Total World War: December 1941 3.0.0.6

[ubernaut]

@redrum must have missed that bit thanks again.

[wirkey]

@ubernaut you can only build there if it was taken by Allies and recaptured by Japan.

[redrum]

@wirkey Do you know why it isn't initially owned by French Indochina?

[wirkey]

@redrum yeah, but can't tell you. Would have to kill you if I told you and I really want to avoid that

[redrum]

@wirkey LOL. Geez first you steal my game with @Gully and now you won't even share the deep dark secrets of TWW's past

[redrum]

So thinking through the best way to adjust destroyers to make countering subs more interesting and balanced, here is my proposal at this point:

Option #1 (weaker strength but can hunt and defend against subs)
Destroyer: 2A/2D with 2 DepthCharge on A/D/Flyover
Improved Destroyer Tech: Increases DepthCharge from 2 to 4
Heavy Destroyer: 3A/3D with 6 DepthCharge on A/D/Flyover

Option #2 (same strength just hunt subs more effectively)
Destroyer: 3A/3D with 2 DepthCharge on A
Improved Destroyer Tech: Increases DepthCharge from 2 to 4
Heavy Destroyer: 5A/5D with 6 DepthCharge on A

Option #3 (weaken subs and just increase destroyer hunting a bit)
Sub: 3A/1D
Improved Sub: Increases attack from 3 to 4
Improved Destroyer Tech: Increases DepthCharge from 1 to 3
Heavy Destroyer: 5A/5D with 4 DepthCharge on A

Thoughts?

[ubernaut]

@redrum seems pretty good to me, Destroyer DC is def too weak as is.

[ubernaut]

engine sometimes fails to remove lend-lease unit:

autosaveBeforeEndTurn.tsvg

[redrum]

@ubernaut Can you clarify? I'm guessing you mean that a UK truck should have been removed from Soviet Far East?

[ubernaut]

@redrum yeah sorry

[redrum]

@ubernaut Ok. Is that the only one you've noticed? If so its probably just a missing or incorrect trigger for that specific territory & unit.

[ubernaut]

@redrum so far yeah, but ill be paying more attention in the future.

[Hepps]

Some good discussion going on here in regards to the new and exciting naval rules...

I like some of what I see but I fear that changing things to completely nullify the Subs advantage is a step in the direction of making them utterly useless once more.

The entire idea around these changes has been to create a more dramatic and dynamic.

If Destroyers are given the ability to "hunt" Subs while on defense... as well as the "flyover" ability... it is returning Subs to a non-existent role.

Currently when I am seeing Sub spams... they are definitely a threat... and are nearly impossible to destroy outright... but they are generally not a threat to large naval groups as they are increasingly vulnerable to air cover. More over... as per the design... building fleets with large numbers of Subs is also highly detrimental to the fleet as the fleet becomes very vulnerable to attack unless the Subs are offered up purely as fodder (thus eliminating them as a threat since they have to be kept surfaced and used as casualties to salvage the fleet... or they submerge and the fleet gets decimated).

All that being said I do agree the perfect balance has yet to be achieved.

So here is where my designs were/are going...

Destroyer Att 3 / Def 3 / move 2 / Att Depth Charge vs Sub 2
Improved Destroyers (tech) +1 to Depth Charge Att.
Advanced Destroyers (tech) Att 5 / Def 5 / Mvt 2 / Att Depth Charge vs Subs 4

All Depth Charge value changes will be the same for Strat. Bombers.

Submarine Att 3 / Def 1 / Mvt 2 / Surprise First strike / Negative support with surface fleet (-2 Def) 1:1 basis
Improved Subs (tech) +1 support to allied Sub on Att & Def 1:1 basis
Advanced Sub (tech) Att 5 / Def 3 / Mvt 2 / Surprise First Strike / Negative support with surface fleet (-2 Def) 1:1 basis

[beelee]

@Hepps

even though I do things a little different, I've come to pretty much the same conclusions. Having Air being able to hit them seems to really help balance things out.

They seem most effective raiding convoy zones and whacking solo DDs that were unsuccessful in their sub attacks.

They also make guarding trprts a higher priority since they can't be blocked.

Anyway is cool to see your new subs getting some action : )

[redrum]

@Hepps Looks pretty good and close to my option #3 above. Here are my only questions on it:

1. Improved Destroyers feels a bit weak. Probably only worth going for if your enemies are massing subs. My thought was make destroyers only start with 1 DC and it would increase from 1 to 3 to make it a more important tech.
2. Improved Subs is an interesting idea though doesn't appear to be possible in the current engine as units will support themselves. So I guess the closest alternative would be to give subs +1A/+1D.
3. Advanced Subs, Given #2, the closest alternative here would be to make them 6A/4D.

[redrum]

@ubernaut The fix for UK L&L Truck in Soviet Far East will be in v3.0.0.3.

[Hepps]

@redrum Ok thanks for testing that. Perhaps we should add some notes to POS2 letting people know that a lone unit will support itself.

In light of this here is an alternative to the proposed changes...

Destroyer Att 3 / Def 3 / move 2 / Att Depth Charge vs Sub 1
Improved Destroyers (tech) +2 to Depth Charge Att (3 total)
Advanced Destroyers (tech) Att 5 / Def 5 / Mvt 2 / Att Depth Charge vs Subs 4

All Depth Charge value changes will be the same for Strat. Bombers.

Submarine Att 3 / Def 1 / Mvt 2 / Surprise First strike / Negative support with surface fleet (-2 Def) 1:1 basis
Improved Subs (tech) +1 to Att. & Def (4/2/2)
Advanced Sub (tech) Att 5 / Def 3 / Mvt 2 / Surprise First Strike / Negative support with surface fleet (-2 Def) 1:1 basis

[ubernaut]

i dont understand how the negative support with surface fleet attribute works. does that apply to any other ship? so a sub plus destroyer would now have a cumulative defense of 1 or sub plus transport would now be negative or just 0 i suppose?

doesn't really seem like a sub should make other ships weaker on defense, at least to me. i understand the fodder issue but frankly, the way things are now if you really want fodder you can still do it with transports cant you? and DD's at 1 pu more seems like there would be no reason to include subs in any fleet which doesn't seem very realistic either.

[Hepps]

@ubernaut No... if you pair Subs with any other surface vessel... the Subs receives -2 to its defense.

So if 1 Sub and 1 Destroyer (of the same nation or alliance) share a sea zone... and that sea zone is attacked... the Destroyer would still defend at 3... however the Sub would have a defense of 0 (technically 1 Def- 2 fleet penalty = -1). So essentially Subs are rendered useless defensively until you get Advanced Subs.

This has been done to reduce the ability of a player to create a fleet with massed Subs to use as defensive cover as had been seen in earlier versions of TWW. Since Subs are now elusive "creatures" who's strength is meant to lie in their ability to travel undetected and attack at will... I really wanted to make them useful as an offensive and harrassment unit and near worthless as a defender. This was also done because of the changes where they can submerge at will and can no longer be blocked... I was trying to make a unit with advantages and drawbacks.

[ubernaut]

@Hepps what about adding a weak DC to BB and CR?