Das Boot!

[Ruanek]

I think the “U-boat Peril” optional rule is German subs remove 3 IPCs for convoy raiding instead of the normal 2.

[Gargantua]

I always use the -3 Uboat Peril optional rule.

The germans need that little edge - and it makes sub building so much more worth it.

[eudemonist]

“U-Boat Peril” is an optional rule that allows German (and only German) submarines to interdict 3 IPCs when stationed in an enemy convoy zone, as opposed to the 2 IPCs subs usually do.

@SgtBlitz:

Convoy damage just doesn’t really work in this game when you can use 1 destroyer and planes to kill a stack of subs who can’t escape.

I strongly disagree.  Convoy damage works great.  Float one or two original German subs down off the west coast of Africa.  Hard to get to, requires the Brits and French to either eat 4 IPCs a round or put themselves out of position to support the Med.  Sitting off Canada can be good, too.

[Gargantua]

Ironically, I think the convoy raiding works better AGAINST the axis, than it does for it.

Just look at the way the convoy zones are setup. Russia has no convoy zones that can be effected, save Sz125, which is in range of British Air and instant naval builds.  I mean, why isn`t it the Sz off of Karelia in the north?  Or in the Baltic?

The U.S. convoy zones basically can`t be touched.

The U.K. zones are on the FAR side of england, whilst the Axis ones are exposed in France and Norway.

The Mediterranean is also Ripe with Convoys,  many having double effect IE -2 for Italy, and -2 for Germany.  Its painful.

Let`s not talk about the Sea of Japan…

And the fact that the Axis doesn`t want to be building destroyers, whilst the allies are going to build them anyways.

[eudemonist]

@Gargantua:

Ironically, I think the convoy raiding works better AGAINST the axis, than it does for it.

True enough.  One reason I like the German subs to be a little better at it.

[SgtBlitz]

What are you talking about?  Convoy damage is so pro-Allies it practically breaks the game.  Italy is a dead duck if the Allies get significant forces into SZ 97 (up to -12 in convoy damage per turn with Yugo and Greece), and Japan’s SZ 6 can wipe out up to 1/2 of Japan’s starting income.  The Allies’ corresponding UK convoy damage SZ 109, however, is a damn death trap for the Axis for most of the game as both the US and the UK can reach it easily with destroyers and subs.

We need to add either more convoy zones to the map (I’d like to see more for Russia in SZ 126 and 127, also Vladiostock in SZ 5 possibly as an NO block), perhaps the ability to BLOCK resources entirely if you have enough naval units in a convoy zone from far-off territories.  It’d also be nice to see if subs could retreat if they survive an initial attack by a destroyer, their 1 defense is pitiful and they need some method of escape.

[knp7765]

@SgtBlitz:

It’d also be nice to see if subs could retreat if they survive an initial attack by a destroyer, their 1 defense is pitiful and they need some method of escape.

I whole-heartedly agree with this.  I’ve never liked the idea that subs can NOT submerge with an enemy destroyer present.  I’m fine with destroyers preventing the surprise strike and letting aircraft hit subs, but keeping them from submerging is a load of crap.  Submarines could escape destroyers.  It may have been harder to do, but it was possible.  It’s not right that the presence of an enemy destroyer suddenly “traps” all your subs into taking whatever pounding can be delivered by other warships and air force with no chance of escape.

[Ruanek]

I think the convoy system needs to be reworked.  A lot of it just isn’t realistic.  For example, Germany could certainly do some convoy raiding off of Normandy when it’s controlled by France, since they receive shipments there.  But when Germany controls it, it doesn’t make as much sense, because Germany wasn’t anywhere near as dependent on overseas shipping (except through the Sweden-Norway-Denmark-Germany route).  It really hurts the Axis off the coast of Europe, when in reality the European Axis didn’t have too many convoys going through the Atlantic.

[Darby]

@knp7765:

@SgtBlitz:

It’d also be nice to see if subs could retreat if they survive an initial attack by a destroyer, their 1 defense is pitiful and they need some method of escape.

I whole-heartedly agree with this.  I’ve never liked the idea that subs can NOT submerge with an enemy destroyer present.  I’m fine with destroyers preventing the surprise strike and letting aircraft hit subs, but keeping them from submerging is a load of crap.  Submarines could escape destroyers.  It may have been harder to do, but it was possible.  It’s not right that the presence of an enemy destroyer suddenly “traps” all your subs into taking whatever pounding can be delivered by other warships and air force with no chance of escape.

2 solutions:

1. “Dark Ship - Quiet Ship Run Silent Run Deep”
   Defending Subs choose to either Hit or Submerge on a 1,  and May Submerge on 2-3

or

2. “Wolf Pack Tactics”
   when more then 2 defending subs are in the same territory – Each Destroyer may only nullify/spot 2 subs. (might even make it 1 to 1)

[Gargantua]

I like the proposed solutions.

And yea, I think it’s totally retarded, that German can’t collect for Yugoslavia because an allied sub is off the coast of Italy?  I dropped a WTF bomb when that happend to me.  I get it if it’s an island territory, but when it’s landlocked?  How is that even possible?

I like the concept of having to match up destroyers.  1-1.  Subs not matched up can then Submerge/retreat.

This makes Germany buying Copious amounts of subs, a successful tactic,  And vice versa aswell.

[warwinner]

I agree. I don’t think defending subs should be allowed to retreat, but they should be able to submerge. If you think about it, that’s the tactic they employed when they encountered a destroyer. I like the 1-1 match up. Should (defending subs) not matched up be allowed to submerge before first round of combat? I think so.

[oztea]

The 106 & 109 attack isnt about killing transports, its about killing destroyers
Knock them all out of the north atlantic, then your subs can play havoc over there near canada

if 2 live move one down to the bahamas

then move that one to africa

make UK destroyers run circles

[SgtBlitz]

@warwinner:

I agree. I don’t think defending subs should be allowed to retreat, but they should be able to submerge. If you think about it, that’s the tactic they employed when they encountered a destroyer. I like the 1-1 match up. Should (defending subs) not matched up be allowed to submerge before first round of combat? I think so.

Someone bring it up on Larry’s site.  I think its a great idea.  Subs are damn near worthless except as fodder hits in major battles as is.

[Fishmoto37]

If anyone is interested I have brought our sub house rules back to the surface under HOUSE RULES. Have been working good for us.

[warwinner]

As far as tactics go, I think it’s advantageous for Germany to put a sub in a far corner of the Atlantic out of reach of anything. The sole purpose of this tactic is to deny UK an NO for as long as possible. I don’t know about you guys, but a u-boat in any part of the Atlantic that can be considered useful, doesn’t live that long for me. A cost 6, and if you deny the NO for a minimum of 2 turns you’ve already made good on your investment.

Best time to do this would probably be with a starting sub since U.S. is neutral.

[JimmyHat]

another good tactic is when you know you’re sub is going to be sunk, try and move him to a spot that is least advantageous to the enemy, this could be in the middle of the ocean or out towards the periphery.