Now that we have trade and it's positively vital.
The trade hunter could ''leach'' more gold, for instance, or attack trade routes in the deep seas.
That would combine balance and history, as early subs (and ''early'' means ''well up to 1945'') subs were not very good against warships, who had far heavier weaponry and better speed-as well as, in the Allied navies at the very least, somewhat crude but efficient sonar systems.
While there was spectacular success of subs against warships in WW2, the success occured often with ships already crippled from previous actions (IJN Shoho and USS Yorktown after Midway,), during a fleet action (IJN Taiho as she was recovering aircraft at the battle of the Philippine Sea), with WW1 older ships with poor ASW capacities and poorer speeds (HMS Barham...)
While in CIV, the sub is deadly against warships. Granted, this might be because the AI don't seem to realize that sending wooden frigates and privateers when someone rushed subs is suicide, but...
The trade hunter could ''leach'' more gold, for instance, or attack trade routes in the deep seas.
That would combine balance and history, as early subs (and ''early'' means ''well up to 1945'') subs were not very good against warships, who had far heavier weaponry and better speed-as well as, in the Allied navies at the very least, somewhat crude but efficient sonar systems.
While there was spectacular success of subs against warships in WW2, the success occured often with ships already crippled from previous actions (IJN Shoho and USS Yorktown after Midway,), during a fleet action (IJN Taiho as she was recovering aircraft at the battle of the Philippine Sea), with WW1 older ships with poor ASW capacities and poorer speeds (HMS Barham...)
While in CIV, the sub is deadly against warships. Granted, this might be because the AI don't seem to realize that sending wooden frigates and privateers when someone rushed subs is suicide, but...
