U-boats not a menace

[vonik]

ORIGINAL: battlevonwar

Vonik, agreed the British tanks are junk ...

Yes . They don't get armored warfare let alone tanks 2 before mid 41 . And there is infantery 2 to research too .
And there are air and naval losses to reinforce . Not enough MPP for all that . Even mid 41 is optimistic .

Germany can drive through the Mideast with 2 or 3 tanks preferably?

No it works like that - counting round 0 with arrival of DAK .
Round 0 : arrival of DAK, its reinforcements to full . An elite PzD strength 11 arrives too (with 2 it is even faster)
Round 1 : Approach to front (presumably El Alamein) . If it is at Tobruk, the Allied is already doomed .
Round 2 : Panzers are at 2- 3 hexes from the front
Round 3 : Assault . The 2 (3) Panzers deliver 4 (6) strikes and kill 1 UK Army . Bombers stay in reserve for HQ if spotted .
Round 4 : If the Brits try to counter, they are dead . So they retreat to Alexandria . Italian infantry closes in , Pz follow .
Round 5 : The Panzers deliver again 4 (6) strikes and kill 1 UK corps . With luck 2 . The UK front evaporated .
Round 6 : The 1 (2) elite Pz move to Tobruk .
Round 7 : The 1 (2) Panzers are transported to Italy then operated to the Ostfront .
Round 8 : The Pz are safe and ready in time for Barbarossa . The DAK and Italians deal with what is left of the Brits who will probably evacuate now everything that still can to Atlantic anyway ..

[IrishGuards]

well if we look at the actual convoy system, or lack thereof in the early stages of the war in the UK/France case.
Allies had no convoys in 39 and not until early 40 were they protected by western approaches, coastal command and such.
On turn 1 the allies full OOB can just trash the norway convoy to Germany, basically sinking norway and sweden ships and
goods, without any political fallout or blowback, need some cause n effect here eh'
Allied ships were not concentrated to hunt Uboats they were escorting ships and troops.
Instead of the convoy research and such go with the events, formation of convoys and escorts, western approaches,
coastal command, escort cv's and then VLRB, closing the mid atlantic gap as events that once reached have relevance.

I still like random T1 Uboat placement so to speak, adds a layer of FoW.
the one aspect of the Uboat game is initiative, he who starts well has an advantage, if KM causes the RN some damage to
surprised ships and then some convoy's so then there ahead of the game.
If your gonna raid every turn with Uboats, then your gonna be in for it.
Gotta hide n then turn up hopefully where the allies arent!
IG
[X(]

[PrinceMiskin]

What if subs could dive away 3 hexes instead of 1? Wouldn't be harder to track and surround?

[sPzAbt653]

Instead of the convoy research and such go with the events, formation of convoys and escorts, western approaches,
coastal command, escort cv's and then VLRB, closing the mid atlantic gap as events that once reached have relevance.

Could you elaborate a little, because I'm not sure what you mean.

[battlevonwar]

I think I have a game going with 10 Axis Subs in total so far. I believe the British have raided more convoys in total than I have or close to the same amount. I really love your take on it. It's hard to raid, not impossible but I am doing the math, Germany doesn't benefit financially from doing it I don't think. With tech, upgrades, losses and actual damage dealt and in the end the few convoys they raid. It's cost ineffective to try... For the Allies Raiding is easy they have a Surface navy to assist it and can do so with impunity, if it's any sign my opponent has a 3 Star Sub near Norway! (boy talk about what the Axis Subs should look like by '42)

ORIGINAL: IrishGuards

well if we look at the actual convoy system, or lack thereof in the early stages of the war in the UK/France case.
Allies had no convoys in 39 and not until early 40 were they protected by western approaches, coastal command and such.
On turn 1 the allies full OOB can just trash the norway convoy to Germany, basically sinking norway and sweden ships and
goods, without any political fallout or blowback, need some cause n effect here eh'
Allied ships were not concentrated to hunt Uboats they were escorting ships and troops.
Instead of the convoy research and such go with the events, formation of convoys and escorts, western approaches,
coastal command, escort cv's and then VLRB, closing the mid atlantic gap as events that once reached have relevance.

I still like random T1 Uboat placement so to speak, adds a layer of FoW.
the one aspect of the Uboat game is initiative, he who starts well has an advantage, if KM causes the RN some damage to
surprised ships and then some convoy's so then there ahead of the game.
If your gonna raid every turn with Uboats, then your gonna be in for it.
Gotta hide n then turn up hopefully where the allies arent!
IG
[X(]

[battlevonwar]

Vonik, you won't want to hear this but I got you cause you let me get you. This is the deal(the first turn you can build a Engineer send him to Egypt and build a fortress line and this is less an issue) Send all Fighters to Egypt and this is a weaker point. Send half the RN to Egypt and you can pound any Italians and Germans that use the Coast to flank, that narrow strip of Bikini line is holdable. I have done so against a very able opponent mind you plan to lose half the Western Desert Army or more! :/ but then again that sorta happened historically. I see no other answer here, the British cannot own the Med in '41 but no, she has zilch for attack power on land till '42(Alternatively go on the offense in Libya earlier, DAK doesn't come till later) Though Forget France! and Risk reinforcements(use the RN)

There are options not great ones just options and they will weaken the Allies! Time, time, time is on your side! But not in the USSR so forget Egypt and the MidEast, not like Panzers need it to run!

[vonik]

Well all I say is that a good Axis player destroys the UK in Egypt in spring 41 if he decides to do so and there is nothing the Brits can do against it .

The good Axis players I played almost always choose to take Egypt before Barbarossa and sent to Libya what was needed to achieve that goal (HQ, fighters, bombers and Panzers) .
UK engineers, RN and fighters are irrelevant because neither can prevent the 6 Pz strikes per round which are enough to anihilate any UK unit in one round . And I don't even mention artillery and the infantery units that can pile up damage too .
If the UK player still survives in Africa end 41, it is a big victory because time works for him and he will never see such a crisis as end 1940 anymore .
Eventually a surviving Allied will go on offensive depending on what is happening in Russia and how the Italian vs Brit research looks like .

[battlevonwar]

Vonik, my whole point. I'm in Leningrad in September with you and I am in Rostov soon as well. Game is going to be over for Christmas and I could have Libya too. British actually fight better than the Russians in 1941.

The only part of the game I find tough at all is France and the Naval War. Honestly! I wonder if one can even hold Moscow or Stalingrad? Can they? Someone really nerfed the U-boats and Buffed the Tanks and Bombers! Too much endless Armies with weapons II. Russian Fortified Cities are the only thing that makes it tough at all. N.Africa is a nightmare for Supply. It takes longer to take Persia than it does Moscow in actual months!

Grand Campaign will need some look over but Egypt should be a HUGE contention point as should the Battle of the Atlantic. Subs in the early days should be like invisible nightmares and Rommel pushed all the way to Alexandria with a tiny little army....

[vonik]

ORIGINAL: battlevonwar

I wonder if one can even hold Moscow or Stalingrad? Can they?

No . Even aginst a very average Axis player, Leningrad and Moscow always fall in 41 . Stalingrad may survive but it's only because the Pz need time to drive there .
The war against Russia is so easy simply because the Russian looses MANY more units than what he gets as reinforcement .
So the Red Army evaporates and by October the Russian has less than 10 units on the whole map !
This is of course very ahistorical because in reality the Red Army had a massive inflow of new units to the Leningrad&Moscow area while whole German Panzerkorps were reduced to a few dozens of operational Panzers when they arrived there .
That's why Taifun was a failure - the German were attrited and vastly outnumbered by the Russians .

Grand Campaign will need some look over but Egypt should be a HUGE contention point as should the Battle of the Atlantic.

That is exactly what I was saying . Currently Axis wins in Africa as easily as in Russia . Actually even if the German army in the game was much smaller it would still win easily in Egypt and in Russia if the German player plays correctly .
Finally the whole game is basically only about the Atlantic and the UK .
It is only there that the German must show some skill especially if he lost his subs and the US had time to produce enough units .

[battlevonwar]

Vonik, yes the U-boat war is strange(go raid a turn, get found by 8 destroyers, ping-ping-ping, slowly die). Though the Wars in the East over The USSR are very easy for the Axis. 10 Units is about right! You haven't convinced me about Egypt there are ways to stop the Germans there it just cost MPPs. I have experienced losing Egypt as the Axis and winning the war. Also I have experienced holding Egypt but never see the Soviets hold against even a semi-competent Axis player.

[Sugar]

What`s the situation now after the 1.03 patch?

The situations in Egypt and Russia are still the same, there`s nothing to hold für the allies. It`s totally enough to send 1 fighter and tact. bomber in addition to the DAK, then one can see what happens to their 2-3 tanks. The axis is superior in every kind of warfare.

And with the strengthenup of the subs it has become even worse. The bill does not go, because you get lots of subs for free. In silent mode (which is automatically entered after first fight) the predictions for carrier- and lightcruiserattacks are 0 damage, even at good weather. If britain looses around 50 mpp/turn, they won`t hardly be able send any reinforces to egypt.

Compared to the elder versions of strategic command, the axis now is clearly in favor.

[vonik]

Yes I think that the Subs in silent mode are now completely overboard .
A level 1 sub in silent mode with 0 supply, 0 moral, 0 readiness will routinely survive 15 + level 1 high moral and high readiness destroyer attacks with 0 damage .
After a few turns the destroyers start to grey out, receive damage (even if the predictor says 0:0) and have to return to port while the sub sails unscathed happily away with a much bigger XP

There seems to be something very wrong mathematically .
If the probability to do 0 damage is P, then the probability to do 0 damage in 10 strikes in a row is P^10 .
As this is what is routinely observed (actually even for more than 10 strikes in a row) , we have to have P^10 of the order of 1 . Say 0.9 .
Then P^10 = 0.9 and we get P~0.99 .
That means that the probability to damage a sub in silent mode REGARDLESS of its moral, supply and readiness is of the order of 1/100 .
So you'll need about 100 attacks before damaging a sub by 1 but your destroyers will run out of supply and readiness long before they can do 100 strikes ...

[Leadwieght]

So it seems we have come around 180 degrees from where this thread started. At first, the concern was that u-boats were too easy to kill.
Now, it seems people are saying u-boats are too hard to kill (at least in Silent mode).
What I haven't seen in the discussion of the u-boat campaign as it is simulated in the game is the question of cost to the Allies beyond the direct cost of convoy losses.
It's an obvious point, I suppose, but if the Allies spend MPPs on ASW research chits and lots of destroyers, there is a substantial opportunity cost.

[Sugar]

The issue is, if you change one of the game mechanics, it may be ruining the balancing.

This isn`t a game about historycally acuressnes, it`s all about MP-Balancing. Given an at start more or less historically situation, what happens if the belligerents do not the same mistakes as their predecessors? The before patch 1.03 given situation enables the axis to do economical damage to the Brits by convoyraiding, together with a Battle of Britain and the threat of Seelöwe (or gamewise the opportunity to take whole France with Franco joining) this has serious consequences for the Middleeast theater. That would have been okay, and worked fine in the elder versions of SC.

But there has been no DAK in those versions, which totally changes the balance of powers.

I highly appreciate the developers reaction to their costumers wishes, and I also like the idea of improving naval gamemechanics, but this went into a wrong direction in terms of balancing I guess.

[johanssb]

You hold Egypt by taking away Axis supply using the UK navy and air.

[vonik]

ORIGINAL: johanssb

You hold Egypt by taking away Axis supply using the UK navy and air.

Neither UK Navy nor air can do anything about supply .
As the German and Italian HQs sit in towns, if you bring those towns down to supply 0, at the start of the next turn it will be 1 and everything is supplied fine .
Not mentionning the possibility to bring a second Italian HQ and chaining supply .
Actually in the game the Brits struggle with supply much more than Axis because they have a single lousy O Connor HQ while the Axis has 2 (or 3) .

Besides your BBs will take damage when shore bombing and you can ill aford to waste MPPs on reinforcing them every turn .
On top if the Brit is not careful, he'll run in a sub in silent mode and loose his BB

[johanssb]

At supply of 1, your maximum becomes 8 and not 10 for your lead HQ and the supply and morale of your front line units will be less (maybe 5 if they are a couple of hexes from the HQ ?).

Agreed, the UK should have more than 1 HQ in Egypt.

Agreed, the BBs should not take damage from bombarding. I don't agree with this game mechanic or the strength loss of units from shore bombardment, infrastructure yes, but not units...

The Brit should be careful with his navy but still must use it.

Maybe the sub will be found by a destroyer first and then visited by a naval bomber ???

[vonik]

ORIGINAL: johanssb


Maybe the sub will be found by a destroyer first and then visited by a naval bomber ???

Well as says a previous post, a sub in silent mode can be visited by 10 naval bombers and just shrug it off without damage .
And as for the immobilised destroyer, he'll be killed by the RM next turn:)

[johanssb]

So mission accomplished then. We've forced the RM to sortie and engage us in battle [;)]

[Sugar]

At supply of 1, your maximum becomes 8 and not 10 for your lead HQ and the supply and morale of your front line units will be less (maybe 5 if they are a couple of hexes from the HQ ?).

You can keep Rommel directly behind the frontline within 2 hexes of the next HQ in a town, this creates a supplychain and Rommel delivers 10 supply.

And also within the Allied turn, if the town is reduced to 0 supply, Rommel will deliver 8 cause the minor HQ delivers still 5 afaik.