|
|
Post by dizzy on Nov 4, 2019 16:24:02 GMT -6
Currently we may build 3 types of submarine: -Coastal -Medium Range -Minelayer I propose we have a fourth type unlocked through tech research. -Carrier This type, if present in a battle, would the ability to scout and an increased chance of fleet support hits. The Japanese I-400 Submarine Aircraft Carrier wiki page.   Thanks! Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Nov 4, 2019 17:17:20 GMT -6
Currently we may build 3 types of submarine: -Coastal -Medium Range -Minelayer I propose we have a fourth type unlocked through tech research. -Carrier This type, if present in a battle, would the ability to scout and an increased chance of fleet support hits. The Japanese I-400 Submarine Aircraft Carrier wiki page. Thanks! I support the idea, but remember that they were 400 feet long and 39.4 feet in width and only did 21.5 MPH on the surface. With search radar on surface ships and scouts, this submarine is very vulnerable during the daylight hours. She has to stop to launch and recover the aircraft. They were not maneuverable due to their size and small rudders. Dive time was 56 seconds, which is slow especially when you have been spotted. My guess is that they had a very large radar signature. Those ships would be good in the Indian Ocean or the Pacific, but not in the Med or the North Sea. Their operations in the Atlantic would be very iffy. |
|
|
|
Post by wlbjork on Nov 4, 2019 22:24:16 GMT -6
I think its a interesting idea, but I'm not convinced it will be simple to implement - due to how subs are currently abstracted.
They could have a big bonus to attacking merchantmen due to the aircraft, but then would need a penalty against warships. The aircraft wouldn't come out of the pool, nor would they be affected by AA defences without some reworking of the code.
|
|
|
|
Post by captainloggy on Nov 7, 2019 6:11:31 GMT -6
I think its a interesting idea, but I'm not convinced it will be simple to implement - due to how subs are currently abstracted. They could have a big bonus to attacking merchantmen due to the aircraft, but then would need a penalty against warships. The aircraft wouldn't come out of the pool, nor would they be affected by AA defences without some reworking of the code. More or less how I'd imagine them, obviously they would also cost more. High cost, high reward, high risk... and a little ASW
|
|
|
|
Post by brygun on Nov 8, 2019 10:12:40 GMT -6
+1 They existed.
As for implementation I agree with keeping them in the submarine abstract system.
The floatplane increasing the chances of getting encounters
Overall I think the carrier submarine may be a little more vulnerable. The slower dive time and large size issues partially offset by that scout plane reporting of warships nearby. However the sub is meant to attack escorted convoys.
Possibly floatplane carriers could marginally improve the encounter changes of all subs. There scouting role was in some doctrines to advise other subs where targets were.
As for the on battle map encounters it might just be abstracted as a medium sub modified as slightly lower ASW but a much greater spotting range.
|
|
|
|
Post by wlbjork on Nov 8, 2019 12:14:06 GMT -6
One conversion (British M...2?) and 3 purpose built (the afore mentioned Japanese models). Just as many as "big gun" submarines (the 3 M-class plus the French "Surcouf") - though these can be abstracted as standard submarines.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobbykew on Nov 9, 2019 6:03:05 GMT -6
I think its a interesting idea, but I'm not convinced it will be simple to implement - due to how subs are currently abstracted. They could have a big bonus to attacking merchantmen due to the aircraft, but then would need a penalty against warships. The aircraft wouldn't come out of the pool, nor would they be affected by AA defences without some reworking of the code. I think a carrier submarine can be abstracted by making it a form of airfield in the tactical map. Some tweaking may be needed though, so as to make it able to move. I'm not sure if you can destroy an airfield with carrier or Land-Based Air strikes as well, also. I've never really tried it. |
|
|
|
Post by brygun on Nov 9, 2019 8:45:06 GMT -6
I think its a interesting idea, but I'm not convinced it will be simple to implement - due to how subs are currently abstracted. They could have a big bonus to attacking merchantmen due to the aircraft, but then would need a penalty against warships. The aircraft wouldn't come out of the pool, nor would they be affected by AA defences without some reworking of the code. I think a carrier submarine can be abstracted by making it a form of airfield in the tactical map. Some tweaking may be needed though, so as to make it able to move. I'm not sure if you can destroy an airfield with carrier or Land-Based Air strikes as well, also. I've never really tried it. I have mixed view on making it a carrier field but... some pro and some con = Submarine carriers had few planes perhaps even just one so it feels a bit of excess to to go full 20,40,60+ airfield code = We do have code for 1,2,3+ floatplanes that we use say on CL, CA, BC so we could do it that way = Submarine on tactical map may or may not be in a situation where it could surface = floatplanes rarely are useable again on the same day they fly so worrying about the submarine on the surface for recovery isn't that critical = If using shipborne airplane code the player needs to know where the submarine is to determine range and arcs of search, currently air groups has no "find this platform" function (possible UI addition) = a more abstract solution (from myself) is just to give the carrier sub a larger spotting range but this has its own limitations such as day/night/weather issues on using the plane = Carrier subs existed, so Im for them, but they were rare so limited coding time for them is recommended Perhaps having though of it using the "as a ship" function the carrier sub on the tactical map is most realistic with light coding changes where as the "increase sight range" is much easier to code but less realistic |
|
|
|
Post by dizzy on Nov 9, 2019 12:32:40 GMT -6
= We do have code for 1,2,3+ floatplanes that we use say on CL, CA, BC so we could do it that way = floatplanes rarely are useable again on the same day they fly so worrying about the submarine on the surface for recovery isn't that critical There are only two things this sub needs to do in a battle. It needs to act like the other land based airbases that launch floatplanes/flying boats, but at sea, and it needs to have more of a percentage chance to hit enemy ships (scout planes enable it to more effectively position to intercept). That's it. So the player, if they have them, will get an automated sighting report by the sub's planes. And maybe see a higher percentage of fleet hits in the AAR. Simple. Easy. |
|
