Subs counter

[Stratego (dev)]

I feel that maybe we have lack of sub counter things in game - that is th reason Dreja opens new sub topics one after another.

my idea is:
Question: what was the real counter against subs IRL?

my answer: was the mines(?) (not the depth charges i wrote earlier)

if i am right: than
- make all water mines invisible to all subs (so they can not avoid the mines) and maybe set the same to all other ships too (so you can not explore them easily)
- so only some special naval unit can see the mines - like a naval "anit-mine" ship - was such ship IRL?

->> by this we can be safe against subs as placing some depth charges will prevent them arriving into our bays.

what so u think?

[DreJaDe]

If you put it like then it's kinda...
Not the reason but ill stick with the topic for now.

my answer: was the depth charges(?)

You might be confusing depth charges with mines as you seem to describe it as like being set up but in game, depth charges just blew up instantly and cannot be set up.

But if you meant mine then I can agree. Not sure but from what I remember, subs have no possibility to see mines. But for other ships then I don't agree. We have discussed this already and we're still waiting for the antimine skill of the destroyers and the rebalance of axis destroyers.

Currently, my only problem with subs is the OP German one. But most subs seems to work just fine as more surface submarine like they are IRL.

[Stratego (dev)]

i ment "mines" yes - but the underwater ones - that is hard to notice.

and maybe depth charges also need buff agaisnt subs? not sure if they powerful enough.

[DreJaDe]

i ment "mines" yes - but the underwater ones - that is hard to notice.

and maybe depth charges also need buff agaisnt subs? not sure if they powerful enough.

The current anti sub destroyer does have adequate depth charge damage.

The lacking is as I said, the balance between the subs of allies and axis.

[Stratego (dev)]

but subs need no balance ONLY between subs themselves,
it is not problem if german subs are more powerful than ally subs (if they really)
the balance can be achieved if those subs can be controlled by "anti-sub" units properly.

a sub, is not ment to be anti sub, so they can have differing stats (one can be stronger than other without hurting the overall balance)

this is why i opened this: if we feel any sub can not be defeated currently than we should give more power to anti sub units / anti sub mines.

[DreJaDe]

it is not problem if german subs are more powerful than ally subs (if they really)

Just to say, they are not IRL but are only in game.

My mistake on this statement about the disparity between subs of ally and axis. I already know that I can't do anything there even if it's imbalanced. What I meant are the destroyers. Whereas Axis destroyers have all-purpose destroyers for the same cost as one-purpose destroyers.

[Dahdee]

There were different types of mine technology. I put a long rant on another thread before I saw this one, so sorry for that. One of the biggest sub killers in WW2 was the patrol bomber. Currently none of them can engage subs unless surfaced. These planes dropped mines and depth charges and some carried torpedoes too, although that's not the real weapon vs subs. The British had a megnetic homing mine they could drop from naval patrol bombers that would follow a sub down even if it were to crash dive. These planes that can engage subs need to be allowed to do so, as they were not really that useful for anything else except vs merchant shipping which is not a factor in the game. Another countermeasure that could be introduced is the sub net. That could be constructed to create safe zones in coastal areas from subs. But mines and depth charges for sure need to be added to planes like the Catalina and MBR2. And France needs to have the Catalina under lend lease. When I was looking at this stuff online, really the only nation I couldn't find that had decent sea patrol bombers was Italy (surprise, surprise).

[Dahdee]

Another thing too is that 100% hit rate from sub torpedoes. No. Not even close to realistic.

[DreJaDe]

Another thing too is that 100% hit rate from sub torpedoes. No. Not even close to realistic.

Yes, but so does MG one hitting infantry.

Like I said, it's more likely for Torpedo to hit than MG bullet does.

Do we suppose to do this where we will need hundred MG attack to kill one infantry? Or rifleman to miss? For bombs to miss?

Although not realistic, I'm more than fine with the current hit rate.

[Dahdee]

Ok I see your point. It's only an issue in the instance of the allied destroyers without sees stealth vs type XXI which can evade so easily. So it's not a huge issue. I was going to suggest they lose stealth on a miss, but that's probably stupid.

[DreJaDe]

Ok I see your point. It's only an issue in the instance of the allied destroyers without sees stealth vs type XXI which can evade so easily. So it's not a huge issue. I was going to suggest they lose stealth on a miss, but that's probably stupid.

Actually, that's kinda a good idea. Since most subs do fire when they are on surface level. They should lose stealth when attacking even with when submerged.

I said kinda cause I think this will have a really big repercussion that I dont know.

[Dahdee]

- so only some special naval unit can see the mines - like a naval "anit-mine" ship - was such ship IRL?

IDK about the other nations, but the US had such ships. They were converted destroyers, designated DMS (Destroyer Mine Sweeper). The original class was the Wickes class, the second class of DMS built was the Clemson class, of which only a single Clemson was made from a converted Wickes class.

[Dahdee]

Those DMS served mainly in the Pacific