[Freeciv-Dev] (PR#10269) Submarines

["Vasco Alexandre da Silva Costa" <vasc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=10269 >

> [jdorje - Thu Sep 23 03:48:39 2004]:
> 
> Even attack subs shouldn't be as fast as destroyers I think.  But then
> there is a difference between WWII destroyers and modern destroyers.

In real life attack subs are even faster than destroyers. Read some
info about the speed of a Seawolf or Akula attack sub submerged versus
an Arleigh Burke Class (AEGIS) Destroyer, or any other destroyer:

Here:
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/index.html

An attack sub can get to 33-35 knots while the fastest destroyers go up
to 30 knots. The subs are nuclear powered and have a teardrop shaped
hull, so they are very fast. In WW2 subs ran on battery power while
submerged, power which had to be conserved, the hull was unoptimized
for speed.

Which is why an US carrier group always has attack sub escorts.

> And subs _certainly_ shouldn't have greater vision than destroyers.

Ok.

> Nuclear subs should have lower defense, mostly because they are less
> maneuverable.

They are more maneuverable than a WWII sub. They can run deeper and
are more silent. That makes them have a higher defense rating vs
attack IMHO. Besides, I only added one measly defense point. Even an
Ironclad has more defense.