Useless submarines

[Temujin69]

Anyone notice that subs are pretty much useless? I've played several games now at the first 4 levels (chieftain, warlord, etc.) and each time I leave a sub in enemy territory, their leader would ask me to get lost. Come on... in the chieftain level, no one else can build anything better than a frigate and there are NO naval units anywhere but they can still see my sub... same thing in warlord, regent and monarch.

Does the AI have some sort of sonar system that I don't? How is it that they can detect my sub sitting in their territory with NOTHING except a coastal city when the civilopedia says that only destroyers and other subs can detect? How can an ironclad defeat a sub, something that it's not supposed to be able to see?

Some rather strange unanswered questions here, and that makes the sub the most useless of naval units due to their expense, weak attack and weak defense...

[HunterAssasin]

The nuclear sub is quite useful, if only it would be faster

[Enigma]

I use subs a scouts to tell me where enemy troops are moving- even battleships will usually get sunk in 1 turn when they are alone, having naval units alone is usually dangerous. But since subs are safe they make great scouts, just don't attack with them. My ideal naval fleet would have 8 subs around the perimiter, and then all the carriers/transports/battleships/cruisers in 1 square to reduce vulnerability, the subs tell you where enemy units are, the carriers bomb them until they get within range for your battleships, then your battleships destroy them.

They also would be great for blockades, if your enemy relies on trade for resources and has only a few harbors mass produce subs and clog his harbors up, he will never be able to damage them.

[The Mad Monk]

If it's anything like Civ II, the AIs know where all your subs are at all times. From what I've heard about their ability to zero in on settlers at whatever range, this is the case.

[Pacific_Wing]

Hey, speaking of navel units and combat: does anyone know if you can get a leader navel unit? Kind of like a battleship that lets you build armies (or fleets) or finish production on a coastal city?

I think that would be kind of neat, but since I've only had one leader (they are very rare), I don't know much about them.

Cheers,

-Pacific_Wing

[duxup]

About as stealthy as a dixie land band

The subs do seem to be useless. I've taken subs into enemy waters, only to find that their frigates come trucking on down to intercept it. I didn't even get near their cities or coast, it was alone, nor did I fire on anyone with the sub, yet they send a whole crew down to attack it. Sadly it was also destroyed by just one frigate. I've seen this happen several times now.

The costs of these nuclear subs is notably higher than a destroyer (makes sense) but sure doesn't pay off with any sort of stealth factor.

[EEKthedog]

I've also heared you can't carry cruise missiles on subs, is that true?

[Wretch]

I've also heared you can't carry cruise missiles on subs, is that true?

Sadly, yes. Cruise missiles are artilery, and so are just like cannons and catapults: carry them on ships and can only fire from dry land.

Wretch

[Quint]

I like subs to guard my coasts actually, it frees up the battleships to go wreak havoc on my enemies improvements. The subs (if you attack rather than defend with them) are more than adequate to take out the frigates and ironclads that the AI civs seem to prefer to send at me so far. I can't figure out why they aren't building battleships, they seem to have the resources.

[MisterMuppet]

I can't believe it !

This is really silly. Whats the point of building a submarine if it can be seen by a frigate. The whole point of being underwater is to launch a surprise attack. I have tried not to be negative on this forum. However, not having the game yet I have been reading threads like this with increasing level of incredulity.
I am going to have to go and lie down in a dark room to calm down.

[Temujin69]

Yeah, subs suck

If it's anything like Civ II, the AIs know where all your subs are at all times. From what I've heard about their ability to zero in on settlers at whatever range, this is the case.

So, this makes the subs worthwhile only against human players? Hmmm... I think multiplayer is missing from the game, making the subs and nuclear subs the most expensive useless units. Even worse than the Privateers.

I thought the entire point of spending all those shields to build subs was to scout out the enemy's territory WITHOUT them knowing... and having a decent chance of killing a naval unit.

I'm still annoyed that a CRUISE MISSILE sank one of my subs, but I can live with that. I don't know how frigates and other naval units who DO NOT have the ability to see subs can hunt down MY subs and I've NEVER seen a single AI sub. Lots of carriers, destroyers and battleships, but no subs.

[martin3393]

Re: I can't believe it !

Originally posted by MisterMuppet
This is really silly. Whats the point of building a submarine if it can be seen by a frigate. The whole point of being underwater is to launch a surprise attack. I have tried not to be negative on this forum. However, not having the game yet I have been reading threads like this with increasing level of incredulity.
I am going to have to go and lie down in a dark room to calm down.

Yeah, well, subs were pretty useless in Civ 2 as well. I'm noticing a bit of a pattern here and that is that most turn-based strategy games (I'm thinking CTP too) seem to have a tough time dealing with so-called stealth units. You can imagine the problem: if one were to allow a player to field a sub that the AI can't see, strategy would very quickly devolve into building as many subs as possible. To counterbalance that effect, the AI cheats, and cheating deprives the stealth unit of any meaning.

On a related note, I was in a situation in Civ 3 where a frigate was stalking a galley from a civ that I had more or less wiped out. I was using the galley's inability to depart from the coast and his limited movement points to pin him in. Only problem was that the galley was spotting me at about four or five squares off and taking evasive measures (an obvious cheat)! It took, finally two ships to pin him in (I had to be careful because if the galley attacked me and put me on defense, he could sink me)! Anyone else encountered this?

[Kc7mxo]

Which are you reffering to, galley's sinking destroyers? or the ai knowing where your stuff is?

Well, hmm. Actually, answer is yes.

[MisterMuppet]

Re: Re: I can't believe it !

Originally posted by martin3393
You can imagine the problem: if one were to allow a player to field a sub that the AI can't see, strategy would very quickly devolve into building as many subs as possible. To counterbalance that effect, the AI cheats, and cheating deprives the stealth unit of any meaning.

I just hope this is a bug and not by design. I reason that this makes me irrated is that the game has a unit in it, a submarine, which can't be seen by any other naval unit of an earlier time. As a player you build coastal cities, research the path leading to submarines, sacrifing other techs and then build a wolfpack to blockade the enemy ports. And then an ironclad hunts you down, and sinks you.
Does the game cheat in such an obvious way. Restore my faith in humanity, tell me it is a bug.
Please.

[Barchan]

FWIW, I have seen an AI sub. It was Indian. My Battleship was on automove to another location when it pysically ran into it. I never saw the sub, just pretty much rammed it. Fortunately, my battleship survived. But I, unlike the AI it seems, never saw the sub until it was too late. And for all I know, again, unlike the AI it seems, the seas could have been filled with them.

I don't see Martin's concerns about subs and the AI. I'm not suggesting that the AI be totally blind to subs, but must it be omniscient ? Why can't the AI use the same spotting rules as the player? How is that so unfair?

I agree that if subs worked as advertised, players would build a lot more of them. So would the AI. And, yes, the seas would be filled with subs and would be very dangerous to unescorted transports. So players (and the AI as well) would have to build more destroyers to counter the threat and implement convoy systems.

Large numbers of subs *can* be a very serious threat. Take a look at the massive number of tons of shipping sunk in WWII (21,000,000 Gross Tons!); at a few points, Germany had strangled Britain down to less than a month's worth of critical supplies on the home islands. It took a concerted effort and several failures before a strong convoy system was created to reduce the wolfpack threat. American subs, on the other hand, neutered the Japanese war effort by eliminating its ability to bring essential rubber and oil (sound familiar?) to the home islands.

But as it is now, subs stink. When the AI can track their every movement from launch to Davy Jones' Locker, you might as well have Boston Whalers out there for all the good they do you. And they're slow, too....