Submarines deserve more respect.

[gjts00]

Thanks to a post under another topic, I was reminded of a MAJOR deficiency in the game. SUBMARINES GET TOTALLY DISSED! In my opinion their inappropriately low defense value combined with their restricted mobility, renders them useless for any thing other than floating centuries or slow moving, poorly defended missile platforms. (in which case I prefer carriers in lieu of their admirable defense stats). I dunno know, what do you fanatics think?

------------------
Thou who goes to bed with an itchy butt wakes up with a smelly finger.

[This message has been edited by gjts00 (edited March 31, 2001).]

 

[rouli]

Actually real life submarines are "poorly defended missile platforms". Maybe if it would possible to make them invisible unless they are in a neighbouring tile, would make them more powerful? With the ranged attacks idea, this feature will make them strong enough IMHO.

[This message has been edited by rouli (edited March 31, 2001).]

 

[gjts00]

Touchet rouli. That is a good point. But without sonar or radar it's impossible to locate and target a submerged sub (maybe there should be a tech added to the game along that line:}). There many angles from which this argument can be waged. Maybe there should be a command to submerge/surface subs. And adjust the defensive stats accordingly for either scenario. Instead of just having a sub that always has the same attributes. After all a submarine got it's name because of it's ability to dive & surface without sinking.

------------------
Thou who goes to bed with an itchy butt wakes up with a smelly finger.

 

[BlueMonday]

Although many civ veterans dismiss sub tactics as an effective weapon against the enemy, I am a radical embracier of submarine warfare. I have several reasons for this:

1. Cheap: the only modern sea unit cheaper than a sub is the transport.

2. Strong offensively: a factor ten in offense gives them an attack advantage over every other sea unit except battleships. Subs do, in fact, have the best offensive power for the cost of any other ship afloat.

3. Strength in numbers: Their cheapness allows them to built abundantly and quickly and formed into large groups -wolfpacks. Often a group of 3-5 veteran subs is more than enough to seriously wound -if not destroy- an enemy battlegroup. Numbers also benefit defense. In the correct formation, an enemy fleet will only discover on or two of the wolfpack. On the next turn, the rest of the pack can quickly destroy the enemy fleet.

4. Available fairly early: They arrive quickly and can be used in any offensive or defensive fleet right from their inception.

5. Maggellan's Expidition: The ME allows subs the ability to transcend their slow movement. With ME and nuclear power, a sub can hunt down nearly any ship.

6. Missile platform: The most obvious advantage, embraced by nearly all civ players.

However, you are correct. I would like to see sub warfare improved in the next generation. It would please me to see modern counterparts to the ancient subs be introduced along with the ability to submerge when attacked based on their experience level.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/image_uploads/goodbye3.jpg" border=0>
<FONT COLOR="blue">"No Hope = No Fear"</FONT c>

 

[Kev]

I am not sure as to the exact ruling, but submarines are supposed to be "invisible" to all but destroyers unless you are right next to them. Again, I could be wrong, but this is supposed to add some value to the unit. However, just as the AI seems to know where you and all of your cities are, I find that the computer has no trouble at all making a direct run to any and all of my subs and sinking them.

The only way I find them useful is to keep them in a coastal city and use it to counterattack enemy ships.

I am not a huge fan of using them as a missle carrier - for the same reason I dislike aircraft carriers. To me it's basically stacking and I hate running the risk of losing several units at once. The AI loves to build cruise missles and, again, they always seem to know where my subs are. Building Aegis Cruisers for support is then just too time consuming for me.

I hope that they are improved in civ3 as well. They were so deadly for the Germans that other countries had to change the way they did naval battles to compensate.
------------------
Diplomacy - the art of
saying "Good Doggie"
until you can find a rock

[This message has been edited by Kev (edited April 01, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Kev (edited April 01, 2001).]

 

[MrLeN]

Yep. Subs are one of the best units, easily.

I don't care much for transports because I hate losing so many units.

MrLeN

------------------
Where there is money, there are liars!
Check out my Homepage:
Nebulous!
Don't forget to sign my guestbook.
I sure do look forward to feedback!

 

[Hell-Raiser]

you got 2 kinds of subs in rela life:
the "missle platforms"
and the "Hunters"
It would be great to have that in civ III
When A Missle sub is being defended by a Hunter or just send youre hunter to find and destroy enemy surrface ships and other subs

In rela life are missle subs very stratic you can show you're militayr power with them!

what would it be if a missle sub from Iraq laing in front of new york??? It Would be really stragic

POwer to the Subs!
-------
damn I want to use S.P.Q.R but it's all ready in use

 

[gjts00]

Well, I'm getting some great feedback! Now (after gathering other opinions) I would like to see advanced unit types in the sub area......But that is a topic for another thread.

------------------
Thou who goes to bed with an itchy butt wakes up with a smelly finger.

 

[BlueMonday]

Originally posted by Kev:
I am not sure as to the exact ruling, but submarines are supposed to be "invisible" to all but destroyers unless you are right next to them.

Civ rules states that a submarine can only be spotted by destroyers, cruisers, and helocopters withn one square. Even though all these units have a two square visibility, they can only spot subs one square away. Other sea units can only discover a sub by trying to enter the same square as the enemy sub. However, the same part fo the AI that let's it know exactly what city to nuke at exactly perfect timing is the same part that let's it see your subs. In short, the AI cheats here too -something that despesately needs changing.

However, the problem of the AI seeing your subs can be easily compromised by practicing wolfpack tactics.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/image_uploads/goodbye3.jpg" border=0>
<FONT COLOR="blue">"No Hope = No Fear"</FONT c>

 

[rouli]

Thus, in the current set of rules and the ranged attacks thingie implemented, submarines would be a powerful units.
Another way to make them more powerful (or not, you choose), is to make them visible only when they move (much like nukes but not the same).
Regarding the wolfpack tactic, well it's not my style. Moreover, two cruisers and a battleship can severly damage such a pack.

 

[gatomarado]

I don't think that subs in civII are a great unit.

I think that in civ3 there should be more types of submarines. Ex: diesel submarines (the first), conventional submarines, and nuclear/missile submerines. Some examples for more advanced submarines lay on the ability to hide from their enemies. Ex: stealth submarine (like in the "Hunt for the red october" movie).

About their use in civII submarines are almost useless. I only use them on a shore city to attack enemy ships that pass by (like Kev does) or use them to complement a fleet of varied ships (mainly formed by AEGIS cruisers).

I dont use them for missile platforms because i'm not a great missile user, but i agree with it's importance to carry cruise missiles to blow with battleships, or with nukes to use on a entire fleet (the most effective use of a nuke because destroy your enemies and doesn't cause polution).

 

[gatomarado]

I also think that a woolfpack of submarines are completly useless. Imagine if a stealth figther discovers their location, if it have enough movement it'll destroy all subs.
And also, if they form a woolfpack they can deffend/atack with more efficiency, but they protect a minor area then a single AEGIS cruiser or battleship from enemy incursions on our seashore.

Submarines are very effective if the other civ's don't have tecnology for destroyers and similar ships. They only wait that a ship gets close and then sink it.

 

[drake]

Does anyone else think it's silly that subs are always above water? I mean, the whole reason they go under water is to avoid detection right? Otherwise theyre just boats..

If they were more realistically sound with the ability to descend and surface somehow, they could be much more useful...

 

[animepornstar]

my opinion is that all the naval warfare in civ2 sucked. it took to long time using the sea when you could use the railroad.

 

[Mongol Horde]

Originally posted by animepornstar:
my opinion is that all the naval warfare in civ2 sucked. it took to long time using the sea when you could use the railroad.

And there are some of you who want to keep railroad the way it is. I despair.

 

[Squirrel2004]

Submarines aren't poorly defended. Go rent Hunt for Red October. It's all real stuff too

Squirrel2004

 

[gjts00]

Originally posted by drake:
Does anyone else think it's silly that subs are always above water? I mean, the whole reason they go under water is to avoid detection right? Otherwise theyre just boats..

If they were more realistically sound with the ability to descend and surface somehow, they could be much more useful...

That is a mistake that astounds me. Even worse still ships that are just next to a sub can see it. Why bother? I wouldn't think that you could see a submerged boat!

I think that there needs to be a new tech called sonar. Thus, only ships that are enhanced with this tech would be able to spot a sub at all (even if they're in the same square).

------------------
Thou who goes to bed with an itchy butt wakes up with a smelly finger.

 

[BlueMonday]

Originally posted by Squirrel2004:
Submarines aren't poorly defended. Go rent Hunt for Red October. It's all real stuff too

Execpt for the "magneto-hydrodynamic propulsion." That's only a theory.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/image_uploads/goodbye3.jpg" border=0>
<FONT COLOR="blue">"BEWARE MY WRATHE"</FONT c>

 

[goodbye_mr_bond]

I like the wolfpack strategy too. The best benefit of subs is that they're cheap. In a major sea-game, I always have a couple of cities churning out subs full time.

Who cares if they get spotted and sunk? It keeps the enemy occupied. And if I get to sink something with only half of my subs, it's still worth it. I never really use missiles, though. Too much bother.

 

[animepornstar]

in civ2 i don´t care about ruling the sea cause there is nothing of value there. if it would be possible to have trading ships och naval trade routes maybe i would reconsider about it.