subs

triggerpimp · June 14, 2009, 08:46

whats the point? same strength as the battle ship, no cargo space, much less defense, and crap for movment... it wouldn't take much to get the tech for the battleship at this stage in the game so why even bother? i dont get it, for a game that gives every unit a purpose, there must be something i'm missing.

Grayson · June 15, 2009, 17:49

they are probably one of the worst units in the game.

Their only upside is that they are cheap, they only cost 25 hammers, so it only takes 75 hammers to make a fleet, wheras battleships cost 80 and cruisers cost 40.

Hardly anyone builds them and I've never seen them as effective online. but if you are low on production or gold and are getting harrassed on the seas, it's a cheap way to attack. It's not like spending all that gold/hammers on a fleet and then getting it sunk. You can get two sub fleets in the same amount of time and have a more likely shot at sinking a ship.

But I never go this route. they should have done it a little different, and given it a lot more movement.

zsozso · August 5, 2009, 13:07

I think they missed a key feature: a sub should be invisible to the enemy. Then it would make sense.

Jaybe · August 12, 2009, 15:34

Thinking historically, those that emphasized submarines in WWII were Germans and the U.S. (early war vs. Japan), when there was no other way to compete because their opponents had surface naval superiority.

I haven't gotten to subs in CivRev yet, so I cannot comment on invisibility or speed issue.

ericball · August 17, 2009, 08:42

In Civ 2/3 (I don't have 4) subs were invisible unless they were adjacent to the enemy unit. But in Civ Rev subs are as visible as any other unit

But I agree subs are the worst unit in the game. Yes, they are cheap and have good attack strength, but their galleon defensive strength and galley movement rate makes them useless. Subs, even a sub pack (army), won't survive being attacked. That wouldn't be a problem if they had a chance of attacking first. But their movement rate guarantees they will be spotted before they can attack. They don't even provide naval support, so they can't be used in that role either. (Nor can they be used as transport, although their defense and movement makes that a dumb idea anyway.)

Maybe they're supposed to be the naval equivalent of catapaults - high attack, low defense & movement. But there is no naval equivalent to archers to escort them around. Sure, you could escort them with a cruiser or battleship fleet, but then the movement rate really hurts.

I'm not sure how the subs slipped through playtesting. They either should have had some kind of invisibility, or had a decent movement rate so they could lurk out of sight and then pounce.

marciv · November 15, 2009, 15:49

I agree with all of the above, perhaps if there is a patch/Rev 2, your suggestions for improvement will be considered. Further to previous ideas, perhaps giving Subs a Blitz and march upgrade from the beginning will give them the opportunity to undertake 'Hit and run' attacks which is the general idea with subs in any case....just a thought.