I would hate to see this thing in the game - I abhor all subs

[Musket22]

[Aethervox]

Hopefully, Wedgie will never see your post. If they do, they might think the Surcouf would be the ideal offering for the Whales.  (I can 'see' wallets already opening)

[Ensign Cthulhu]

In development already, I am sure. 

Aren't you a co-op main, Musket? Red bot subs are food there. I kill them all the time.

[Itwastuesday]

It's only a matter of time.

[Jakob Knight]

This has been brought up a few times since Subs were put into testing.  The biggest problem with it is that to use it's main feature ( 203mm guns ), it would have to remain on the surface and visible, making it easy fodder for ASW.  It isn't going to outgun a surface warship, and engaging in a gun duel with even a DD would likely leave it seriously outmatched.

 

I don't doubt we'll see it, but I don't currently see it being much different than the I-56.

 

 

[kriegerfaust]

S-584-163 "Cruiser Submarine Type # 1--Unprotected" ... October 20, 1920 Note:

Download Image:
Low (PNG, 319x319px, 39KB)
Med (JPEG, 1280x1280px, 239KB)
High Res (JPEG, 2475x1100px, 315KB)

Title: "Cruiser Submarine Type # 1--Unprotected" ... October 20, 1920 Note:

Description: Photo #: S-584-163 Cruiser Submarine Type # 1Unprotected ... October 20, 1920 Preliminary design plan for a Cruiser Submarine (Type # 1 Unprotected). The Chief of the Bureau of Construction and Repair requested in early October 1920 that his staff develop a set of comparative studies for ships of this type, apparently reflecting his desire to anticipate a possible need for large submarine scouts. The vessel was intended to carry heavy guns and scout aircraft, and be able to submerge to great depths. Type # 1 emphasized gun armament and speed and had no protection and large aircraft storage tubes topside that the Bureau considered a risk to survival if flooded. The concept was not pursued. This plan provided eight 8-inch guns, diesel machinery, and a surface speed of 14 knots in a ship 400 feet long on the waterline, 46 feet in beam, and with a normal surface displacement of 10,000 tons. The original document was ink on linen (black on white). The original plan is in the 1911-1925 Spring Styles Book. U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command Photograph.

 

S-584-166 "Cruiser Submarine Type # 2 -- Armored" ... October 23, 1920 Note:

Download Image:
Low (PNG, 319x319px, 40KB)
Med (JPEG, 1280x1280px, 249KB)
High Res (JPEG, 2475x1100px, 462KB)

Title: "Cruiser Submarine Type # 2 -- Armored" ... October 23, 1920 Note:

Description: Photo #: S-584-166 Cruiser Submarine Type # 2 Armored ... October 23, 1920 Preliminary design plan for a Cruiser Submarine (Type # 2 Armored). The Chief of the Bureau of Construction and Repair requested in early October 1920 that his staff develop a set of comparative studies for ships of this type, apparently reflecting his desire to anticipate a possible need for large submarine scouts for transoceanic operations. Type # 2 incorporated 474 tons of armor protection but a bureau design report considered it very vulnerable to torpedo attack because it lacked the side protection system in Type # 3 (see Photo # S-584-165). The concept was not pursued. This plan provided eight 8-inch guns, diesel machinery, and a surface speed of 15.5 knots in a ship 490 feet long on the waterline, 60 feet in beam, and with a normal surface displacement of 13,500 tons. The original document was ink on linen (black on white). The original plan is in the 1911-1925 Spring Styles Book. U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command Photograph.

[kriegerfaust]

S-584-165 "Cruiser Submarine Type # 3 -- Protected against Torp. & Gun Fire" ... October 23, 1920 Note:

Download Image:
Low (PNG, 319x319px, 40KB)
Med (JPEG, 1280x1280px, 252KB)
High Res (JPEG, 2475x1100px, 477KB)

Title: "Cruiser Submarine Type # 3 -- Protected against Torp. & Gun Fire" ... October 23, 1920 Note:

Description: Photo #: S-584-165 Cruiser Submarine Type # 3 Protected against Torp. & Gun Fire ... October 23, 1920 Preliminary design plan for a Cruiser Submarine (Type # 3 Protected against Torpedoes and Gunfire). The Chief of the Bureau of Construction and Repair requested in early October 1920 that his staff develop a set of comparative studies for ships of this type, apparently reflecting his desire to anticipate a possible need for large submarine scouts for transoceanic operations. Compared to the other three designs considered, a contemporary Bureau report considered Type # 3 superior for having a better balance of capabilities, being deficient only in speed. The concept was not pursued, however. This plan provided four 8-inch guns, diesel machinery, and a surface speed of 11.75 knots in a ship 425 feet long on the waterline, 60 feet in beam, and with a normal surface displacement of 13,500 tons. The original document was ink on linen (black on white). The original plan is in the 1911-1925 Spring Styles Book. U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command Photograph.

S-584-164 "Cruiser Submarine Type # 4 (High Speed)" ... October 23, 1920 Note:

Download Image:
Low (PNG, 319x319px, 36KB)
Med (JPEG, 1280x1280px, 215KB)
High Res (JPEG, 2475x1100px, 403KB)

Title: "Cruiser Submarine Type # 4 (High Speed)" ... October 23, 1920 Note:

Description: Photo #: S-584-164 Cruiser Submarine Type # 4 (High Speed) ... October 23, 1920 Incomplete preliminary design plan for a Cruiser Submarine (Type # 4 High Speed). The Chief of the Bureau of Construction and Repair requested in early October 1920 that his staff develop a set of comparative studies for ships of this type, apparently reflecting his desire to anticipate a possible need for large submarine scouts. Compared to Type # 1 (see Photo # S-584-163), Type # 4 sacrificed considerable cruising radius and most gun armament to achieve higher speed, while adding no protection, and accordingly was considered unattractive in a contemporary bureau report. The concept was not pursued. This plan provided two 8-inch guns, diesel machinery, and a surface speed of 18 knots in a ship 550 feet long on the waterline, 42 feet in beam, and with a normal surface displacement of 8,750 tons. The original document was pencil on linen (black on white). The original plan is in the 1911-1925 Spring Styles Book. U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command Photograph.

Edited December 25, 2023 by kriegerfaust

[Asym]

Wow.  Innovation is always "something that simply itches us; to scratch somewhere, no one can find"....   Disruptive or Destructive or simply Delightful.

Now, I have a feeling someone was reading Tom Swift Sr. books.....

     

Written when the designers of ^^^^^ everything above were kids.....  Hmmmm?  I wonder where we get our ideas some days???

[Jakob Knight]

Wait till we get ramming Subs with drills on their bows.

 

 

[HamptonRoads]

26 minutes ago, Jakob Knight said:

Wait till we get ramming Subs with drills on their bows.

No drills, but this did happen:

 

[Wolfswetpaws]

In the past, the Surcouf has been suggested as a future premium Submarine.

While the design concept has some legitimate compromises & drawbacks, the "novelty" and "collector value" seems undeniable (to me, at least).

She might shine in certain scenario operations?

[Jakob Knight]

6 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

She might shine in certain scenario operations?

 

 

I sense a new Salvage For Victory candidate for when all of the resources have been drained on Kitakami.

 

 

[Wolfswetpaws]

1 minute ago, Jakob Knight said:

 

I sense a new Salvage For Victory candidate for when all of the resources have been drained on Kitakami.

🤔

[Lord_Slayer]

10 hours ago, Musket22 said:

 

2 hours ago, Jakob Knight said:

This has been brought up a few times since Subs were put into testing.  The biggest problem with it is that to use it's main feature ( 203mm guns ), it would have to remain on the surface and visible, making it easy fodder for ASW.  It isn't going to outgun a surface warship, and engaging in a gun duel with even a DD would likely leave it seriously outmatched.

 

I don't doubt we'll see it, but I don't currently see it being much different than the I-56.

 

 

 

23 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

In the past, the Surcouf has been suggested as a future premium Submarine.

While the design concept has some legitimate compromises & drawbacks, the "novelty" and "collector value" seems undeniable (to me, at least).

She might shine in certain scenario operations?

The I-56 and the Thrasher are the only subs in game with a controllable gun. They are really too small to be effective on anything but a cargo ship. The rate of fire and damage they do is not going to do much against a DD, let alone anything bigger. Myself I have rarely if ever used the guns during a battle.

Surcouf, if it does come into the game, is going to be unusual.
She has 6 torpedo tubes forward, and 2 swivel mounts aft with two torps each. She also carried a spotter plane for the 8in guns. The twin 8in guns were themselves in a turret, and could only fire after being one the surface for 3 minutes. Their range was limited by the viewing distance, and could be increased by raising the periscope, but that put it a max of about 10 miles. The plane could increase it to the guns max of 26 miles.

If WG brought Surcouf in, I could see the following being done:

1. No homing torps. With 6 bow mounted tubes and 2 swivel mounts aft, it has alot of torpedo area coverage.
2. Delay on the guns after surfacing. There should be a delay of the 'guns loading' when the ship surfaces. As it is, the I-56 and Thrasher can fire on reaching the surface and continue to fire even as the ship begins to dive. Being much larger in caliber, Surcouf should have a delay before being able to use the guns.

3. Spotter plane. Give it access to a spotter plane, which in turn allow the guns to fire further. However, much like U-4501's heal, if the ship submerges, the spotter plane is 'lost' instantly. While it would be fine to use it to fire the guns, it shouldn't benefit the sub whose vison is reduced at periscope depth.

4. It should be slow. This is a massive submarine. It was historically slow. However, that would likely mean nothing to WG, so it would likely get a speed boost.
 

The only parts in doubt are the dive time, concealment, and perhaps its Tier (I'm leaning towards 8). Most subs have a smaller concealment then most of the DDs at their tier. But this is a massive sub, so I'd likely place its concealment towards the higher end, similar to some of the large Russian DDs, around 7km. Dive time could be around a high of 5 minutes, but with a slow recharge. Its potentially an ambush sub, either using the torpedos or guns to citadel a passing cruiser.

[MysticalWar]

21 hours ago, HamptonRoads said:

No drills, but this did happen:

 

Yep Subs are still scary. So far I only have 13 sub kills with depth charge since they been out.

[Jakob Knight]

2 hours ago, MysticalWar said:

Yep Subs are still scary. So far I only have 13 sub kills with depth charge since they been out.

 

I have quite a few, though if they were easy kills, they wouldn't be playable.  When they come out, I may gravitate towards the RU Subs, since I like to hunt the opposing Subs.  The S-189 is my go-to for this, so I'm waiting to see if the national line maintains this focus or gets changed to something like other Subs.

The Surcouf doesn't generate much interest in me because of that, but I might pick one up if WG goes the route of Lesta and completely abandons the idea of any kind of balance in favor of blistering firepower on screen.  I hope not, but desperate companies can make short sighted decisions if their competitors throw themselves off the bridge to get attention.

 

 

[kriegerfaust]

[Admiral_Karasu]

On 12/26/2023 at 5:36 PM, Jakob Knight said:

 

 When they come out, I may gravitate towards the RU Subs

 

 

 

You think they won't be making them historically accurate then?

[Jakob Knight]

2 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

You think they won't be making them historically accurate then?

 

I imagine the models will be amazingly accurate.  Everything else will be like just about every ship in this game, with imagination, magic, and the intent to sell the line to the players.  

 

If historical accuracy was important in this game, half the ships in it would either vanish or never leave port in the time a match takes.