I had a read about what each unit type does and to my understanding subs are great, cost/value super.
But isn't this boring always spamming subs..
I am worried on new map if I decided to go Cruisers only I will go wrong? Any thoughts..
Also i play now on 22player map as Kaukasus, mainly dominating on land but what would it bring me to raise a big navy?
Why has controlling sea zones no economical value?
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.
13 Replies
16 Aug 2015, 17:46
Cruisers are only okay. They are very good air cover but DD(destroyers) and BB(battleships) can do a good job too. I have lately realised that cruisers can be handy but are not vital. A big navy is vital. You can destroy lots of land units and cripple cities with them.
Forum ArmyField Marshall Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!
16 Aug 2015, 18:47
Ok thx for your answer, sharing of experience. Just to be sure in your opinion cruisers only are not the best?
I am dealing with 2 big naval players on this map:
1 has: only battleships
2 has: building many subs
if I go for battleships and destroyers what is than the best ratio to combine them.
16 Aug 2015, 19:48
I like a 1:4 ratio. For every 1 BB, 4 DD. As for those idiots on your map, you can handle the guy who only has BB with either your BB(only if you have more in a 1:3 ratio) or a couple subs. As for the guy who only has subs, just leave him. If you have enough DD, he can't touch you.
Forum ArmyField Marshall Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!
16 Aug 2015, 22:48
Generally speaking, you should have a balanced mix of forces. Before you feel ready for strengthening a strategy, try a well-rounded approach and see how that works for you.
Submarine spam all the way. Sometimes with a few Destroyers.
No, that's not a good tactic. How would you clear up the coast of the US or Europe(if you are US) before a landing?
Forum ArmyField Marshall Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!
18 Aug 2015, 15:29
I think its very silly that subs can attack other subs. It simply didnt happen in WW2.
The first subs to have sonar were build in the '50s.
And while you're at it, remove the asw capability of CC's and BB's. Subs dont come close enough to use depthcharges, and active homing torpedoes are also only used from the '50s onwards.
If you want to protect a convoy of landbased units from subs, you will need destroyers. Or maybe seabombers.
This would end the submarine spam, bring more diversity and make the game more realistic.
What if I'm indoctrinated and actually fighting the good guys?
18 Aug 2015, 15:39
BlackPrince2 wrote:
Subs dont come close enough to use depthcharges
Doesn't matter, I commonly watch footage of ships in WWII dropping depth charges. When using them, the trick is to be moving really fast so you don't blow yourself up. Most CC and DD have torpedo tubes(which look awesome when they fire) and hedgehogs(which are amazingly awesome).
As for sub v sub, they are probably engage each other with deck guns.
Navbombers suck. They are only good against BB in large groups and that's it. Most people use DD anyway.
Forum ArmyField Marshall Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!
18 Aug 2015, 16:03
DD's drop depthcharges, not CCs'or BB's.
Torpedoes aren't usefull vs subs if they're unguided. In WW2 torpedoes run at a fixed depth. If you dont know where the sub is, you cant hit it with a torpedo.
Subs firing at eachother with deck guns...WW1 tactics at best. Most late war subs didnt even have deck guns anymore.
Navbomber suck because of how they are implemented. Irl navbombers saw widespread use.
What if I'm indoctrinated and actually fighting the good guys?
18 Aug 2015, 16:06
BlackPrince2 wrote:
Torpedoes aren't usefull vs subs if they're unguided. In WW2 torpedoes run at a fixed depth. If you dont know where the sub is, you cant hit it with a torpedo.
That's why they aimed before firing.
BlackPrince2 wrote:
Most late war subs didnt even have deck guns anymore.
Lies! There is a previous thread somewhere where we talked about this subject.
BlackPrince2 wrote:
Irl navbombers saw widespread use.
I know.
Forum ArmyField Marshall Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!
22 Aug 2015, 23:31
In the pic, those BB's just finished 2 days work against land targets.
Forum ArmyField Marshall Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!
25 Aug 2015, 14:51
Are Nav Bombers more effective against troops dis-embarking from transports?
Also, their description says, "great view range"... so do they see/scout further than other units?
I looked, and behold, a pale horse! And its riderβs name was Death, and Hades followed him. (The Revelation of John 6:8 ESV)
23 Jan 2016, 23:28
their view range is way too low, but they do allot more dmg to convoys and subs then anything else. 5 seaplanes do the same dmg as 20 bbr when unprotected and on the ocean por disembarking. i found it out the hard way lol what the hell is a CC? SS sub. DD destoyer. CL light cruiser, CA heavy cruiser. BB batleship. CC clasification you made up bro. unless you wana go BC which is a battle cruiser a.k.a. panzershiffe
Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world.