Type 21 (XXI) submarine cost too low IMPLEMENTED

[DreJaDe]

@Jasondunkel you said that the reason why the new sub of German cost only 2 because they are made to be built faster. But in terms of balance, they should be 3-4 turns. Since the new update, taking them on is harder now because of their speed and sight. They have literally have the same sight as most destroyers

Also, in same logic. Why doesn't this logic apply to carriers? Carriers are literally faster to make than Battleships.

And even the transport should be easier to make than submarine.

I really suggest a rebalance for the ships again.

[Shark guy 35]

I agree. Navy needs re-balancing, right now it's confusing and not as accurate as the rest of the game.

[Jasondunkel]

@Jasondunkel you said that the reason why the new sub of German cost only 2 because they are made to be built faster. But in terms of balance, they should be 3-4 turns. Since the new update, taking them on is harder now because of their speed and sight. They have literally have the same sight as most destroyers

Also, in same logic. Why doesn't this logic apply to carriers? Carriers are literally faster to make than Battleships.

And even the transport should be easier to make than submarine.

I really suggest a rebalance for the ships again.

hello dre. you describe exactly the effect this submarine had in the war. in other words, everything is correct.

the carrier ships that we currently have in the game are in most cases quicker to build than battleships. we have based the logic on the weight of the ships. so that only the old battleships are built as quickly as carriers - all others take longer.

in addition, carrier ships are not supposed to be so cheap because they can produce units and aircraft are supposed to serve as bases.

[DreJaDe]

@Jasondunkel you said that the reason why the new sub of German cost only 2 because they are made to be built faster. But in terms of balance, they should be 3-4 turns. Since the new update, taking them on is harder now because of their speed and sight. They have literally have the same sight as most destroyers

Also, in same logic. Why doesn't this logic apply to carriers? Carriers are literally faster to make than Battleships.

And even the transport should be easier to make than submarine.

I really suggest a rebalance for the ships again.

hello dre. you describe exactly the effect this submarine had in the war. in other words, everything is correct.

the carrier ships that we currently have in the game are in most cases quicker to build than battleships. we have based the logic on the weight of the ships. so that only the old battleships are built as quickly as carriers - all others take longer.

in addition, carrier ships are not supposed to be so cheap because they can produce units and aircraft are supposed to serve as bases.

One of the problem is it's balance.

It's not balanced at all.

[DreJaDe]

I really see this subs as a big issue.
(Btw, im currently using it so I know)

It's just way too powerful for a ship, it's even more powerful than Gato which is currently already a 3 turn sub.

So here's a fix that I think could satisfy the logic of. @Jasondunkel, the reality and the game balance.

Make the Type 21 sub of the German, only available at the docks.

Of course, im still not giving up that cheaper US destroyer because that has the same real life logic as Jason's type 21 but somehow, it cant be done because somehow, the logic of game balance applies to US destroyer but not the type 21 which didn't even see combat.

[Jasondunkel]

okay then the u-boot XXI should only be built in the docks

[Stratego (dev)]

ok! ready!

[Stratego (dev)]

please others confirm that type21 is still op (after being only trainable in shipyards)
if so also a suggestion to change (Drejade suggested cost 3 as other subs)

@TntAttack
Banzai

[TntAttack]

please others confirm that type21 is still op (after being only trainable in shipyards)
if so also a suggestion to change (Drejade suggested cost 3 as other subs)

@TntAttack
Banzai

Once you or someone proposes a better naval rebalance, then it's probably time to make changes. Why change now if you are going to have to fix it properly later?

(Your call though)

I don't have much suggestions regarding this. It's still unbalanced either way, we are just treating the symptoms. For example, why is that uboats have a base attack e.g. 8 damage with like a +50 bonus or something on ships, when you have a torpedo ability that has absolutely no cooldown!


Edit: Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't anti sub warfare primarily carried out by destroyers and aircraft? So one idea for a naval reform is that subs have a time limit on how long they can stay Submerged. Also, Submerged subs can't attack each other. (As ww2 era subs were not designed or capable of shooting each other underwater with only one unique exception)

[Stratego (dev)]

Once you or someone proposes a better naval rebalance, then it's probably time to make changes. Why change now if you are going to have to fix it properly later?

balance broblems are not fixed "later" but immediately.
if they are balance problems.

[Stratego (dev)]

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't anti sub warfare primarily carried out by destroyers and aircraft? So one idea for a naval reform is that subs have a time limit on how long they can stay Submerged. Also, Submerged subs can't attack each other. (As ww2 era subs were not designed or capable of shooting each other underwater with only one unique exception)

time limit: we can do that! there can be a suspended effect auto surface the sub after a few turns - unless you do it manually.
torpedoes sooting on ships only: i dont know that @Jasondunkel do u agree? If it is true we can set that torpedoes can not target submarines.

wait: what was the exception?

[TntAttack]

On February 9, the hydrophone operator on the Venturer overheard a contact that he at first believed was coming from the diesel motor of a fishing boat. Launders moved his submarine closer to the sound pickup, and spotted on the periscope what appeared to be another periscope in the distance. This was actually most likely U-864’s snorkel. Running submerged on batteries, Launders slipped the Venturer behind the German submarine and began tailing it.

He was waiting for U-864 to surface before launching his torpedoes, but thanks to its snorkel, U-864 could operate underwater for extended periods of time. The German submarine began zigzagging side to side, likely having detected the British sub.

After three hours of pursuit, the Venturer was running short on battery and would soon have to surface itself. Launders decided he would simply have to attack U-864 while it remained submerged. He calculated a three-dimensional intercept for his torpedoes, estimating his adversary’s depth by the height of the snorkel mast protruding above the water. However, he knew the enemy submarine would quickly detect a torpedo launch, and planned his firing solution to account for evasive maneuvers.

At 12:12, Venturer ripple-fired all four of its loaded torpedoes in a spread, with 17.5 seconds between each launch. Then the British submarine dove to avoid counterattack.

The U-Boat immediately crash dove as well, then swerved evasively. After four minutes, it had managed to duck under three of the incoming torpedoes. But Launders had launched the second pair of torpedoes at lower depths. The fourth torpedo struck U-864, breaking it in two; the gruesome sound of popping rivets and cracking metal filled the Venturer’s hydrophones. The U-Boat fell 150 meters to the bottom of the ocean, taking with it all seventy-three onboard and sinking Operation Caesar along with it.

Source: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-b ... once-24566



Classification: I meant we should remove underwater sub firing at underwater sub.

Underwater sub firing on non submerged sub is fine.

[Stratego (dev)]

ok so suggestion to balance type 21 (and all other subs?) are
1. making them be able to submerge for only 3 turns?
2. theirt torpedoes can not shoot submergedsubs

is that all?
with this the 2 cost type21 cost can remain?

[DreJaDe]

For example, why is that uboats have a base attack e.g. 8 damage with like a +50 bonus or something on ships, when you have a torpedo ability that has absolutely no cooldown!

That is true but they are there IRL also. That was part of their defence when surfacing and subs like surcouf were also used to go to secret places and hit.

1. making them be able to submerge for only 3 turns?

While I do agree with this, the submerge part is not fully defined. Cause it has two meaning in game.

1. Not full surfaced subs which is the state used by Subs to hide against surface ships though if found can be hit by guns, surface torpedo and even. Gun fire

This is also the state where they can only attack surface ships.

This doesn't necessarily have a time limit.

2. Fully submerged subs. used to escape destroyers to hide. On this state, it's not possible for subs to use their torpedo against surface ships cause they have to level their torpedo horizontally to their enemy.

This have a short time limit.

...

Let us not forget that we are currently using at the same time on one "submerge" state completely different from the full surfaced version.

I actually planned to suggest this later cause I didn't thought it was possible but here it is now.

1. There will be 3 state for subs, surfaced, half surfaced or half submerged and fully submerged.

A. Surfaced
- not invisisble
- can use main gun
-.Can only use torpedo against surface ships (not submerged versions)
- can be gunned by surface ships.
- has current surface version speed.

B. Snorkel
- is invisible
- has longer time limit
- Can't use main gun
- can only use torpedo against surface ships and other half submerged subs.
- can be gunned by surface ships
- has current submerged speed
- will have the 10/10 armor (or increase it by 10 more)

C. Fully submerged
- is invisible
- has time limit
- Can't use main gun
- can't use torpedo
- can't be hit by surface gun
- cant be hit by surface torpedo of any ships
- can only be hit using the depth charge and mines
- will NOT have the 10/10 armor

For image B, I think it's enough to have the surface version but is looking like invisible. Or we can just use the current submerge version and make and even more submerged version. I think I can do this if I have the assets.

Although a submarine like type 21 is said to be able to stay underwater for three days. It is highly questionable because of the fact that it is a rushed project, based from Americans who used it, it has so many flaws in it sit design that so many of it's function didn't go as intended.

While Gato which can stay underwater to for 48 hours will basically suffocate their members.

There's also the fact that they have to be so slow when. In this fully submerged state and I don't want that so I suggest that we have to make concessions and let most of them have

Normal subs can have 2 time limit, gato can have 3 while type 21 will have 4 and will be able to maintain current submerge speed. After the countdown, they will transform to either surfaced or snorkel version.

While in snorkel version, they will all have +2 turn vs submerged version.

Destroyer change
With this also, I would suggest for the destroyer depth charges to have cooldowns of let's say, 2-3.

[TntAttack]

The 3 states are good, a bit tedious to micromanagement esp if you are going to have large armies.

Imagine trying to adjust for every sub in 3 different states.

(In a humourful tone)

Not to mention the poor dev has to work his ass off and rebalance everything!

e.g. bomber damage vs half submerged sub and fully submerged sub.

Tl;Dr Unnecessarily complication of the game. Besides, it would probably screw the AI.

[DreJaDe]

The 3 states are good, a bit tedious to micromanagement esp if you are going to have large armies.

Imagine trying to adjust for every sub in 3 different states.

(In a humourful tone)

Not to mention the poor dev has to work his ass off and rebalance everything!

e.g. bomber damage vs half submerged sub and fully submerged sub.

Tl;Dr Unnecessarily complication of the game. Besides, it would probably screw the AI.

If there's only two states then we can't really make logic of what you want that surface subs can't attack submerged subs... Since that also means that submerged subs shouldn't be able to hit surface ships... Most subs after all need to a horizontal angle to fire their torpedo. They don't perform vertical launches.

That mean, they can only be surfaced when attacking where they aren't invisible.

The submerged state would just be an unhittable useless form.

Though that kinda solves our problem with OP subs. If we follow this, we can just make the submerged skill, a skill that doesn't consume action to let subs escape.

This kinda makes more sense for the game NGL. I kinda like it.

[TntAttack]

If there's only two states then we can't really make logic of what you want that surface subs can't attack submerged subs... Since that also means that submerged subs shouldn't be able to hit surface ships... Most subs after all need to a horizontal angle to fire their torpedo. They don't perform vertical launches.

That mean, they can only be surfaced when attacking where they aren't invisible.

The submerged state would just be an unhittable useless form.

Though that kinda solves our problem with OP subs. If we follow this, we can just make the submerged skill, a skill that doesn't consume action to let subs escape.

This kinda makes more sense for the game NGL. I kinda like it.

Actually, we can simplify sub warfare to make it implied that submerged subs surface temporarily to attack before diving again with being caught.

(To dev)
Which idea do you prefer?
1. 2 states, sub surfaces after 3 turns.
2. 2 states, sub has ability to submerge without consuming action points.

[DreJaDe]

That's basically what I said...
Lol

[Stratego (dev)]

The 3 states are good, a bit tedious to micromanagement esp if you are going to have large armies.

this is definitely not a good way, i dont want more micromanagement in game.
and the snorkel and submerged if very tiny difference imho.
(also all submerged images are with snorkel currently)

2. 2 states, sub has ability to submerge without consuming action points.

this is easier to make, but this case we dont need to make the submerge-timeout? (when only for 3 turns can remain submerged)
(i dont really see the ideas like ones solving same problem - wait what was the problem here about limited submerge time? )

[TntAttack]

I meant the three states were not good, my bad!

Okay to summarize:

Sub patch:
-Subs can submerge and surface without action points (technically 1 turn cooldown so players don't spam submerge and surface)
-Subs submerged can only last 3 turns (4 for advanced ones)
Note: Implementation either via ability cooldown or forceful activation of surface state.
-Underwater sub vs underwater sub is no go
-Subs have to rest on surface for 1 turn. (Debatable)


Edit to reply to Drejade below post without adding less important posts.

Well their nerf is that they have to surface every 3 turns and that makes them vulnerable to all navy ships. As for them speeding towards a enemy ship surfaced, firing a torpedo before diving its quite balance in my opinion.

The sub was vulnerable before it attacked (it was on the surface) and after it attacked its location is known. Anyone with nearby destroyers can target them easily.

[DreJaDe]

Okay to summarize

This actually kinda just make them stay as OP since you just reduced their counter...

Though from my suggestion which is kinda like that. Mine is that they need to surface to attack.. And not having action points for surfacing let's them escape at least when using torpedo.

[Stratego (dev)]

This actually kinda just make them stay as OP since you just reduced their counter...

but dont forget the enemy subs are also got proptected from subs (as they can not be targeted submerged) this way, so spamming only type 21 no longer will work (or at least work less) imho

[DreJaDe]

but dont forget the enemy subs are also got proptected from subs (as they can not be targeted submerged) this way, so spamming only type 21 no longer will work (or at least work less) imho

This is basically what I mean...

If subs can't be countered by subs now, that means they can be spammed even greater.

Imagine so many 2 turn type 21. You can see them with subs but can't attack them... Now you need destroyers to attack them.... Wait a sec, that's kinda a weak point isn't it? They can see each other but can't attack each other.

But the basic question.
How does this prevent the spammability of subs?

In my suggestion, subs will have to think before attacking and will only attack vulnerable enemy like on real life since they can be seen when attacking.

[Stratego (dev)]

ok,
but they can only be submerged for 3 turns
...
wait i am kind of lost on where we are.

this was last:

Sub patch:
-Subs can submerge and surface without action points (technically 1 turn cooldown so players don't spam submerge and surface)
-Subs submerged can only last 3 turns (4 for advanced ones)
Note: Implementation either via ability cooldown or forceful activation of surface state.
-Underwater sub vs underwater sub is no go
-Subs have to rest on surface for 1 turn. (Debatable)

and you say the read is not a good change?

[TntAttack]

but dont forget the enemy subs are also got proptected from subs (as they can not be targeted submerged) this way, so spamming only type 21 no longer will work (or at least work less) imho

But the basic question.
How does this prevent the spammability of subs?

In my suggestion, subs will have to think before attacking and will only attack vulnerable enemy like on real life since they can be seen when attacking.

It's quite simple. All naval ships e.g. destroyers (one shot surface subs), cruisers and battleships should be able to hit surface subs with main attack.

By forcing subs to surface, they will be exposed to long range fire, not mention aircraft as well.

Just know that although underwater sub vs sub action is no more, the first sub that has to rise is vulnerable to fire from the submerged one.

And if you are really against this idea, how about scrapping sub submerge/surface ability to consume no action points and go back to where it was before e.g. it consumes one action point.

So surfacing subs have to choose to fire and risk dying next turn, or submerging and not being about to shoot that turn.

[DreJaDe]

The sub was vulnerable before it attacked (it was on the surface) and after it attacked its location is known. Anyone with nearby destroyers can target them easily.

This is basically how they work when attacking a convoy in real life... When they are seen when attacking, they can be gunned and stuff and will be chased by subs if submerged.

and you say the read is not a good change?

Tbh, even I am now confused but I don't necessarily disagree with it. My problem is the limited suggestion...

In my suggestion which is almost the same as his, I added that.
1. You can't use torpedo using subs when submerged. (Not only limiting to subs vs subs but including all surface ships.)
2. They can only use torpedo when surfaced.

This actually not solve that they can see each other but not hit each other but since they have time limit... I think that kinda solves the issue.

So basically, their submerge version is only used as a way to run from the enemy. Or to reposition.

Kinda got confused along the way sry.

[Stratego (dev)]

So surfacing subs have to choose to fire and risk dying next turn, or submerging and not being about to shoot that turn.

sounds good to me

[TntAttack]

[

This is basically how they work when attacking a convoy in real life... When they are seen when attacking, they can be gunned and stuff and will be chased by subs if submerged.

In my suggestion which is almost the same as his, I added that.
1. You can't use torpedo using subs when submerged. (Not only limiting to subs vs subs but including all surface ships.)
2. They can only use torpedo when surfaced.

This actually not solve that they can see each other but not hit each other but since they have time limit... I think that kinda solves the issue.

So basically, their submerge version is only used as a way to run from the enemy. Or to reposition.

1. I mentioned that this idea was too complicated and that we should just simplify it so that it's implied that the sub surfaces to fire its torpedo and dive when it's targeting units underwater.
2. See above.

There is not much synergy with other unit mechanics for the sub to run away safely. It doesn't contribute much and makes sub warfare more complicated e.g. Move, fires on battleship, before diving.

You want to run around with this 2 turn unit and look for a opportunity to strike? Aircraft, destroyers and terrain will hinder you.

[DreJaDe]

that it's implied that the sub surfaces to fire its torpedo and dive when it's targeting units underwater.

This is the my idea though...

Sub submerges. Run towards ships. Surfaces and torpedo fire then leaves or the target is already destroyed so no need.

The example you gave are just one part of it.

This is actually more realistic since they are left open when attacking IRL. They will need a long time to submerge which can be represented by only being able to submerge next turn.

[TntAttack]

I think we have very similar ideas that have just the tiniest discrepancies between the two.

I humbly ask you to go over and recite clearly what exactly do you mean that is different from my idea.

This is my idea:

Sub submerges.
- Has 3 turns limit.
- Can fire on surface ships with torpedo
E.g. moves 3 tiles, torpedos and stops.

Sub on the surface.
- Has 1 turn cooldown before able to dive underwater again.
- Can fire on surface ships with main gun and move
E.g. moves 4 tiles, shoots ship. Can not submerge as firing action has been performed.

Additionally:
If its ability to submerge is not ready, here lies the sub's vulnerable phrase, to balance Sub spamming.