One thing I would mod . . .

[bru888]

. . . would be reversing the lack of ability for aircraft to spot a surfaced submarine from adjacent hexes, let alone from directly overhead. When it comes to surfaced submarines, aircraft are totally blind which is NOT realistic.

This is a change that has been made relatively recently because the following is still an alteration that I make in my language files:

english_8.txt - (remove "or aircraft"; only adjacent ships can detect surfaced submarines)
loading_tip_16 = A surfaced enemy submarine can only be detected by adjacent ships. If submerged, it can only be detected by sonar or by attempting to move a ship to the submarine's exact position.

I cannot fathom (no pun intended) why the developers would make such a change to blind aircraft for surfaced subs. With my limited knowledge about mods, and my reluctance to use them, all I can do is alter the loading tip to be correct, such as it is.

[bru888]

Without getting into specifics, I can tell you that this lack of visibility will prevent me from doing something using a submarine that ought to be present, according to history. Which bothers me a bit.

If I had to point to one aspect of OOB that needs an overhaul, it is submarines. They need to be both 1) more powerful, and 2) more vulnerable. By "vulnerable," I mean more easily detected and destroyed. The two things that come to mind in that regard are 1) detection from the air when surfaced, and 2) allow the first ship to detect a sub by sonar to also fire.

Heh, that's another thing I would mod, then: "allow the first ship to detect a sub by sonar to also fire."

As it is, I find submarine warfare in OOB to be tedious. I have designed a bunch of sea battle scenarios and submarines are reluctantly thrown in as an afterthought; either for the human player to use as scouts or the AI to badger and balance gameplay a bit. Any objective that requires destroying them, however, gets thrown out because . . . it's just not fun.

[TheFilthyCasual]

Destroying subs is honestly really easy. If you set up a destroyer cordon around whatever a sub would want to go after, it's impossible for them to get past the destroyers without being spotted on sonar. Then the destroyers can just dogpile it into oblivion. They definitely need to be more powerful (chiefly, their torpedoes need to be as powerful as aerial torpedoes, which they aren't for some inexplicable reason), but they definitely don't need to be easier to destroy.

[Mascarenhas]

Perhaps, hydroplanes, as Catalinas and such recon seaplanes could be a compromise on this, modded as being both able to detect and bomb subs; differently from faster and high altitude combat planes and regular bombers. And for the subs performance, after a midification in specs like this, subs wouln't need to be easier to destroy.

[GabeKnight]

Yeah, I've tried to buff them a little bit in my mod to be at least more powerful with reduced reload times.

And I've also changed the text of the loading tips...

You could mod the planes to detect surfaced subs quite easily: Add the "spotter" trait to the classes.txt file.
The problem is, that they would also detect concealed LAND units...
All ships have it, that's why they can detect infantry inside city hexes, for example. No good like this. It would have to be changed in the game code to be sub-specific, I'm afraid.

Heh, that's another thing I would mod, then: "allow the first ship to detect a sub by sonar to also fire."

Isn't that so already?

[OrangeA]

I agree, spotter planes/ recon should be able to spot surfaced subs if not 'all' aircraft.

[bru888]

Destroying subs is honestly really easy. If you set up a destroyer cordon around whatever a sub would want to go after, it's impossible for them to get past the destroyers without being spotted on sonar. Then the destroyers can just dogpile it into oblivion. They definitely need to be more powerful (chiefly, their torpedoes need to be as powerful as aerial torpedoes, which they aren't for some inexplicable reason), but they definitely don't need to be easier to destroy.

Perhaps I should restate/reiterate: They should be easier to locate and destroy.

[bru888]

Destroying subs is honestly really easy. If you set up a destroyer cordon around whatever a sub would want to go after, it's impossible for them to get past the destroyers without being spotted on sonar. Then the destroyers can just dogpile it into oblivion. They definitely need to be more powerful (chiefly, their torpedoes need to be as powerful as aerial torpedoes, which they aren't for some inexplicable reason), but they definitely don't need to be easier to destroy.

Perhaps I should restate/reiterate: They should be easier to locate and destroy. What you describe is easier said than done. For one thing, are you sure that a ring of destroyers can contain an enemy sub or does the sub move "underneath" it anyway? Second, you need seven destroyers to surround one hex. To surround two hexes, you need 8 destroyers. Three hexes, 10 destroyers. Four hexes, 12 destroyers. Do the math as the area to be "ringed" expands. How often in a battle do you have a dozen destroyers available to surround a sub which, by the way, does not stay still while you are building your trap.

Also, see the Free France thread for the dilemma about when one has only a few, one, or no destroyers. Without a pack of destroyers, how does one hope to damage a sub without at least air support looking for surfaced subs?

Heh, that's another thing I would mod, then: "allow the first ship to detect a sub by sonar to also fire."

Isn't that so already?

You are usually the expert in these types of discussions. AFAIK/AFAIR (As Far As I Recall), a destroyer can only ping sonar, or move/fire in one turn. I am advocating that the destroyer that locates a sub should be also able to fire at it in the same turn.

[TheFilthyCasual]

Perhaps I should restate/reiterate: They should be easier to locate and destroy. What you describe is easier said than done. For one thing, are you sure that a ring of destroyers can contain an enemy sub or does the sub move "underneath" it anyway? Second, you need seven destroyers to surround one hex. To surround two hexes, you need 8 destroyers. Three hexes, 10 destroyers. Four hexes, 12 destroyers. Do the math as the area to be "ringed" expands. How often in a battle do you have a dozen destroyers available to surround a sub which, by the way, does not stay still while you are building your trap.

I'll agree on the air spotting, but you don't need to fill every hex with destroyers to make an effective cordon, 2 or 3 hex spacing will do the job.

Bru note:
I edited my own quote which I was still altering when you posted. Based on that, I still think what you are saying is easier said than done. And again what happens if you don't have a sufficient number of destroyers to play ring around the rosie?

[bru888]

Perhaps I should restate/reiterate: They should be easier to locate and destroy. What you describe is easier said than done. For one thing, are you sure that a ring of destroyers can contain an enemy sub or does the sub move "underneath" it anyway? Second, you need seven destroyers to surround one hex. To surround two hexes, you need 8 destroyers. Three hexes, 10 destroyers. Four hexes, 12 destroyers. Do the math as the area to be "ringed" expands. How often in a battle do you have a dozen destroyers available to surround a sub which, by the way, does not stay still while you are building your trap.

I'll agree on the air spotting, but you don't need to fill every hex with destroyers to make an effective cordon, 2 or 3 hex spacing will do the job.

Bru note:
I edited my own quote which I was still altering when you posted. Based on that, I still think what you are saying is easier said than done. And again what happens if you don't have a sufficient number of destroyers to play ring around the rosie?

Eh, on second thought, perhaps you are right about the cordoning. Not easy, but can be done with enough destroyers. The ring does not have to be continuous, as you pointed out, and my Free France dilemma is unusual. But I will stick to aircraft should be able to spot surfaced subs and a destroyer should be able to ping, locate target, and fire in the same turn.

[bru888]

But I will stick to aircraft should be able to spot surfaced subs and a destroyer should be able to ping, locate target, and fire in the same turn.

And keep in mind something else along with this. At the same time that I am advocating greater submarine vulnerability, I am also suggesting that they be made more powerful to balance. These two improvements in conjunction with each other would do much to liven up submarine warfare in this game, IMO.

Meanwhile, I resolved my Free France dilemma . . .

[GabeKnight]

You are usually the expert in these types of discussions. AFAIK/AFAIR (As Far As I Recall), a destroyer can only ping sonar, or move/fire in one turn. I am advocating that the destroyer that locates a sub should be also able to fire at it in the same turn.

And AFAIR, every unit using the sonar ping can also either 1) fire depthcharges if the sub's submerged or 2) main guns if it's surfaced. When a ship enters the same hex as a submerged sub it can also fire depthcharges, and if the subs's surfaced (and on an adjacent hex) it can also fire main guns. All in the same turn.

And just to be clear, it's NOT a change that planes can not spot surfaced subs, it was never like that. The only mistake was the misleading (in fact rather: incorrect) loading tip!

[bru888]

You are usually the expert in these types of discussions. AFAIK/AFAIR (As Far As I Recall), a destroyer can only ping sonar, or move/fire in one turn. I am advocating that the destroyer that locates a sub should be also able to fire at it in the same turn.

And AFAIR, every unit using the sonar ping can also either 1) fire depthcharges if the sub's submerged or 2) main guns if it's surfaced. When a ship enters the same hex as a submerged sub it can also fire depthcharges, and if the subs's surfaced (and on an adjacent hex) it can also fire main guns. All in the same turn.

And just to be clear, it's NOT a change that planes can not spot surfaced subs, it was never like that. The only mistake was the misleading (in fact rather: incorrect) loading tip!

Well, you win some and you lose some. Now I know that, in phrasing your question the way that you did, you were being polite for which I thank you. Yes, I just tested and, to my embarrassment, you can ping, locate target and fire in the same turn.

Well, that leaves me with my original premise, to which I should have stuck: aircraft should be able to spot a surfaced sub, which is a bit bigger than a dinghy but invisible as one to a plane overhead.

By the way, I beg to differ on your last point. Back in 2017, they announced "A look at the new features of Order of Battle: Kriegsmarine" in which they said this:

Image0451.jpg (144.88 KiB) Viewed 2789 times

Oh, Great Swami, direct this pilgrim if he has once again stepped away from the proper path of OOB knowledge!

[GabeKnight]

By the way, I beg to differ on your last point. Back in 2017, they announced "A look at the new features of Order of Battle: Kriegsmarine" in which they said this:
[...]
Oh, Great Swami, direct this pilgrim if he has once again stepped away from the proper path of OOB knowledge!

As always, never say never, right?

Yeah, I should have phrased it like that: "this loading tip was always incorrect..."

You're right, before Kriegsmarine they were just "normal" ships when surfaced. They introduced the conceal trait and battery time with that DLC. Together with the wrong loading tip that I kept reading and reading and reading and believing...until tested.
And although I was playing with my mod for a long time, up until last december I completely forgot that the texts of these tips were stored in the english.txt files and could be altered.

And BTW, I'm also for some change/trait that could enable planes to spot adjacent (or two hex?) surfaced subs!

[bru888]

Well, I blew one thing but got two other things right.

The main thing was, and is, this: "I'm also for some change/trait that could enable planes to spot adjacent (or two hex?) surfaced subs!" Glad to have you on board with that.

[bebro]

I think spotting subs for selected air via trait would be a good idea. I'll discuss it with folks, but I guess even if doable it may not be the quickest thing.

[bru888]

That would be "top shelf." Thanks.

[bru888]

Heh, I would go so far as to say it would be truly "visionary."

[GabeKnight]

I think spotting subs for selected air via trait would be a good idea. I'll discuss it with folks, but I guess even if doable it may not be the quickest thing.

Cool. Thanks.

[conboy]

Bebro,

I request that we include a Piper Cub as a recon plane for US forces. This was common in WWII and we only have Navy Recon planes that look awful when used with Army troops.

what about that? Thanks!

conboy

ps, should I move this item to a new thread?