Longturn Forum

Not sure if this would be possible but if it was, would it make sense?

It wouldn't be that accurate simulation since the subs could still be attacked. It would just get a defense bonus.

There were talks about this but I can't remember what was the outcome.

I can't recall any such talks (must've been before my time here), but in principle, I'd be in favor of that – at least to try if it works out. Not sure if it'd do much, what with submarines' low defense anyways, but why not?

However, I'm not sure how that would be properly implemented – allowing submarines to fortify would (probably) also allow them to do so inside a city, which might not necessarily be intended.

An alternative would be adding a new "submerged submarine" unit and allowing conversion back and forth between them. The submerged submarine could be a lot slower, but unreachable to anything short of other submarines (and possibly bombers with depth charges).

The talks sometimes take place in the game chats/irc and it's almost impossible to remember where the talks took place. At least for me

Would it be that bad if the submarine would be able to fortify on the cities? I'm not sure how the bonus is calculated for ships but the land units are always considered as fortified ones inside the cities. Workers not and actually maybe not the ships. If this is a problem then maybe subs should have FP 2 instead of 1 and attack defense would be 6/2 instead of 12/4. That because I believe the FP is reduced to 1 if the ship is inside a city.

Adding a more advanced submarine unit also sounds good. The nuclear submarines can travel submerged for a weeks/months and they do move slowly. The current submarines work like the WW2 ones where any ship with depth charges can kill them. Now I'm not that familiar with the modern ones but I believe very deep travelling nuclear submarines are not easy targets with conventional methods. Those could actually work like the air units where only other subs and some specific units could attack them. Submarines, Destroyers and the AEGIS Cruiser maybe?

wieder wrote: Now I'm not that familiar with the modern ones ...

Here you go:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_212_submarine

This type is underwater way faster than on surface:
Speed: 20 knots (37 km/h) submerged, 12 knots surfaced
They say the new type is undetectable. Undetectable in this context means the submarine has the means to evade detection because its long range reconnaisance will know of any vessel long before the vessel has any chance of detecting it. Except it's a comparable submarine, of course.
They say the greatest danger for this type comes from aircraft, especially helicopters with torpedos. OTOH, the helicopter needs to bring a sonar into water, and that, in turn, could be detected by the submarine, so if you give them anti-aircraft-missiles, the helicopter is out.

From wikipedia:
"In 2013, while on the way to participate in naval exercises in U.S. waters, the German Navy's U-32 established a new record for non-nuclear submarines with 18 days in submerged transit without snorkelling.[16] It also got through all the defences of a U.S. carrier strike group, unseen, and shot green simulation torpedos at the carrier.[17]"

hahaha, I didn't know that.

I don't think doubling FP and halving combat strength will keep the unit at quite the same strength, but that's not the main problem. The main problem is that a +50% increas in defense doesn't do shit for a glass cannon. It'll maybe scare off hostile destroyers, but by the time you have combustion, they have steel, so they'll send a cruiser and you're liquefied.
That said, it doesn't make sense for a submarine to just stay in place for a long time. If we're talking about submerging, we need movement.
Of course, if this is supposed to be fortifying in one place on the ocean floor, burrowing into sand or hiding in a reef, then yeah, you'll have to stay in place, but that should probably not just give a defense bonus, but make you completely invisible, which is something Freeciv doesn't support at this point.

So yeah, I'd be in favor of adding a new "Deep Sea" unit class which can only traverse deep ocean and is unreachable, then to introduce a "submerged submarine" (name is wip) unit, which cannot be built, but can be converted to and from regular submarines, and then letting regular submarines target submerged submarines.

It is to be noted that, unless missiles are explicitly allowed to disembark from SubSubs, they'll be stuck under the sea, which makes sense. However, a "torpedo" unit could be added, which could essentially be a water-based missile that can disembark from SubSubs.

The cruiser is actually quite different with the current LT rulesets. It has a defense of 8 and attack of 4. Not 100% realistic but it was changed because of gameplay point of view. In the past almost no one built those because they were not good enough attackers and making them stronger would have resulted with destroyers becoming useless. The game was also lacking more defensive naval units and with this change the cruiser is now good for escorting other ships.

The 50% bonus for fortifying might not do that much but it would be a nice bonus. Then again, I'm not sure if the bonus wouldn't be actually too much.

The torpedo missile is an interesting idea for fighting the deep sea subs. The "submerged" subs could have a really high cost. I suppose the major powers in the RW can't really build too many of those anyway. With missiles (but without nukes) those would still be really nice for annoying the enemy

Or... What about forgetting the fortify/submerged option and instead giving 25%-50% defense bonus for subs when they are on deep ocean?

wieder wrote:Or... What about forgetting the fortify/submerged option and instead giving 25%-50% defense bonus for subs when they are on deep ocean?

Yeah, that actually sounds sensible. However, since I believe the only way to do that would be by giving a defense bonus to deep ocean tiles (and creating a new unit class for the subs), it would be impossible to ever add amphibious units that gain a defense bonus on land, but not in deep ocean. If that's a sacrifice you're willing to make, this might just work.

Would it be possible to set up so that only destroyers can attack submarines, but cruisers and battleships can't?

" it would be impossible to ever add amphibious units that gain a defense bonus on land, but not in deep ocean"

NoT sure I follow. What unit would that be? The only units able to enter sea/land are the air units.

"Would it be possible to set up so that only destroyers can attack submarines, but cruisers and battleships can't?"

I guess that would be possible but it might also result with confusion. Or maybe not. I would imagine that if there were two sub types. The ww2 type and the more modern type that would be unreachable to everyone except maybe torpedo units and destroyers/very few ships able to catch those.

Having the unreachable sub might help if we want to make possible to simulate "unrestricted" submarine warfare.

Well, in reality battleships and cruisers don't hunt submarines so it would be a most obvious option.

wieder wrote:" it would be impossible to ever add amphibious units that gain a defense bonus on land, but not in deep ocean"

NoT sure I follow. What unit would that be? The only units able to enter sea/land are the air units.

I'm talking about hypothetical future amphibious units, i.e. units that aren't air units, but represent vehicles that can move both on land and water. It would make sense for those to receive terrain defense bonuses (on land), but not the Deep Ocean bonus (at sea).