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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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....

[martin3393]

Well, anything I have to say about subs should be taken with (several) grains of salt. In my first game, I was rolling along as Germany and had conquered a huge continent and was just starting to think seriously about sea power when I suffered the "save game corruption" bug. Now, it doesn't seem worthwhile to play until the patch since I can't count on loading my games. Because I had only just developed the destroyer, anything I say about subs is purely speculative and is based more on my experience with other similar games.

I am, however, interested in theorizing why many such games include stealth units that virtually everyone then (correctly) complains don't work as they're supposed to against the computer. The previous post on how forcing the AI to follow the rules on subs would mean that s/he (my AI is a she, I'm pretty sure) would have to escort ships as players do suggests the likely answer: the AI can't do that, evidently. In years of watching what I assume to be similar AI's in CIV, CIV2, SMAC, SMAX, and CTP, I have never yet witnessed the AI move a group of disparate ships across a body of water in a rational and strategically sound fashion. Perhaps this AI is smarter, but in my limited play, I've not observed much substantial difference. Thus, if the AI can't escort very well, allowing players to build wolf packs of invisible subs would rapidly mean that the AI would have to surrender the oceans to the player. At the very least, the AI would have no hope of getting a transport across an ocean. Therefore, the designers allow cheats that make the unit rather stupid. One might say that the very idea of the unit, however alluring it may be, violates the capacity of the game so long as the opponent is automated.

Of course, I write this wishing the contrary were the case: I'd like to use subs too! For God's sake, I was playing Germany!

Plus, I'm still mourning the demise of my favorite piece: the mini-skirted, sun-glass wearing, stiletto-heeled spy (Gosh, her outfit didn't give her away, did it?)! Stealth units really are not faring well in Civ 3. I used to devote one of my better industrial cities solely to the production of spies!

Michael

[Garth Vader]

I think you are "supposed" to see everything in your cultural borders. I suspect that includes subs. I tried moving a sub into somebodys borders and I got the move your units message.

Later I left a number of nuke subs with tactical nukes loaded near, but outside a couple of civs. They never saw those subs.

[minmei]

I've seen another one, hopefully not another bug...

I'm pulling back my fleet of battleships (late game) from a war out east to their home cities for repair. They are on automove back to the cities.

Suddenly an advisor states I lost my supply of wines and furs.

And I get to see my battleship take out an ally's sub. Now I'm at war.

Reload.

Only way around is to use the movement keys, since only then will it pop the dialog box to ask if I want to take the darn thing out.

Arrgh!

[Barchan]

Hmm. Good point, Garth Vader. I don't know for sure, but I think that the sub I hit was within my coastal waters, and I didn't see it. I'll try to test that more later.

Martin, I don't know if the AI is any good at moving armadas of ships, but I have seen some fairly intelligent naval activities: transports escorted by battleships, carriers stacked with multiple capital ships, stacks of ironclads. I've also seen a few dumbo moves, such as empty carriers flung into the great unknown alone and without aircraft. It's a lot better than the willy-nilly naval ops of previous Civs and SMAC, but admittedly I haven't put it fully to the test.

Mostly due to the fighter non-interception bug. The Zulus pounded my mighty fleet with wave after wave of normal bombers, despite the fact my 3 Carriers each had a jet fighter assigned to Air Superiority missions. What's the point of trying to engage in a naval war when the enemy can ream you from afar and you can't do squat about it?

But anyway, that's off point. Frankly, if destroyers and Aegis cruisers have a visibility of two (and can see subs at that range) I don't see where the AI couldn't intelligently move convoys. The destroyers zig-zag, scout ahead, and clear the way for other units. Sure, the convoy moves slower, but that's the price of survival.

Air units should also be able to spot subs. (Again, due to the utter lameness of fighters at sea, I haven't really put this to the test. But if they can't, this needs to be fixed in a patch as well.) Using a few fighters would also allow you (or the AI) to reconthe way ahead and sweep it clear of subs.

But with subs as weak as they are, why bother? I'm a bit disappointed in them. I'd really like to see a nuclear attack sub, one that had a higher attack rating, could see other subs, and couldn't carry missiles. It'd be just as expensive as the missile sub, but more useful for naval operations. Oh, and the attack sub would be faster as well.

[SerapisIV]

Originally posted by Barchan
But anyway, that's off point. Frankly, if destroyers and Aegis cruisers have a visibility of two (and can see subs at that range) I don't see where the AI couldn't intelligently move convoys. The destroyers zig-zag, scout ahead, and clear the way for other units. Sure, the convoy moves slower, but that's the price of survival.

The destroyers can't see subs. The Civilopedia says that only Aegis cruisers and other subs can see regular and diesel subs. No mention of destroyers (also no mention in the destroyer entry either, though the Aegis entry says they can so them)

I find this odd, as why else would you build destroyers? I think only choppers or bombers should be able to see subs, not fighters. There should be an Anti-sub search like there is a bombard command.

[SlightlyMadman]

I must agree with minmei here about this bug. I was playing in a game where 2 strong allies (Chinese and French) and I were waging war against the Romans (who were the largest nation, and in danger of achievinc military conquest). We all ended up building massive navies and bombarding his costal cities and improvements.

Throughout the course of this campaign, I accidentally ran my battleships into Chinese subs at least 4 times. I would then have to reload from the autosave, as I did not want to go to war with my strongest ally! This became extremely aggrivating, as I had to stop using the goto command, and move my ships around a very long coastline by hand.

Very sloppy.

[Dominator_Jones]

I am not so sure how the AI is programmed to respond to subs. I was in a war and had a lot of subs moving around on defense. When the AI moves it's transports, it moves the transport then moves the battleship protecting it. It blindly would move a transport into a sub which would sink the transport.

[minmei]

I've seen it too! Their transport moves first, then the escort, destroyer or battleship, and one move at a time, not the full range.

Instead of seeing the escort moving 5 spaces, "clearing out" the path for the transport, then the transport moving,

you see transport move a space, escort move a space, and so on.

Good thing, it should be an easy bug fix. Who in their right mind would move the transport first? And since they have obviously thought of the escort in the AI, why backwards?

Shove, shove, shove the game,
right on out the door,
Nobody cares if it's all full of bugs,
Infogrames will sell more.

Couldn't resist.

[Capt Dizle]

This is so sad. I wish the art and sound budgets were spent on gameplay and the gameplay budget was spent on art and sound.

This is why I buy 2-4 games per year now instead of the 12-24 I used to buy.

Whoever is making these marketing decisions is driving the pc game market into the ground. I guess we will all be playing consoles in a few years.

[Barchan]

Minimei:

The only reason I can imagine moving the transport first is to avoid starting an accidental war; since non-combat units can't initiate combat, if a transport bumps into a sub nothing will happen.

Perhaps the bug is so obvious even the AI can see it!

SerapisIV:

I noticed that destroyers are not advertised as being able to see subs, but sort of assume (and hope) that they can. Why the hell else, other than not being able to wait for a battleship, would you build one then?

True, true, ASW is traditionally the role of the bomber and chopper and not the fighter. But since fighters can perform Recon missions, it would make sense (game-wise) to allow them to spot subs and other naval units. You'd get one air strike (bomber or fighter) at the sub and then it would dive (disappearing from view) and could not be reattacked until respotted. My $.02, anyway.

[MisterMuppet]

Originally posted by Barchan
Perhaps the bug is so obvious even the AI can see it!

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by Barchan
I noticed that destroyers are not advertised as being able to see subs, but sort of assume (and hope) that they can. Why the hell else, other than not being able to wait for a battleship, would you build one then?

Destroyers can't see subs. If you look at the entry in the editor, you will see that there is an unit ability called "Can See Submarines" which the destroyer does not have selected. It is simple enough to change, though.