 |
| |
|
|
BelSlavin
|
|
Boston, MA
Nov 2001
time: 00:16
|
|
Hi all!
I sure hope the nice people over at Firaxis takes all your suggestions into account with their patch! I agree that the naval units especially need some work.
I especially agree with the problems surrounding the subs in the game. However, my biggest concern is with regards to the cruise missle.
Several things could improve this unit in the game--even though many people would never bother to build them.
How about these suggestions:
1) Out of the box, it seems as if cruise missles can only be loaded into transports(sound right)? It seems to me that it would be much more interesting if they could be loaded into the combative vessels, the AEGIS seems like a very logical choice. Perhaps on the order of 5. Other vessels could also carry them, but perhaps in smaller numbers. Thus allowing ship-launched cruise missles.
However this would be contingent on:
2) Increased range! Two makes no sense! I think this has been addressed in a mod now it's 6?
3) Regardless of the ship they can be loaded on, they can't be loaded into ships in port? This doesn't make sense either. Other units can be (L)oaded in a city but not cruise missles? Hmmm.
4) Are they too expensive? They are used once--obviously--and usually kill the targetted unit (depending on the circumstances). Seems a hefty trade off. Maybe they should be cheaper.
Anything else?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
BelSlavin
|
|
Boston, MA
Nov 2001
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Barnacle Bill
The Civ3 cruise missile apparently models the ones the USAF drags around on trailors, not the ones launched from ships or planes. |
Yeah, thus I have no problem with the fact that they have 1 MP to get around on land with prior to bombardment; however, allowing the combative vessles to load up with a few of them would be a nice thing. It's ugly (for lack of a better word) to have transports sitting around with your ships if you desire to launch off cruise missles from sea. Maybe my point is moot.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jayis Solis
|
|
Washington, DC
Nov 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
This has been a great source of information from those who would have somewhat direct knowledge of naval combat.
Since we are on the subject of submarine roles and capabilities-- couldn't a Civ III nuclear sub carry one marine unit in addition to missiles? Or is that being too nit-picky?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
vette_21
|
|
Chatsworth CA
Jul 2001
time: 21:16
|
|
I believe that the Aegis Cruiser should have a and equal or higher attack value then the Battleship, and if nothing else a significantly higher defense value then the battleship. My reason? Ship vs Ship combat in modern times is mostly fought with missiles, thus the 16 inch guns (I am thinking American battleships) aren't as much of a factor. The battleship should be much better at shore bombardment. I also think that the aegis shouldn't have a special anti-submarine capability, that is the job of the Spruince Destroyer. I would give the Aegis a free shot at air units attacking like a bombardment or something.
So here is my suggested recap:
Aegis: Make Attack as strong or stronger then battleship
Make Defense stronger then battleship, due too the
Aegis system.
Take away Aegis ability to see subs and make a modern
Destroyer to fill that task.
Give the aegis the ability to bombard air.
Oh i like the idea of the modern ships carrying Cruise Missiles.
I know some of this stuff may be tough or impossible to do in a mod I am just thinking out loud here. Maybe the Civ III people will take notice. Who knows.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrbilll
|
|
To answer Jayis- Subs have been outfitted for covert and spy ops from WWII to the present day. But usually, the mission is along the lines of special ops, surveillance, and extractions. Tom Clancy type stuff. For an undetected insertion/extraction, with small numbers of people, they're great. But for some kind of conventional assault involving a large number of people, they'd be a recipe for disaster.
As conventional supply or transport vessels, they've been pretty dismal. The Japanese tried to use them as supply vessels in WWII. This has always struck me as one of the silliest uses of a sub, and I think history bears me out. The Germans did some of that too, but at least they understood what a sub is REALLY good for. They just aren't very efficient in non combat roles. As for a marine detachment, it's physically possible- just not something you'd want to do.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
B-line
|
|
Nuclear subs and modern conventional sub are best used in two seperate arenas.
Nuclear subs produce a huge wake in both terms of water and heat. If a nuke travels in shallow/warm water it is highly visible from the air (typically space) through the use of infred sensors. I have seen a satelite picture of a US nuke trversing the globe, everywhere it had been ..for days.. was clearly visible as a solid trace accros the map. ...but give them the cold deep waters near the antartic and they riegn supreme.
Conventional subs are quiet and small, they make liitle impact on there surroundings. They operate best in the shallow waters of the pacific or on the continental shelves (hugging coastlines) and patrolling habours.
Either sub is superior to the other in its own territory.
Nuke sub can travel significantly faster then almost any serface vessel, while convential subs travel close to surface vessel speeds.
In Civ game terms subs should be invisible when not moving or when only moving one square, when they move faster they are easily detectable. Further nuke subs should always be visible when in shallow water.
A submarines biggest fear is aviation.. because a good sub commander is only detectable after an attack (which is almost always a success) and then only aircraft can respond to the subs attack before it hides again.
A secondary fear is an escorting submarine to the attackers target that the attacker did not detect.
Surface vessels are only a threat in terms of providing a platform for aviation.
A surface vessel can not detect a conventional sub (while the sub is running on batteries) whilst the surface vessel is traveling at any speed greater then..!I am a sitting target! because of its own engine and propeller nosies...and a nuke sub can travel so fast that it can run away.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrbilll
|
|
Conventional or Deisel, subs don't need to entirely surface to ventilate. They have snorkeling masts, which do the same thing for a sub that they do for a snorkelling swimmer. They also have a very low visual profile. What you see up close, transiting a harbor in broad daylight, is impressive. What you see on the open ocean is much harder to spot. And without satellite or night vision aid, you're not going to spot a sub snorkelling in the middle of the night.
As for surfacing, that's not really the case. Barring mishap or malfunction, a nuclear sub can theoretically stay submerged indefinitely. It is often desirable to surface partially for various operations, but if the need is great enough, the sub does not need to come up- ever!
The power supply lasts for years. Fresh water and oxgen are processed from the ocean. The atmospheric equipment can keep the air breathable, if not pleasant, for weeks on end. The biggest limitation is food, and a modern sub can store enought to keep the crew going for months.
To prove this point, the first Nuclear sub built (the Nautilus, appropriately enough) circled the world- underwater!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Barnacle Bill
|
 |
Somewhere on the wine dark sea
Oct 2001
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mrbilll
Fresh water and oxgen are processed from the ocean. The atmospheric equipment can keep the air breathable, if not pleasant, for weeks on end. The biggest limitation is food, and a modern sub can store enought to keep the crew going for months.
|
Sea story time, kiddies!
To pack in the maximum amount of food, you line the decks forward with cans. This effectively lowers the cealing about 6", resulting in even average height guys routinely hitting their heads on stuff in the overhead. The standard 90 day load-out for deployment pretty much requires this. One of my Captains was about 6'5" and ordered the Cheif Cook to get 90 days on board without "walking on cans" during our Med run. The Cheif Cook looked at the schedule, saw we were only going to be out 30 days at a time, and cheated.
Port visit to Athens got cancelled and we stayed out much longer than scheduled. The last two week, all we had left was flour & spam.
During that same run, the 02 genny broke down. The back-up is these chemical canisters called oxygen generators. They create a lot f heat, so they are "burned" in a "candle furnace". The standard candle furnace wasn't keeping up, so we rigged another one in the engine room. Even that didn't fully keep up, so we were running a little low on O2 and you had a headache most of the time. I used to go down to the candle furnace after watch and breath until my headache went away so I could get to sleep.
We pulled into La Spezia after 72 days submerged (my personal record but others I know have much longer), on Thanksgiving Day. Of course, I had the duty first night in port...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrbilll
|
|
If I remember right, Barnacle Bill is talking about Lithium Hydroxide cannisters, which produce oxygen when opened. It's a chemical reaction which generates heat, so it has to be held in a container to use safely, (though it can also be spread on the deck, in a pinch). The container is what he's referring to. How's my memory, BB?
The boomers have more space than the fast attacks, but even so, I've walked on cans myself a couple of times. Well, at least I always had my own rack.  My personal longest underwater was 78 days. I may have beaten BB by just a little, but I think the record is upwards of six months. (!)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
sophist
|
|
They should definitely rename the AEGIS cruiser. If they want for simplicity to create a single ship that's anti-sub and anti-ship, they should at least not name it after a real ship that's anti-air. And if they keep the AEGIS cruiser, they should give it air superiority capability.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
KloePoek
|
|
what i did to the subs, a good idea IMO, is lower their defence to 2(they are dead when discovered), raise their attack a bit (Sub to 8, nuke sub to 12) also all my ships got a bit higher range. Now the special thing to make the subs realistic is giving them a bombard ability with their own attack value, range 1, ROF 1. This makes them the real annoying subs (and prevents the unrealistic thing like some ships killing the sub while they can't even see him. So he just get in range, fires a torpedo, and gets out again. If you had a ship which could see it, you could see in which direction it went and pursue it, but if you don't then it can hit you again next round, and finally move in for the kill if your down to 1 hp. This makes sub the real threat they should be, since you can only kill them if you know where they are (or accidentially stumble upon them)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sevorak
|
|
sophist,
Anti-air and anti-submarine capability are not mutually exclusive.
Compare the antisubmarine destroyer Spruance class and the AEGIS cruiser Ticonderoga class.
Sonar:
Spruance: SQS-53 B or C with SQR-19 TACTAS towed array
Tico: SQS-53 A, B or C with SQR-19 TACTAS towed array
Armament:
Spruance: 2x triple torpedo tubes, possible ASROC loadout in VLS, 2x SH-60 ASW helo
Tico: 2x triple torpedo tubes, possible ASROC loadout in VLS, 2x SH-60 ASW helo
Their antisubmarine equipment is essentially identical - the two ships are based on the same frame. The only advantage of the Tico is its AEGIS computer, SPY radar, and greater number of VLS cells.
I think the AEGIS cruiser is a great name for a ship both anti-sub and anti-air, since that's what it really is. Problem is that they use the graphic of an AEGIS destroyer in the game. Oh well.
KloePoek,
Submarines are disadvantaged when discovered, not dead. They kick off a couple of decoys, dive below the thermocline layer, and try and be very, very quiet...and probably succeed. The problem in Civ 3 is that detection is either 0% or 100% - and submarines are found far less than 100% of the time, so the defence value MUST be raised to compensate. The first indication that a submarine's in the area is usually a ship snapping in half from a torpedo.
The problem is compounded in Civ 3 because an advancing line of Caravels could find submarines, since submarines can't occupy the same space as another naval unit. With a defence value of 2, all you need are Frigates.
Bombardment won't work. You'll have submarines destroying mines, killing population, and blowing up cathedrals.
You seem to have a misjudged perception about "real" submarine combat. This is not video game land where a submarine needs to pump six or seven torpedoes into a target to kill it. One torpedo and that's all she wrote, the ship's back breaks like a stick and it's effectively junk. ONE torpedo, so it's not get in, shoot torpedo, get out, it's get in, shoot torpedo, avoid wreckage.
For a graphic example I direct you here. It shows the effect of one torpedo on a destroyer-escort. Ships don't work with their back ends cut off.
I'm not Navy, just a really big fan - I'd appreciate input from the Navy people on how to properly implement subs. I'm working on a mod right now that makes them 36.36.12 (compared to my new AEGIS cruiser's 36.36.10). Submarines can take out any surface ship on the seas, I'm trying to represent that.
-Sev
Last edited by Sevorak on 01-12-2001 at 02:54
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sevorak
|
|
"Water-bombs"?
I think something's not coming across in the translation here.
There is currently only one major way to attack a submarine from a surface - the lightweight torpedo. This was Mk46, changing to Mk50 in the US, and the Stingray in the UK. It is either delivered from ship-mounted torpedo tubes, helicopters, or ASROC (not in service). If a submarine is detected, a ship without a helicopter can fire three, and the helicopter can carry one or two.
Modern submarine combat isn't about placing torpedoes correctly to kill his stability. Antisub lightweights aren't wire guided. The point of the torpedo is to rupture the hull, yes, but hasn't anything to do with proper placement.
In any case, detection of submarines is too easy in Civ so yes, defence must be increased.
But as for bombardment...you aren't really in favour of letting submarine torpedoes destroy the colosseum and throw the city into civil disorder, are you?
-Sev
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Defkon
|
|
my 2 cents.
Not sure what can be done with civ3 since i'm new.. but here's my suggestion based on play with janes fleet commander.
make 3 types of subs for civ3
Regular (ww2) subs
SSN attack subs - better attack and defense than other subs, and can carry "special missles".
SSBN. - carries Nukes, but has slightly lower values than the SSN class subs.
* special missles * In modern combat most missles can be shot down with other missles. So how bout this. You change the cruise missle to work like so...
If you fire your "special missle" at another unit, it does damage as usual.
BUT if you fire it at a unit or city that has "special missles" there's a chance that it'll be shot down at the cost of X amount of the defenders missles. and no damge done. You could even be a little more complicated and try:
The attacker's missle is given 50/50 chance of being shot down by the defenders missle first missle. If the attackers missle wins, the defender fires a second missle, and so on till that threat is removed or till the ship runs out of missles.
OR
The number of missles the defender is allowed to use could be limited to the distance the attackers missle had to move. Perhaps one defending missle is allowed per square the offending missle has to travel to it's target.
I'd guess that a sub should be limited to say.... 6 Special missles max, and maybe 8 or 10 for a cruiser.. and they must return to port for a reload.
This way the SSN is the "silent hunter killer" of the seas, where as the nuke subs are more of a strategic piece best used for MAD, or... "first strike" units.
- other smaller suggestions
The detection of subs could be based on what percentage of it's "moves" it's used during that turn. (ya figure the faster a sub moves, the more noise it makes) For example. If a sub has a max of 8 moves available, and it only used 4 of those it'd be 2x times harder to detect because it was moving at half speed. Thus a sub that doesn't move during a turn would be nearly impossible to detect, where as one moving at flank might as well be a surface ship.
-- helo's on choppers should have the ability detect subs when ordered to do a recon mission
-- maybe a sonor buoy net should be a small wonder or something, that gives a higher chance of detecting subs in your boarders.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Shadow99
|
|
Union City, PA US
Nov 2001
time: 00:16
|
|
These thoughts match mine pretty closely... I have btw noticed one really odd happening in a game I was testing (I test each 'version' of my mod to try to fix balance & play issues)...
I had a sub (non-nuke) enter a cities 'coastal zone' & I ran out of movement for the turn when it got 1 square to the left of the city & 2 squares out (but within the cultural zone for that city). Well on the enemies turn a battleship left the city floated over to my sub & kicked it's ass... then went back inside the city. I checked & then triple checked that battleships weren't set to be able to see subs... But yet this one did...
So a question does anyone else think the AI can cheat? (that's my only logical conclusion as I cannot see enemy subs, yet they can when they enter their culture zone)....
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Barnacle Bill
|
|
Somewhere on the wine dark sea
Oct 2001
time: 00:16
|
|
I think by "water bombs" he means what we refer to as "depth charges".
The key piece of understanding that is missing here is what has changed between modern & WWII.
Submerged submarines in WWII were SLOW. Most could not make 10 knots, and running at top submerged speed drained the battery very quickly - less than 1 hour. A surfaced submarine could do something like 25 knots, which was enough to get out ahead of a 12 knot convoy but not to outrun a 30 knot+ destroyer on the surface (they could outrun some of the cheap low-end escorts, though). If the battery & air banks were fresh, by creeping along just fast enough to maintain steerage way, one of those boats could remain submerged for about 12 hours. So, to attack you had to guess where the enemy was going, get there ahead of him, then lurk until he came to you. To make that hard, convoys & task forces zig-zagged. Torpedos went in a straight line along a preset course & depth - if they worked right. For the most part, they had to physically hit the target, and blew a hole in the side below the waterline. To sink a capital ship might take 6-8 torpedos. A merchant ship 2 or more, depending on size. A single torpedo would ruin a destroyer's day, for sure, though (but sub skippers were not rewarded for sinking escorts - waste of a "fish" intended for something more important to the war effort). To attack, a submarine needed visual contact via periscope (or on the surface at night, but once escorts had radar that tactic became a bust). The sensors to execute a submerged attack without using your periscope simply did not exist. So, our steely-eyed killer of the deep had to lurk at shallow depth until the convoy or task force arrived (assuming the sub skipper guessed right about where the target would be). Then, up comes the scope, throw your sunday punch, and dive for it. If they see the torpedo wake and take evasive action, or see another ship blow up and take evasive action, or just happen to zig while your torpedo was in route, you probably miss (so you fire a spread at slightly different angles hoping for a "shotgun effect"). You can't "run" away after the attack - you are too slow, and they probably have a pretty good idea where to look for you (with steam torpedos, the norm before about mid-war and common right to the end, they know exactly where to look). So, the escorts come running over and dump wads of depth charges on your head while you try to creep away and hope they loose you. However, while you are lurking at shallow depth out ahead waiting for the targets to arrive, the escorts are running out ahead pinging active sonar - if they detect you, you skip right to the depth charge eating part without ever getting a shot off. Plus, since your submerged speed & endurance is so low, you make all your transits on the surface, and after mid-war you've got to worry about radar-equipped maratime patrol aircraft catching you doing it. By late war, radar can pick up the periscope, too. A depth-charge equipped patrol aircraft that catches a sub skipper at PD can definately ruin his day.
Nuclear power & computers changed all that. Nuke boats are faster submerged than surfaced. Except for the first generation of them, SSN's are faster than most surface warships (although they can't hear too good going that fast). "Boomers" are slower, but then they don't "go in harm's way" - they are supposed to stay in the middle of noplace & launch missiles if WWIII happens. With a nuke sub, your submerged endurance is nominally infinite - you only have to surface to enter port again because you are out of food or ammo, something is broke that you can't fix at sea, or because the crew's going stir-crazy. Passive sonar coupled to computers means the sub knows where all the surface ships are without sticking up a periscope or even coming above the thermal layers. Due to surface noise and thermal layers, escorts can't hear you coming. Using active sonar (by either side) is like using a flashlight in a nighttime firefight - the range at which the enemy can see exactly where you are because of your flashlight greatly exceeds the range at which the flaslight helps you see things - net result is that turning it on just gets you shot. Escorts can't keep you away from the targets, be they transorts in a convoy or high value capital ships (carriers, battleships, etc...). Torpedos are now wire-guided and acoustical homing (i.e. they steer themselves after the target with on-board sonar). The wire lets your fire control computer back on the boat keep updating the torpedo's computer with info as to what its target is up to. When it gets close enough for the torpedo's onboard active sonar to pick up the target, it kicks into high speed and goes after it and nothing but a decoy or torpedo malfunction will save the target (the wire let's your more advanced computers on the boat negate decoys, too). Meanwhile, the escorts still haven't got a clue where the sub is, except maybe a bearing on the "launch transient" (the load noise made by the torpedo tube impulse). Due to your speed & quietness, though, you can probably "clear datum" before they get to you. Depth charges are hopeless - their best shot is a helo with a dipping sonar and/or a rocket-launched lightweight torpedo on top of where they think you were (remember, if they have anything at all they have a pretty good bearing, but their range info sucks). That dipping sonar doesn't help all that much if you are deep, but if they detect you, the helo drops a lightweight torpedo on you. Those lightweight torpedos lack the sensor & processing power of your big wire-guided jobs linked back to your on-board sensors & computers, so they kind of sail in a downward spiral until/unless they pick you up on the torpedo's own less powerful sensors. If they do detect you, decoys and high-speed manuevers can still probably save you. Even detected, you are therefore real hard to kill. In excercises where we were TRYING to keep skimmers & aircraft from losing us so they could practice tracking a sub, we used to lose them by accident and have to make a loud noise on purpose so they could find us again. The big threat if you are a modern sub is a guy just like you except the language spoken inside his boat He operates in the same environment as you, with the same advantages, and it really comes down to who detects who first. Whoever is quieter and/or has the best sensors has the advantage, but so does the skipper with a "sixth sense". The way you protect carriers & transports & such is to send your SSN's into the area days ahead to clear out enemy SSN's.
Future technology may change things again, but for about the last 40 years SSN's have ruled the oceans. Surface escorts exist because (a) hope springs eternal, and (b) they are more effective than no protection at all. To model reality in a civ-type game, I'd give nothing but nuke subs the ability to detect other subs, a nuke sub attacking another of its kind a 50-50 shot at winning, and a sub attacking a destroyer (or stack defended by a destroyer) a 75% or better chance of winning. I'd also give nuke subs a "blitz" capability, because you can easily launch simultaneously at multiple targets. What Firaxis should fix is ideally to let units that can't see subs just pass right over them. Nuke subs should not be detected as tresspassers in peacetime, either. Ideally, subs should get a numerical "stealth" rating and both surface ships & subs a numerical "sensor" rating which would be used to determine whether or not a sub is detected (replacing the "can see subs" check block) - WWII subs would be fairly detectable by then-contemporary destroyers & maritime patrol aircraft (new unit type), and easily detected by modern ASW units. Nuke subs would be almost-but-not-quite undetectable by WWII-era ASW units, have a low probability of detection by modern destroyers & ASW patrol aircraft, and a moderate probability of detection by another modern sub. There would be a modern oceanic terrain improvement called "SOSUS" which would have the best ability to detect subs that come in range, but would be expensive to build. Any ship with a "sensor" rating of 0 would automatically sink if attacked by any sub (but of course subs attacking a stack would possibly fight escorts first). If a sub attacks a stack, it should get the choice of targets in the stack. If anything in the stack has sensors > 0, a detection roll is made and if the sub is detected the escort attacks the sub first (like air interception) - the escort with the best sensors is used if there is more than one. After the sub attack on its selected target is resolved, if there any escort which failed to detect the sub before the attack (the original one if detection failed, or a second one if detection succeeded but the sub won), there should be another detection roll to see if the escorts catch the sub trying to get away after the attack.
Last edited by Barnacle Bill on 04-12-2001 at 01:45
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
14-11-2001 06:09
|