 2 ammo in some scenarios.

The beauty and flexibility of the system we have is when we want content to provide a schnellboot with 2 ammo (2 torpedoes) this can be done with the default unit. Norway and Sealion for example.
When we want content to provide a schnellboot with 10 ammo (Torpedoes plus deck guns) this is very easily configured too. The Frozen North and Hunters in the Atlantic for example.

Kerensky wrote:The beauty and flexibility of the system we have is when we want content to provide a schnellboot with 2 ammo (2 torpedoes) this can be done with the default unit. Norway and Sealion for example.
When we want content to provide a schnellboot with 10 ammo (Torpedoes plus deck guns) this is very easily configured too. The Frozen North and Hunters in the Atlantic for example.

Well, are you thinking of the way the named tank commanders in Urban Assault start the game with more ammo than usual? That is, setting the ammo value in the editor higher than what the unit normally allows?

Assuming you are - thing is, this isn't what I'd call a permanent solution. After all, you're only changing the current ammo capacity, not the maximum ammo capacity. Such a schnellboot or IS-2 that runs out of ammo will on resupplying be limited to the regular maximum amount.

It's like when you want to add a 5 strength unit.

You normally want this 5 strength unit to have that as its maximum, as well as current strength. The need for a 5 strength unit which you can simply click reinforce on to get it back to 10 strength is much slimmer.

Yet, that is the only variant on offer (without the much more complicated prospect of creating a brand new unit).

Please consider changing the designer so that when you enter a value in the strength field it becomes the maximum too. And when you enter a value in the ammo field, that becomes the maximum too.

That way you can create strength 20 tanks or strength 5 garrison infantry or PT boats with 10 ammo that actually are customized units; that don't revert to the regular stats as soon as you reinforce/resupply. That would be so much more useful than the marginal utility of how things work today.

Thank you.

You can already do that with the equipment file though., or well at least the ammo part.
Which means it's not a great solution and a editor based one would be more elegant (since it wouldn't conflict with the EQ file), but it can get the job done.

Molve wrote:
Please consider changing the designer so that when you enter a value in the strength field it becomes the maximum too. And when you enter a value in the ammo field, that becomes the maximum too.

That way you can create strength 20 tanks or strength 5 garrison infantry or PT boats with 10 ammo that actually are customized units; that don't revert to the regular stats as soon as you reinforce/resupply. That would be so much more useful than the marginal utility of how things work today.

Thank you.

Hmmm. No, and probably not. Maybe in the future as an optional feature aside from the current one, but there are so many optional things we'd like to have and only so much time to implement critical ones.

As Fimconte pointed out though, what you describe is already possible to do, it just requires new entries in the equipment file. So why have redundant systems when we can have two separate and unique systems instead? One for permanent alterations, one for temporary alterations. After all, sometimes temporary alterations are very important, as we shall soon see in even more detail.