Missile Subs

[zinc]

Should you only need a radar to build missile subs, instead of the tech centre requirement that exists now?

Obviously the issue is that Soviets have no equivalent of the destroyer, and so have no naval anti-air or ability to do any land damage before the tech centre.

Also, what about a small drop in price or an increase in shielding? They are already cheaper than the allies cruiser. 2000 compared to 2400 I think.

[Assist]

Don't touch that. There is much better idea I will discuss in depth another day.

For now, I will just briefly point out where the problem is.
Why do you feel the need a unit equal to destroyer?

I tell you: the thing that bothers all player in navy war is not really the navy itself. But rather the combination of helicopters + destroyers, while soviets can't combine planes + subs.

Destroyers vs submarines is well balanced.
But destroyers + helicopters vs subs + planers is clearly big fail for soviets.

Solution: I will discuss it later.

[Doomsday]

For now, I will just briefly point out where the problem is.
Why do you feel the need a unit equal to destroyer?

I tell you: the thing that bothers all player in navy war is not really the navy itself. But rather the combination of helicopters + destroyers, while soviets can't combine planes + subs.

This. Allied have a massive edge because at radar dome tech they get hinds + navy. Soviets can use yaks + navy at radar tech but they don't have anything to counter hinds. I think possible solutions are changing missile sub to equal tech level as allied destroyer or making it so that submarines don't submerge when launching torpedoes.

Soviet naval mirror match also seems awful with current missile sub. Whoever gets yaks out first has an edge because there is no naval AA before tech center.

[avalach21]

For now, I will just briefly point out where the problem is.
Why do you feel the need a unit equal to destroyer?

I tell you: the thing that bothers all player in navy war is not really the navy itself. But rather the combination of helicopters + destroyers, while soviets can't combine planes + subs.

This. Allied have a massive edge because at radar dome tech they get hinds + navy. Soviets can use yaks + navy at radar tech but they don't have anything to counter hinds. I think possible solutions are changing missile sub to equal tech level as allied destroyer or making it so that submarines don't submerge when launching torpedoes.

Soviet naval mirror match also seems awful with current missile sub. Whoever gets yaks out first has an edge because there is no naval AA before tech center.

I keep wanting to say... why dont Yaks (& Migs) have Air to Air capabilities. It seems that it's been discussed extensively before, so no one wants to talk about it, but I haven't seen those discussions, so could someone fill me in as to why that is the case? Would be awesome to have plane dog fights over the sea and would be a natural way to give Soviets AA capabilities at radar tech

[Smitty]

I keep wanting to say... why dont Yaks (& Migs) have Air to Air capabilities. It seems that it's been discussed extensively before, so no one wants to talk about it, but I haven't seen those discussions, so could someone fill me in as to why that is the case? Would be awesome to have plane dog fights over the sea and would be a natural way to give Soviets AA capabilities at radar tech

MIG's would absolutely wreck allied air and it wouldn't be close. They would be able to hit and run longbows all day. Keep in mind Sovs have flak trucks and mammoths for additional anti-air capabilities.

[avalach21]

I keep wanting to say... why dont Yaks (& Migs) have Air to Air capabilities. It seems that it's been discussed extensively before, so no one wants to talk about it, but I haven't seen those discussions, so could someone fill me in as to why that is the case? Would be awesome to have plane dog fights over the sea and would be a natural way to give Soviets AA capabilities at radar tech

MIG's would absolutely wreck allied air and it wouldn't be close. They would be able to hit and run longbows all day. Keep in mind Sovs have flak trucks and mammoths for additional anti-air capabilities.

Ok I understand that, even though there's probably potential ways it could still be balanced. Regardless, how about the Yak though.. since we are talking about Radar dome level AA to help out at sea. The yaks should be able to shoot ground and air with their machine guns. To explain why the Yaks can shoot air to air and the migs cannot, just say the Migs are loaded with Missles for ground strikes which aren't designed for air to air combat and logically you're ok.

[Smitty]

Ok I understand that, even though there's probably potential ways it could still be balanced. Regardless, how about the Yak though.. since we are talking about Radar dome level AA to help out at sea. The yaks should be able to shoot ground and air with their machine guns. To explain why the Yaks can shoot air to air and the migs cannot, just say the Migs are loaded with Missles for ground strikes which aren't designed for air to air combat and logically you're ok.

This is a world with tesla death rays and a crazy lady who outranges and massacres riflemen with dual .45s. The second folks start modeling the game based on real-world logic as opposed to what makes sense balance-wise; this game is in trouble.

[avalach21]

Ok I understand that, even though there's probably potential ways it could still be balanced. Regardless, how about the Yak though.. since we are talking about Radar dome level AA to help out at sea. The yaks should be able to shoot ground and air with their machine guns. To explain why the Yaks can shoot air to air and the migs cannot, just say the Migs are loaded with Missles for ground strikes which aren't designed for air to air combat and logically you're ok.

This is a world with tesla death rays and a crazy lady who outranges and massacres riflemen with dual .45s. The second folks start modeling the game based on real-world logic as opposed to what makes sense balance-wise; this game is in trouble.

I understand that, I don't mind taking some logical liberties when necessary or appropriate. At the same time, I appreciate when things make logical sense as much as possible. Part of the charm of the game was how finely it danced the line between having an immersive semi-realistic representation of war delicately mixed in with some fantastical technologies.

Regardless of the logical analysis, and as we both agree... more importantly, from a gameplay perspective, what about giving Yaks air to air capabilities???

[Materianer]

Sounds like a bad idea to me, Missle subs are tech units and that shouldnt change.
They got all the attributes of a tech unit and that just dont fit.
They are like the allied tech ship cruiser so make it also available with radar?
They submerge have long range missiles and shoot air. If you use em right they are really strong, maybe too strong in midgame.

[OMnom]

I'm going to post a thread next week with an experimental map containing many new features, including yak/mig AA, a naval overhaul, and maybe an upgrade system, should time permit.

[zinc]

Sounds like a bad idea to me, Missle subs are tech units and that shouldnt change.
They got all the attributes of a tech unit and that just dont fit.
They are like the allied tech ship cruiser so make it also available with radar?
They submerge have long range missiles and shoot air. If you use em right they are really strong, maybe too strong in midgame.

True they are a long range high tech equivalent to the cruiser in the original game, so this is an understandable objection.

However, it's possible that the original just wasn't balanced that well for naval... I'm not sure that 3 missile subs (for example) are actually more dangerous in the mid game compared to half a dozen destroyers. A few destroyers can actually put a lot of pressure on land targets as well as the anti-air use, regardless of the limited range.

How do you justify cruisers being a tech unit and not the missile subs? -- well I think it would come down to whether the game balance works ok. If if it's balanced, I don't think we need to worry about any theoretical inconsistency with Soviets having a long range weapon at mid tech rather than high tech.

[avalach21]

Sounds like a bad idea to me, Missle subs are tech units and that shouldnt change.
They got all the attributes of a tech unit and that just dont fit.
They are like the allied tech ship cruiser so make it also available with radar?
They submerge have long range missiles and shoot air. If you use em right they are really strong, maybe too strong in midgame.

True they are a long range high tech equivalent to the cruiser in the original game, so this is an understandable objection.

However, it's possible that the original just wasn't balanced that well for naval... I'm not sure that 3 missile subs (for example) are actually more dangerous in the mid game compared to half a dozen destroyers. A few destroyers can actually put a lot of pressure on land targets as well as the anti-air use, regardless of the limited range.

How do you justify cruisers being a tech unit and not the missile subs? -- well I think it would come down to whether the game balance works ok. If if it's balanced, I don't think we need to worry about any theoretical inconsistency with Soviets having a long range weapon at mid tech rather than high tech.

Destroyers have very limited range. It's very easy to move/plan your base build around being inland enough to not be in range of the destroyers. The missle subs should have significantly more range than the destroyers.

[avalach21]

I think giving Yak's AA capabilities would pretty much solve this issue... In regards to this thread and the other thread discussing navy.... the Soviets were designed to have limitations as well as unique possibilities with their Navy.. so I don't like ideas that fundamentally change the naval identity of the Soviets. The allies always had a more dynamic navy and that's their strength. The Soviets were always limited with their inability to attack land targets with the subs, but really they are stealthed and undetectable until they fire. Even GPS doesn't expose them so that is truly a humongous advantage if used properly. Want to know good AA for subs? Stay submerged.. lol

The Soviets strength was always in their airforce, and considering that planes can fly over the water to support the navy, this should be our focus in addressing any imbalances at sea in my opinion.

Giving Yaks the ability to engage air to air targets will give Soviets Radar tech level anti air support for their Navy.

[Orb]

Unfortunately, giving Yaks AA would really do a number on the land balance. Hinds are slow and allies have no real mobile AA. If a Hind ever left an allies base it would be hunted down by Yaks pretty easily. Not to mention Longbows have a hard time engaging Yaks, and depending on the implementation I could see Yaks beating Longbows as well.

To be honest, when the balance is comparing 2 sea units vs 3 it's kind of hard to get engaging balance. I think the soviets need another sea unit, maybe an AA boat or something.

[avalach21]

Unfortunately, giving Yaks AA would really do a number on the land balance. Hinds are slow and allies have no real mobile AA. If a Hind ever left an allies base it would be hunted down by Yaks pretty easily. Not to mention Longbows have a hard time engaging Yaks, and depending on the implementation I could see Yaks beating Longbows as well.

To be honest, when the balance is comparing 2 sea units vs 3 it's kind of hard to get engaging balance. I think the soviets need another sea unit, maybe an AA boat or something.

I don't necessarily see an issue... allies "dominate" the seas, soviets "dominate" the skies.. that's their faction's strengths. I agree, Allies have no mobile AA which is frustrating as an Allies player, but that's an inherent weakness of the allies and you have to plan around that. yes the Hinds would be vulnerable to yaks out in the open. The Allied player needs to asses if they can do hit and run strikes with their Hinds.. if they can't then they need to be relegated to supporting their ground force, which is how they are mostly used anyways.. And are extremely vital for that purpose (for vision and support).