| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Posts: 93
|
|
|
Post subject: type XXI submarine (done)
|
 |
|
i wanted to make this submarine in to a custom card but im not quite sure how to go about it.
what i had come up with for this sub was.
cost 15
torps/5/4/3
armor/4/6/2
speed 2 slow 5
Quiet Sub - ASW attacks against this unit get -1 on each attack die.
Homing Torpedoes - When this unit makes torpedo attacks, a result of 5 or higher is considered a success.
elusive quarry-ships with sub hunter can,t use that ability against this unit.
this is from wiki.The Type XXI's streamlined and hydrodynamically clean hull design allowed high submerged speed. The ability to outrun many surface ships while submerged, combined with improved dive times, made it much harder to chase and destroy. It also gave the boat a 'sprint ability' when positioning itself for an attack. Older boats had to surface to sprint into position. This often gave a boat away, especially after aircraft became available for convoy escort.
The Type XXIs had better facilities than previous classes, including a freezer for foodstuffs. Conveniences for the crew included a shower and a washbasin – crews on other boats spent weeks without bathing or shaving. The Type XXI featured a hydraulic torpedo reloading system that allowed all six torpedo tubes, located in the bow, to be reloaded faster than a Type VIIC could reload a single tube. The Type XXI could fire 18 torpedoes in under 20 minutes. The total warload was 23 torpedoes, or 17 torpedoes and 12 sea mines. The XXI featured an advanced sonar system which allowed aiming torpedoes without using the periscope, increasing stealth. |
|
 Wed Nov 04, 2009 12:57 pm |
|
|
Posts: 9280
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
It may be a good idea to focus on the two XXI-type operational submarines: U-3008 and U-2511.
I'm not too comfortable to get a class card, because then people will use them too much. In practice, they were almost "planned" in WAS terms, because only these two were sent to sea and none of the two fired any torpedoes in the few days before the war ended.
Stats for both:
In terms of torpedo tubes (6x) and torpedoes (23), it's the same as U-510. However, it can't get wolfpack. Also, it had an advanced aiming system. So, we can give it 5/4/3/- but no related special ability.
Speed 2 slow 5 is extreme. In practice, all ships below 20 knots get speed 1 (e.g. St. Lo with 19.5 knots got speed 1). However, I agree that we need to give it something about speed. My suggestion is
Speed 1 + FAST SUB (+1 speed once per game) (similar wording with Terrible, without the restriction for objectives).
The difficulty to be detected should also be mentioned. Elusive quarry looks just fine to me.
For armour, I think that your 4/6/2 is ok given its (theoretical) ability to evade, but we can't give it more related SAs.
_________________
 
My new blog, specialised in the military equipment of Greece (1821-today). |
|
| Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:39 pm |
|
|
Resident U-Head
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
I mostly agree with ND...
4/6/2 hull seems right. It spends far more time underwater than conventional subs so aircraft should have a tough time hitting it.
5/4/3 torps is OK, though 4/3/2 with Advanced Torpedoes (one damage on a 5, two damage on a 6) would be better - at least if the unit didn't have so many SAs already.
Speed 1 with Submerged Sprint (+1 speed once per game) is good.
Elusive Quarry is spot on.
As for the number of units, let's not forget that although only two sailed on war patrols, more than 100 (!) were actually completed and commissioned since May 1944.
_________________
  |
|
| Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:57 pm |
|
|
Posts: 9280
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Submerged Sprint is an excellent name!
_________________
My new blog, specialised in the military equipment of Greece (1821-today). |
|
| Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:58 pm |
|
|
Posts: 93
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
so the homing torpedoes your saying would be one of the reasons why it gets 5 at range 0 not an extra SA that it gets. how about the quick reloading hydraulic system. how about if it got the homing torps at range 0 but not farther out because this type would have little trouble hitting the the target at less than 5000yds with all of its advancements. plus i think that it should have the quiet sub because for one thing it was like one off the first subs that could aim without needing to surface.
and even though it did not get a kill one did have its sites on a British cruiser the day the war ended. |
|
| Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:08 pm |
|
|
Posts: 93
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
ok so who do i need to contact about making this a custom card,or do yall not want it  |
|
| Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:33 pm |
|
|
Posts: 9280
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Give it some time. Weedsrock2 will notice it soon.
_________________
My new blog, specialised in the military equipment of Greece (1821-today). |
|
| Wed Nov 04, 2009 6:15 pm |
|
|
Posts: 1642
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Update...
U-3008 (Type XXI Submarine)
1,621 tonnes to 2,100 tonnes
Available from 19 October 1944
Cost 15?
Speed 1
Torps 5/4/3/-
Armor 4/6/2
Submerged Shot, Elusive Quarry, Submerged Sprint (New SA) ?
Submerged Sprint - Once per game, at the beginning of your Sea Movement step, you can give this unit +1 speed for the turn.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U3008.jpg
_________________
Repaint Reference...
http://aaminis.myfastforum.org/about6080.html |
|
| Thu Nov 05, 2009 4:07 am |
|
|
Posts: 543
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
I am going out on a limb here but I think it should be way higher then 15. I know the cost is speculative, so just throwing that out there as to where it needs to be costed. The Archerfish is 15 and the U-47 is 14, I-26 is 16. This needs to be around 20-21 imo.
_________________
Take a peek at my tradelist:
http://aaminis.myfastforum.org/about8921.html |
|
| Thu Nov 05, 2009 4:22 am |
|
|
AHF Bronze-Rated Trader
Posts: 4166
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
I have noticed!
I will make a comment less 'tongue-in-cheek' than I did on the original thread. These boats were coming off the construction slips in late 1943 yet few of them were in seaworthy condition until the war was virtually over. According to 'Wiki' the modular construction technique was flawed and inland manufacturers that knew nothing about shipbuilding were used to make the modules. Go to U-boat.net and you will see that most of them only went out on repeated 'training' cruises in 1944 and 1945. Most likely to test and shake out the defects. So while they were great subs once they were extensively repaired they only went out on a lot of 'training/teething' cruises in practice.
I think we should tone these down a bit. Agree with it or not, even the Oi with 48 torpedoes and a 24 torpedo broadside only got a 4/3/3/2 torpedo rating.
I think if any unit needs a negative SA this is certainly a top candidate. I am not a big fan of negative SA's, but this was clearly 'technology ahead of it's time' so much so that they couldn't get them working properly until the war was almost over.
I suggest this:
Teething pains: At the beginning of the Submarine Attack phase roll a die, on a 1 this unit cannot make a torpedo attack this turn.
This should compensate for the 'advanced technology not quite ready for prime time' and tone these subs down a bit. I also think their torpedo attack should be reduced to 4/3/3/-. I am good with ND's "Speed 1 + Fast sub" +1 per game. Calling it Submerged Sprint sounds good.
Elusive Quarry also seems appropriate.
Those three SA's are all that will reasonably fit on the card. I don't think we need to boost the torpedoes anyway. Their technology was never tested in battle.
So these guys have a good chance of surviving, but their ability to successfully deliver an attack is toned down to reflect their incomplete and unproven status by the end of the war.
And I think I am being lenient because Allied ASW techniques and equipment had come a long way by the end of the war. These subs would have been a little harder to find, but not impossible.
The Convoy scenario is already impossible to win for the Convoy. Making a nearly indestructible and omnipotent sub will not help the game IMO.
_________________
The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care"
Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship! |
|
| Thu Nov 05, 2009 4:32 am |
|
|
Posts: 1642
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| weedsrock2 wrote: | I suggest this:
Teething pains: At the beginning of the Submarine Attack phase roll a die, on a 1 this unit cannot make a torpedo attack this turn. |
So, are you saying we should drop the underwater piu-piu, with bubbles? 
If we keep Submerged Sprint and Elusive Quarry, we won't have room for Submerged Shot.
Update...
U-3008 (Type XXI Submarine)
1,621 tonnes to 2,100 tonnes
Available from 19 October 1944
Cost 19?
Speed 1
Torps 4/4/3/-
Armor 4/6/2
Elusive Quarry, Teething Pains, Submerged Sprint (New SA's)?
Teething Pains - At the beginning of the Submarine Attack phase, roll a die. On a 1 this unit can't make a Torpedo attack this turn.
Submerged Sprint - Once per game, at the beginning of your Sea Movement step, you can give this unit +1 speed for the turn.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U3008.jpg
_________________
Repaint Reference...
http://aaminis.myfastforum.org/about6080.html |
|
| Thu Nov 05, 2009 5:06 am |
|
|
AHF Bronze-Rated Trader
Posts: 4166
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Hmm. They are all fairly short SA's. We might be able to squeeze in Submerged Shot. Personally, I think a sub without submerged shot has seriously downgraded utility in the game.
So:
Submerged Shot
Elusive Quarry
Submerged Sprint
Teething Pains
It might fit since all of them have short text.
_________________
The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care"
Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship! |
|
| Thu Nov 05, 2009 5:18 am |
|
|
Posts: 1642
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| weedsrock2 wrote: | | It might fit since all of them have short text. |
They are short, and Sub cards have more room for SA's than Ships with all their scores. What about the cost?
Latest update...
U-3008 (Type XXI Submarine)
1,621 tonnes to 2,100 tonnes
Available from 19 October 1944
Cost 19?
Speed 1
Torps 4/4/3/-
Armor 4/6/2
Submerged Shot, Elusive Quarry, Teething Pains, Submerged Sprint (New SA's)?
Teething Pains - At the beginning of the Submarine Attack phase, roll a die. On a 1 this unit can't make a Torpedo attack this turn.
Submerged Sprint - Once per game, at the beginning of your Sea Movement step, you can give this unit +1 speed for the turn.
_________________
Repaint Reference...
http://aaminis.myfastforum.org/about6080.html |
|
| Thu Nov 05, 2009 5:29 am |
|
|
Posts: 727
|
|
|
| Thu Nov 05, 2009 5:46 am |
|
|
Posts: 727
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Oi vs XXI - its different if a sub shoots torpedos or a cruiser. The cruiser can see ecery one, the sub not (nor their electric torpedos). |
|
| Thu Nov 05, 2009 5:49 am |
|
|
Posts: 1754
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
im still not passing the negative SA. Just change the year to 1944 and get rid of it.
Like so many other negative SA's, it just ruins what would otherwise be a good unit. |
|
| Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:39 am |
|
|
Posts: 1642
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
What if we make a class card with Teething Problems? We could leave it off the one or two that get names, since those will likely be the ones with their glitches fixed. Make sense?
_________________
Repaint Reference...
http://aaminis.myfastforum.org/about6080.html |
|
| Thu Nov 05, 2009 8:58 am |
|
|
Posts: 9280
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Did the two XXIs that were sent to patrol have any notable teething problems?
_________________
My new blog, specialised in the military equipment of Greece (1821-today). |
|
| Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:04 am |
|
|
Posts: 1754
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| chesty wrote: | | What if we make a class card with Teething Problems? We could leave it off the one or two that get names, since those will likely be the ones with their glitches fixed. Make sense? |
Negative SA's really just don't make sense to me at all unless it's really valid.
Hoods Fatal Flaw doesn't even make sesne to me, RB would of been better just to give her a lower vital armor score is he wanted it to explode easy.
Taiho's explosion makes no sense, we had to argue for ....knows how many pages completely ignoring that it took several hours to explode in a freak situation.
Unmask guns (both FS and TF version) very little sense. On older En Echelon style layouts that have trouble bearing all guns on a broadside it does, but not on Gangut, Fuso, or Omaha, all of which could bear a full salvo easily. Not to mention squiffy facing rules in general.
This one too.
People really seem to be forgetting that a turn is really only 10 minutes (maybe 20 tops) CV rules are just funny. The only negative SA's that should really exist are ones that immediately affect a ship.
Example - KGV and jammed mount. That is something that can happen in 10 mintes. But..........even that is a little too harsh. Maybe if that included a once per game it'd be ok. Equipment just wasn't put in the field like that.
For this one, the negative SA is basically saying that the submarine just cant launch a single torpedo 1/6th of the time. That would never happen. Serisuly, no boat would go to sea if 10 mintues out of the hour it couldnt fire it's primary weapon. The system would have been ripped out, they'd of been converted to minelayers or transports or something, but they wouldn't have been used as attack subs, ever,
Even KGV can still shoot.
This is why we should not perpetuate negative SA's. They just ruin units for no valid reason.
I know i'm getting all preachy right? But seriously i am amazed on how easily Negative SA's are passed/agreed on when we are overly critical to the point of.....insanity on nearly all other aspects.
bah.....i shouldn't type at 5:45 AM |
|
| Thu Nov 05, 2009 10:45 am |
|
|
AHF Bronze-Rated Trader
Posts: 4166
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
My point is we are creating an 'uber sub' that will be very difficult to stop with existing ASW stats. There is no doubt these would have been tough cookies if they had actually made it into war service, but they did not. So my concern is to keep them from totally breaking the game. If there is a way to do that without a negative SA I will be fine with that. But limiting year doesn't 'cut it' for me because gamers rarely use year limits and many do not use class limits. Even if they do use class limits it will be argued there were over a hundred of them.
_________________
The IJN Carrier Liberation Force - "Because We Care"
Join the IJNCVLF. Service Guarantees Citizenship! |
|
| Thu Nov 05, 2009 1:42 pm |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Donations are used for Forumini Olympics awards (donations admin: Aquarius)
| Forumini Gallery |
 |
|
