Submarine change

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Submarine change

      __Submarine changes__
      Again I might have suggested something like this before. If I did, consider this a revision
      -Damage of Destroyers to subs increased considerably
      -Sonar cannot simply “detect” submarines anymore. This is because of surface duct propagation, which makes it difficult to detect vessels that are not on your own depth. Even anti-submarine ships like destroyers can be snuck up on by subs if their active sonar fails to identify

      The following applies to Attack Subs, Ballistic Missile Subs, and Sub Officer:

      When in Surface mode, your submarine is detectable by any surface ship using active sonar. This is essentially the normal state of a submarine in the game. In theory, your submarine is just below the surface using their periscope. All submarines have “Naval Scout” attribute in this mode. Naval Scout identifies non-stealth surface ships and air units in sight range, and gives their exact stack composition.

      When in Submerged mode, your submarine is only detectable by other submerged submarines, or ASW aircraft. Naval Scout attribute is nullified, active sonar is disabled and the sub moves slowly (as slow as 2 speed for Attack sub and 0.5 speed for Ballistic sub). Your sub will gain the “Reveal stealth” attribute, allowing you to see exactly all subs in sight range. Additionally, transport ships are vulnerable to cavitation and can also be seen by submerged subs. Destroyers will reveal an attacking sub’s location even if they are submerged

      What will disable stealth:
      -Attacking a destroyer
      -Being attacked by any enemy unit
      -Being revealed by an enemy sub or ASW patrol
      -Launching a cruise missile

      Note: Launching a ballistic missile from BM sub or Officer will not disable stealth

      AIP sub: Permanently surfaced with the benefits of being submerged.

      Finally, Fire Control options
      Vanilla:
      Standard > Sub engages spotted enemies in range
      Passive > Sub does not engage enemy units unless ordered or forced into melee combat (Standard for BM subs)

      Security Council:
      Hunt > Will only attack transports that pass by
      Patrol > Maintain position at Surface. If enemy ship is detected within sonar range, will submerge and move to intercept. Option is turned off after an attempted interception


      The following applies to NPA and ASW Heli:

      They are mostly unchanged except for Active Sonar. Their sonar will be unable to detect submerged submarines. However, they will see any sub within sight range no matter what, thanks to Magnetic Anomalies from the subs

      __Final notes__
      Take it with a grain of salt. It’s a legacy code nightmare for sure and has a number of issues I probably haven’t thought of yet. My biggest issue with naval right now is that for such an important aspect of the game it is very basic, especially if you and your opponent use hit-and-run. My idea is to make subs more of a threat that has to be considered to spice things up. If you don’t like my idea, how would you make naval warfare, and specifically submarine warfare, more interesting?
      Yee Haw
    • I'm pretty sure any changes based on your understanding of ocean acoustics and of modern active/passive sonars' abilities are built on a foundation of sand.

      But who cares. Con is a game, not a simulation.

      I recommend using your best it-will-open-the-door-to-more-interesting-gameplay justifications for this change instead of using ocean/sonar physics.
    • KFGauss wrote:

      I'm pretty sure any changes based on your understanding of ocean acoustics and of modern active/passive sonars' abilities are built on a foundation of sand.

      But who cares. Con is a game, not a simulation.

      I recommend using your best it-will-open-the-door-to-more-interesting-gameplay justifications for this change instead of using ocean/sonar physics.
      I mean I’m no sonar expert so don’t expect anything to be 100% realistic. The changes are based on what I know about sonar and adapted for the game. Is there a gameplay change you think would be beneficial based on real-life submarine warfare?
      Yee Haw
    • tbh not really a fan of spicing things up simply by introducing more pointlessly overcomplicated mechanics

      something i‘d change for navy is definitly adjust the weird +/-25% thing sub has going on; if youre always gonna be in a state where you receive either the buff or the debuff, then at least to me it’d make sense to set on of these buffed/debuffed values as default and adjust the other one to compensate

      how to spice things up? you could definitely make out ships even more into their role; make them even more specialized;
      - buff destroyers anti sub dmg to obscene degrees eg 30 dmg to subs but only 5 to ships ( cuz currently it could get outtradet by a sub), increase its deep water speed from 4.50 to 6 or something insanely high, negates the first strike bonus of subs
      - subs (or all stealth units) gain some sort of surprise attack bonus (guaranteed landing the first hit and/or dealing more dmg on first hit), lower their dmg vs other subs (asw is destroyers job)
      - up asw helis dmg vs ships and npas vs subs (maybe even make npa anti sub and asw heli anti ship? would make a bit more sense in terms of their range
      - cuz helis are now a bigger threat to ships buff cruiser anti heli

      tho i have to say that currently navy is in a pretty good state and at least in theory there are a lot of different things you could to; the only real downside could be that since its ranged combat it ultimately comes down to who has more range
      I feel like calling naval warfare „too basic“ (hit and run for example is anything but basic, since it excells against moving opponents there is quite some stuff that goes into making it work against an opponent) is a bit extreme with the variety that is offered; probably by far the most complex (at least in theory) of the branches when it comes to what units you make
      I’d rather argue that with its high cost you more often then not simply cant explore this depth because of a lack of resources
      I am the basline for opinions
    • A submerge feature is interesting and is the "sub" in submarine... but I don't think that's the big miss with subs in the game.

      Torpedo warfare.

      Submarines use torpedos...
      Cruise missiles from attack subs should be torpedos.

      The ship killers.

      No defense from it... it's underwater.... but maybe a ship could evade it.

      Cruise missiles follow their target... the torpedos in the game might be a straight shot version.
      Launching a torpedo from further away could give the ship more time to react/evade.
      If fired down a travel line it would have a good chance of landing.... perpendicular to a travel line and there is a high chance the ship can evade.
      Something like that...
      An attack sub should be able to sink a lvl 1 cruiser with a torpedo in a single hit...

      So,
      I'd lower the stats of attack subs to look more like ballistic subs...
      Give 2 torpedo capacity.

      Separate torpedo research tree? I don't know.

      ... but with torpedos in game ... depth charges would need to be added as well.
    • Colonel Waffles wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      I'm pretty sure any changes based on your understanding of ocean acoustics and of modern active/passive sonars' abilities are built on a foundation of sand.

      But who cares. Con is a game, not a simulation.

      I recommend using your best it-will-open-the-door-to-more-interesting-gameplay justifications for this change instead of using ocean/sonar physics.
      I mean I’m no sonar expert so don’t expect anything to be 100% realistic. The changes are based on what I know about sonar and adapted for the game. Is there a gameplay change you think would be beneficial based on real-life submarine warfare?
      I haven't even thought about how I might suggest changing this part of CoN.

      And - I'm trying to politely say that based on what you wrote, you don't yet know well enough how surface warship and submarine sonars can be used and are used.

      You are on the right track, because surface ducting and similar phenomena are real, but there is much, much more going on.
    • Smallsword wrote:

      ...


      Torpedo warfare.

      Submarines use torpedos...
      [EDIT] KFG Says: Submarines use Torpedoes and cruise missiles for anti-ship purposes, and can/do use cruise missiles for land-attacks. [\EDIT]

      No defense from it... it's underwater.... but maybe a ship could evade it.
      [EDIT] KFG Says: The "No defense from it" part of this is wrong. [\EDIT]

      ...


      ... depth charges would need to be added as well.

      [EDIT] KFG Says: Depth charges are on their way out of modern Navies. [\EDIT]
      See inline edits above.

      Like I wrote in my earlier post, I think you'll have a much better chance of promoting a change if you can describe how it will improve game play (create more options for creative strategies and tactics, without corrupting existing unit interactions, and without adding more complexity than they are worth) (in other words will the change get more people to play, and perhaps pay a little).
    • Smallsword wrote:

      A submerge feature is interesting and is the "sub" in submarine... but I don't think that's the big miss with subs in the game.

      Torpedo warfare.

      Submarines use torpedos...
      Cruise missiles from attack subs should be torpedos.

      The ship killers.

      No defense from it... it's underwater.... but maybe a ship could evade it.

      Cruise missiles follow their target... the torpedos in the game might be a straight shot version.
      Launching a torpedo from further away could give the ship more time to react/evade.
      If fired down a travel line it would have a good chance of landing.... perpendicular to a travel line and there is a high chance the ship can evade.
      Something like that...
      An attack sub should be able to sink a lvl 1 cruiser with a torpedo in a single hit...

      So,
      I'd lower the stats of attack subs to look more like ballistic subs...
      Give 2 torpedo capacity.

      Separate torpedo research tree? I don't know.

      ... but with torpedos in game ... depth charges would need to be added as well.
      I think that is supposed to be What they Are already doing, a part of their normal fighting
    • KFGauss wrote:

      Smallsword wrote:

      ...


      Torpedo warfare.

      Submarines use torpedos...
      [EDIT] KFG Says: Submarines use Torpedoes and cruise missiles for anti-ship purposes, and can/do use cruise missiles for land-attacks. [\EDIT]

      No defense from it... it's underwater.... but maybe a ship could evade it.
      [EDIT] KFG Says: The "No defense from it" part of this is wrong. [\EDIT]

      ...


      ... depth charges would need to be added as well.

      [EDIT] KFG Says: Depth charges are on their way out of modern Navies. [\EDIT]
      See inline edits above.
      Like I wrote in my earlier post, I think you'll have a much better chance of promoting a change if you can describe how it will improve game play (create more options for creative strategies and tactics, without corrupting existing unit interactions, and without adding more complexity than they are worth) (in other words will the change get more people to play, and perhaps pay a little).
      Torpedos are the bread and butter of submarine warfare... and they're not in the game.

      Depth charges are a surface vessel's means of combating subs... battleships as a whole are on the way out of modern navies (except for frigates)... battleships are on the way out BECAUSE of torpedos... modern surface vessels almost always have submarine escorts because subs are the best defense against subs... and subs are the apex predators... but subs aren't apex in the game currently, cruisers are.

      FIrst line of defense against a torpedo is evasion ... and modern torpedos are going hypersonic (which is crazy...) and leaves little room for defense.
      The idea that modern subs surface to attack like U-boats is ridiculous... but that seems to be the gameplay.


      I think your focus on "how will it improve gameplay" and "get people to pay " is smart.

      If an attack subs value is in delivering torpedos (not it's stats) there are 3 additional research slots that need to be completed before its of use... time and resources that a lot of players would prefer to use gold to expedite. If torpedo subs are the best ship killer people will want to build them and make torpedos.

      Naval engagements would be different... you might think twice about leaving your stack of ships in the middle of a straight path... or even entering that path... leaving them in port... or static at anytime.
      One would really need to consider the threat and how to be prepared for it...
      It makes one proceed with a lot more trepidation for fear of what lurks beneath the waves... which makes the game more thrilling.

      Setting up your subs to launch a torpedo and have it land would be exciting and would take consideration of the ships movements and the travel paths it may take etc...
      Cruise missiles are fire and forget... you know that they'll reach their target and that that target may have some defense stat/anti-air
      To have something that is hit or miss would add another layer to naval battles... it could disrupt "hit and run with the biggest gun"

      The concept of torpedos brings submarines up in value... and would bring naval warfare up as a whole....
      Right now its kind of like "make cruisers"
      Torpedos would literally blow that out of the water.
      It would turn into "make subs so you can have cruisers and aircraft carriers"
      or make subs and torpedos to absolutely devastate your enemy at sea.

      Depth charges would be to balance it out...
      I think every vessel should have sonar.
      If you know there are subs around... or know one is trailing your ships
      leaving some depth charges in their wake would give you the chance of taking out the sub...
      but really, you'd want your own sub...

      Currently subs in the game are like a subculture... they aren't essential naval vessels.
      They should be...
      I think torpedos are the way for that to happen.
    • Smallsword wrote:

      Torpedos are . . . that to happen.
      I just love getting educated about submarine/navy capabilities and tactics by internet folks who aren't actually familiar *enough* with them to be teachers.

      I'm not saying you're clueless, or that you don't know more than the average jane Doe on the street. I am saying that there is still a lot that you are misunderstanding, or not appreciating.

      AND

      CoN is a game, not a simulation.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by KFGauss ().

    • KFGauss wrote:

      Smallsword wrote:

      Torpedos are . . . that to happen.
      I just love getting educated about submarine/navy capabilities and tactics by internet folks who aren't actually familiar *enough* with them to be teachers.
      AND

      CoN is a game, not a simulation.

      Ok.
      Not trying to educate you... assumed you know something.
      It's not that I'm an expert or anything... but it's naval warfare history 101
      Used to be you needed a big gun on a big ship to outrange and outrun the enemy... the bigger the gun the bigger the ship needed to be...
      Torpedo subs changed this arms race because a small ship (sub) could sink a big ship. That's all.

      My suggestion wasn't to make the game a simulation... that's a complete overhaul.



      Subs in the game aren't just underpowered... they're under capable.
      They don't fulfill the balance to cruisers/destroyers they should.
      They don't engage like subs.

      Why? They don't have torpedos.


      I offered an idea.
    • this is a strategy game...so that attack from a submarine is a tropedo but the hit is excute in a strategic way. not in an operative way. The submarine attacks and the missle hits the target. That it doesnt sink the ship with one hit ist reflecting the fight on an operational level the evasion the repositioning of vessels on the battlefield and so on.

      I mean the gaem doesnt reflect that some tanks might miss when they fight or that airplanes dont see the enemie when he is hiding in the forest and they miss their target.

      This is strategic not operativ. A big level scale, a helicopter view one things. Like "Risiko" you send armies and let them fight. This is not about a unit having a better training an moral that will wipe away the others or weather conditions influencing a attack. This is pruely statistics and aritmetics calculating a battle.

      And its fine.
      Alle sagten: Das geht nicht. Dann kam einer, der wusste das nicht und hat es einfach gemacht.
    • kurtvonstein wrote:

      this is a strategy game...so that attack from a submarine is a tropedo but the hit is excute in a strategic way. not in an operative way. The submarine attacks and the missle hits the target. That it doesnt sink the ship with one hit ist reflecting the fight on an operational level the evasion the repositioning of vessels on the battlefield and so on.

      I mean the gaem doesnt reflect that some tanks might miss when they fight or that airplanes dont see the enemie when he is hiding in the forest and they miss their target.

      This is strategic not operativ. A big level scale, a helicopter view one things. Like "Risiko" you send armies and let them fight. This is not about a unit having a better training an moral that will wipe away the others or weather conditions influencing a attack. This is pruely statistics and aritmetics calculating a battle.

      And its fine.
      What's the statistic on a cruise missile landing on a 5 stack of frigates?
      Zero.
      Unless of course you time it just right from just the right distance which I think by your point would be operational... hit and run is operational... artillery fencing is operational...

      My issue is that subs should attack from underwater... a torpedo should be able to sink a cruiser in one hit, or deal 40+ damage to ships... if you have a "guided" torpedo in game it will hit 100% of the time... I was trying to think of a way to mitigate the OP factor in that... hit or miss, 50/50 chance, all or nothing... and of course the player makes a difference by when and where they fire... a cruise missile isn't different in this respect.

      Cruise missiles and anti-air have a balance.
      Torpedos aren't in the game but if they were they would need a balance... without inventing some totally fake defense mechanism... I thought hit or miss might work.
    • Smallsword wrote:

      kurtvonstein wrote:

      this is a strategy game...so that attack from a submarine is a tropedo but the hit is excute in a strategic way. not in an operative way. The submarine attacks and the missle hits the target. That it doesnt sink the ship with one hit ist reflecting the fight on an operational level the evasion the repositioning of vessels on the battlefield and so on.

      I mean the gaem doesnt reflect that some tanks might miss when they fight or that airplanes dont see the enemie when he is hiding in the forest and they miss their target.

      This is strategic not operativ. A big level scale, a helicopter view one things. Like "Risiko" you send armies and let them fight. This is not about a unit having a better training an moral that will wipe away the others or weather conditions influencing a attack. This is pruely statistics and aritmetics calculating a battle.

      And its fine.
      What's the statistic on a cruise missile landing on a 5 stack of frigates?Zero.
      Unless of course you time it just right from just the right distance which I think by your point would be operational... hit and run is operational... artillery fencing is operational...

      My issue is that subs should attack from underwater... a torpedo should be able to sink a cruiser in one hit, or deal 40+ damage to ships... if you have a "guided" torpedo in game it will hit 100% of the time... I was trying to think of a way to mitigate the OP factor in that... hit or miss, 50/50 chance, all or nothing... and of course the player makes a difference by when and where they fire... a cruise missile isn't different in this respect.

      Cruise missiles and anti-air have a balance.
      Torpedos aren't in the game but if they were they would need a balance... without inventing some totally fake defense mechanism... I thought hit or miss might work.
      Submarines have no attack against ground targets, because their attack is considered torpedos. They just happen to have the same attack animation like all other ranged units. Similar to Elite Railguns who also don't have a more fitting attack animation.
    • Kalrakh wrote:

      Submarines have no attack against ground targets, because their attack is considered torpedos. They just happen to have the same attack animation like all other ranged units. Similar to Elite Railguns who also don't have a more fitting attack animation.
      It's not the animation that bothers me... its the effect.

      They should be ship killers.
      Subs are supposed to be the Anti-ship.
      Instead, attack subs are a sort of glorified semi-stealth corvette.

      If you see a navy base 3 on the map... do you think that player is building attack subs or destroyers?
      Compare the stats... compare the capabilities... the destroyer is better at what the sub is supposed to do... plus it can bombard the coast... it can detect the sub... stats don't change, it doesn't matter in high or shallow water...double HP... quadruple HP sometimes.
      it gets cruise missiles, too...
      You can't land cruise missiles on subs... but if the destroyer is with a cruiser or frigate you can't hit it with a cruise missile either...
      So you build subs if you have an excess of rare material?
      You need the stealth unit that most any navy can detect?
      What's there use, really?
      If you set them to attack, they can be attacked, so you must hit and run or virtually any surface ship will sink them.
      What's submarine about them? The graphic?

      It just seems drastically underpowered to me... like I said before, it seems under capable.

      If this game is an ecosystem that's supposed to have balance I'd venture to say the attack sub is on the endangered species list... maybe going extinct... in public games I don't even come across one to kill... I might make a few like exotic pets but they don't see much action...

      I guess if they're basic attack is supposed to already be "torpedos"... though, that seems to be determined by its inability to bombard coasts, not in its ability to sink ships... the stats really need an update.

      Raise the attack stat significantly... around 15 for lvl 1.... ... 30 at full upgrade.

      Lower the HP if you must... 15HP anywhere.... hell, I'd take 10HP anywhere if it packed a punch.....

      It needs to be offensively apex or it's just silly.
    • KFGauss wrote:

      Colonel Waffles wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      I'm pretty sure any changes based on your understanding of ocean acoustics and of modern active/passive sonars' abilities are built on a foundation of sand.

      But who cares. Con is a game, not a simulation.

      I recommend using your best it-will-open-the-door-to-more-interesting-gameplay justifications for this change instead of using ocean/sonar physics.
      I mean I’m no sonar expert so don’t expect anything to be 100% realistic. The changes are based on what I know about sonar and adapted for the game. Is there a gameplay change you think would be beneficial based on real-life submarine warfare?
      I haven't even thought about how I might suggest changing this part of CoN.
      And - I'm trying to politely say that based on what you wrote, you don't yet know well enough how surface warship and submarine sonars can be used and are used.

      You are on the right track, because surface ducting and similar phenomena are real, but there is much, much more going on.
      To respond to yourself and Teburu

      From my understanding of submarine warfare, there is a great deal of uncertainty. It’s not like current CoN ASW where the sonar just sees all the subs and then you go to kill it. A warship may have trouble detecting a submarine, or it may not detect it until it is too late. Fleets can be undone by a sudden, brutal submarine attack. Finding and tracking a submarine is a constant challenge

      My ultimate goal with this suggestion is to implement that uncertainty into CoN, even if it does not follow sonar physics perfectly. A constant threat of units you can’t fully see will make naval warfare more intense, and will encourage the use of less common tactics like ASW patrols and transport escorting.

      It doesn’t really matter if the duct phenomenon isn’t perfect and what not. This is a game where railguns bombard armies through entire cities and SR-71s conduct bombing raids, so I’m not too worried about that. It comes down to making stealth more complex so that it opens up new possibilities and strategies instead of putting together some cruisers and frigates and then going to hit and run the enemy
      Yee Haw
    • In game submarines are stealth in name only....
      Every other true stealth unit requires another unit of a high level to reveal them.
      Subs are detectable as soon as they're buildable...by not one unit... but several... destroyers, ASW, other subs, naval patrol, naval AWACs (later).... and lets not forget corvettes.
      To compare to air power ... neither the stealth strike fighter or stealth bomber detect stealth... next to top level frigates and stealth ASF due.
      The first naval unit anyone can produce already reveals the not-even-one-exists-on-the-map-yet submarine's "stealth"...

      Submarines (real) sometimes submerge until they rest on the sea floor to evade detection from sonar... perhaps this tactic could be drawn on for the game.

      If a sub is in an ocean sector center it could "submerge" and get a stealth bonus like how ground units get entrenchment... but it's bonus would just be stealth from sonar...maybe heal too.



      When you find a destroyer with AWACs what are you going to sink it with? An attack sub?
      The relation between destroyers and submarines is completely imbalanced... destroyers are the sub killers...a sub can sink a frigate if they hit and run 3-5 times and don't get nailed... 4-6 times to sink a single destroyer if the sub doesn't take a hit. .... Does that sound like a ship killer? Does that sound like a sub?
      Hell, if it's a naval patrol unit that scrolls over the sub its just 3 hits and its gone.
      It's like there was so much effort put towards "balancing against submarines" that attack subs don't really have a place to shine... too many things see them... too many things kill them... they don't really stand up well.

      I'd rather have a unit with a low HP that can kill... or at least hit hard. If I'm arguing for a better attack sub and I need to make a concession I'd make just about any to get the submarine basics.

      Again, the quintessential characteristics of a submarine are that they are stealthy and can sink ships.... the game subs have neither.
    • Of the big ships the destroyer is considered the weakest, because the only thing it is good at is attacking subs, one of the reasons you hardly see them in challenges and most experienced players tend to just go for frigs and cruiser


      If you pinch 5 subs vs 5 destroyers the subs can easily win, because they just need to use their CM and devestate the destroyers without them having a chance to fight back

      If you mix in frig with the destroyers they lose speed and also a lot of combat power against subs, so might duke it just out with hit and run


      A unit that can win every fight just by itself, would kind of defy the 'grand strategy' concept of this game
      Subs are supposed to hunt frigs and cruiser, destroyer are supposed to fight subs
      So if subs could easily take down destroyers, what would the destroyers even be good for anymore?


      Remark: My biggest issue with subs is the fact, that they drain your rare material, which makes this unit only reasonable to research and build in mid to end game when you tend to have excess rares

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Kalrakh ().

    • I was thinking of changes to subs but I think I have a simpler solution.

      When subs stop moving they have double sonar range and are not detectable.


      Subs, imo, Attack subs only become useful at tier 6 because they have the range to engage most hostile ships wihtout taking much damage and they can possibly do it from deep water so they don't have the hp penalty. Most combat is going to take place on teh coast where subs suffer the hp penalty so you have to be out of range using them or you can micro them in if you find a contact and run away after you fire. There is about a 10m delay when the enemy shoots back in my experience so they can be effective but you're still at a huge disadantage.

      In early game the two most common units, the destroyer and the corvette both detects subs and those are extremely dangerous in shallow waters because they can bombard cities and attack subs and other surface ships... so unless the sub has been teched up to have a 75 range and the destroyers haven't you're going to be fighting at a huge disadvantage. And there won't be in warning if you're going to be facing lots of naval ships, so if you do prep and you're wrong you've got a ton of resources in subs that won't help you. If you're right and he's build a navy and is coming after you you're still at a significant disadvantage because you're going to have to win coastal battles.

      If you could park your subs near your harbors and enemys could move in and not see you, then when they start firing on your city you could engage and have a slim change at doing something...

      I honestly don't think there is a way around the shallow water penalty until you get the 100 range, with that you can park them strategically so they can hammer people coming into your ports and prob not take to much damage. Before t6 I don't see how you can do that. The sub is built as if the frigate is the primary naval vessel and you're going to find them to engage.

      Maybe the corvette should lose it's ability to attack subs? (or just detect them?)