Mid-ocean islands, naval search, search arcs

[Ambassador]

Hi fellows,

In my new campaign against the AI (playing the Allies, once more...), I started forward basing my Catalinas at small islands across the Pacific.

I have enough support (base forces, AV & AVD) and supply everywhere I need them.

Next step was improving the search settings : arcs, rest, range.

I use long-term settings, with good rest & training ratios, and reduce to range to normal to limit fatigue. This means I use up to four or five squadrons at a single base to cover 360°.

My question is : would it be better to organize the search arcs so that all 36 of them are covered individually, or is it better to just let each of the squadrons search in a 360° degree ? IOW, is the penalty for the fact of having a 360° search for one squadron with insufficient planes to cover all arcs (let's say only a quarter of what is needed), greater or smaller than a factor 4 (aka "with four times as many planes, do I fare as well or better for every arc than if I covered each arc with a dedicated plane") ?

Thank you for your attention.

[crsutton]

There are some players that never set search arcs and swear that it works just fine. You should just experiment around. Personally I use search arcs and try to set up interlocking arcs from supporting bases. That is, I want to fully search possible routes of advance rather that worry about all around. If it is an isolated base with no supporting bases nearby then I suppose I would use perhaps two squadrons set for maximum normal range with no search arcs.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

There are some players that never set search arcs and swear that it works just fine. You should just experiment around. Personally I use search arcs and try to set up interlocking arcs from supporting bases. That is, I want to fully search possible routes of advance rather that worry about all around. If it is an isolated base with no supporting bases nearby then I suppose I would use perhaps two squadrons set for maximum normal range with no search arcs.

+1 on all points.

It always surprises me how many players do not use the arcs, but actually quite a few don't.

[HansBolter]

I'm one of the most vocal in claiming they are unnecessary chrome.

You're committing 36 PBYs to a single base to get 360 degree coverage!!!!

I find that to be an astronomical over commitment.

I never place more than one squad of 12 on any given small island base or seaplane tended dot base.

I very rarely ever get surprised by a TF that gets inside my search range.

It does happen, but its rare enough for me that I don't feel the need to micromanage arcs and leave myself blind on an arc that I can't cover for lack of sufficient planes.

Be aware that the daily grind of planes going into maintenance or taking damage reduces your intended coverage and leaves you blind along alleys you may not realize.

[Ambassador]

In my previous games, I have always used arcs, except with carrier planes and float planes. Too many adjustments to make for TF, but for land-based search I used to set it once, and look only once a week to check the squadron.

Has anybody (Alfred maybe) done extensive testing for this ?

[Feltan]

The only time I use search arcs is when a squadron is based on the coast of a continent (ex., San Francisco, Hong Kong, Brisbane, etc.). Other than that, I generally leave them on 360 degree naval search with no noticed negative repercussions.

It would seem that mid-Ocean islands are a great place for 360 degree naval searches!

Regards,
Feltan

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

I'm one of the most vocal in claiming they are unnecessary chrome.

You're committing 36 PBYs to a single base to get 360 degree coverage!!!!

I find that to be an astronomical over commitment.

I never place more than one squad of 12 on any given small island base or seaplane tended dot base.

I very rarely ever get surprised by a TF that gets inside my search range.

It does happen, but its rare enough for me that I don't feel the need to micromanage arcs and leave myself blind on an arc that I can't cover for lack of sufficient planes.

Be aware that the daily grind of planes going into maintenance or taking damage reduces your intended coverage and leaves you blind along alleys you may not realize.

Well, 36 flights. That doesn't have to mean 36 planes.

[HansBolter]

Perhaps the most salient point I made was the fact that planes going into repair means arcs assigned to those planes aren't getting covered.

Isn't this exactly what happened to the Japanese at Midway?

At least when I leave my 12 plane squadron covering all 360 degrees and 4 of them go into repair/maintenance the other 8 are still covering everything, albeit at a lesser concentration.

[geofflambert]

I rarely use search arcs, except as Feltan described. One thing to keep in mind though is that search planes also do ASW work if they spot any and can do that at a longer range than ASW mission planes. Also they will attack shipping as well so you may want to consider if 360° is necessary so you can cover an area more intensely. You might want to avoid enemy bases with CAP so you could use arcs and or shortened ranges to keep from losing planes daily. Finally, training. I never ever have land based squadrons training and doing other missions, they do one or the other. Realize their experience will rise just from doing missions. Carrier capable planes I almost always have doing mission/training (or only training), usually 30% mission, 20% training because they have so many skill sets they need to improve. If I'm expecting a carrier battle in a day or three I turn the training off. Another thing is to not rely on your cruiser float planes because they can't operate in heavy seas. And keep those the heck away from enemy bases, you can lose all of them quick. Same for IJN sub floats. If you want to see what's going on in an enemy base with CAP, send recon planes at high altitude.

[Lowpe]

No matter the arc set, some search is done in a 3 hex circle I believe. This is an old Alfred gem, & I am not being precise so if you want better you can search for it.[;)]

Not understanding it has led to a number of lost searchers blundering into heavy CAP.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

No matter the arc set, some search is done in a 3 hex circle I believe. This is an old Alfred gem, & I am not being precise so if you want better you can search for it.[;)]

Not understanding it has led to a number of lost searchers blundering into heavy CAP.

I believe it is 4 hex ... but you don't get the full DL on hits ... so subs will be spotted, but frequently 'disappear' from the screen before the next day phase ...

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

Hi fellows,

In my new campaign against the AI (playing the Allies, once more...), I started forward basing my Catalinas at small islands across the Pacific.

I have enough support (base forces, AV & AVD) and supply everywhere I need them.

Next step was improving the search settings : arcs, rest, range.

I use long-term settings, with good rest & training ratios, and reduce to range to normal to limit fatigue. This means I use up to four or five squadrons at a single base to cover 360°.

My question is : would it be better to organize the search arcs so that all 36 of them are covered individually, or is it better to just let each of the squadrons search in a 360° degree ? IOW, is the penalty for the fact of having a 360° search for one squadron with insufficient planes to cover all arcs (let's say only a quarter of what is needed), greater or smaller than a factor 4 (aka "with four times as many planes, do I fare as well or better for every arc than if I covered each arc with a dedicated plane") ?

Thank you for your attention.

That is not how naval search operates.

Read this thread and the hyper links it contains.

tm.asp?m=3749607&mpage=1&key=search%2Carcs?

Other than the 4 hex range which is 360, search planes take only 10 degrees for hex 5 and beyond. Setting it to computer control only means the computer is determining where the search begins that turn. Once the computer has run out of planes the search stops.

Three PBY squadrons at full TOE provides 36 aircraft. Setting each squadron to 100% search in theory gives 360 degree coverage but operational losses will occur thus degrading the search. Plus how do you know that the computer will select squadron A to start searching at 000, squadron B to start at 130 and squadron C to start at 250. With the die rolls it might instead start at 000, 060 and 120 which would leave 250 to 360 completely uncovered.

Alfred

[Ambassador]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

Hi fellows,

In my new campaign against the AI (playing the Allies, once more...), I started forward basing my Catalinas at small islands across the Pacific.

I have enough support (base forces, AV & AVD) and supply everywhere I need them.

Next step was improving the search settings : arcs, rest, range.

I use long-term settings, with good rest & training ratios, and reduce to range to normal to limit fatigue. This means I use up to four or five squadrons at a single base to cover 360°.

My question is : would it be better to organize the search arcs so that all 36 of them are covered individually, or is it better to just let each of the squadrons search in a 360° degree ? IOW, is the penalty for the fact of having a 360° search for one squadron with insufficient planes to cover all arcs (let's say only a quarter of what is needed), greater or smaller than a factor 4 (aka "with four times as many planes, do I fare as well or better for every arc than if I covered each arc with a dedicated plane") ?

Thank you for your attention.

That is not how naval search operates.

Read this thread and the hyper links it contains.

tm.asp?m=3749607&mpage=1&key=search%2Carcs?

Other than the 4 hex range which is 360, search planes take only 10 degrees for hex 5 and beyond. Setting it to computer control only means the computer is determining where the search begins that turn. Once the computer has run out of planes the search stops.

Three PBY squadrons at full TOE provides 36 aircraft. Setting each squadron to 100% search in theory gives 360 degree coverage but operational losses will occur thus degrading the search. Plus how do you know that the computer will select squadron A to start searching at 000, squadron B to start at 130 and squadron C to start at 250. With the die rolls it might instead start at 000, 060 and 120 which would leave 250 to 360 completely uncovered.

Alfred

Thank you, that's the kind of information I was looking for. So I'll continue using the arcs ; and as you point in the other thread (and which I already said earlier), it's mostly a one-time chore.

I knew about the 4-hex rule, my question pertained to long-range search by patrols.

One more question : as I understand it, with several squadrons, each will determine a starting arc randomly, with no real coordination. Does it mean that a hypothetic 48-plane squadron with 80% search will cover all arcs regardless ?

[Alfred]

80% of 48 = 38 planes.  So yes, in theory that single oversized squadron will start somewhere and then overlap the first 2 vectors.
 
Alfred

[Lokasenna]

It's worth pointing out, as usual, that you rarely need 360' search. Searching from Akyab? You only need to cover 180 degrees if you want to cover the entire thing, and likely need to cover less than that.

I don't see why anyone wouldn't use arcs for 90% of their searching. In most cases, you just have to set it once and on the front lines you might have to tweak due to Ops/CAP losses or wanting to cover other areas, but... Basically the only time I find myself spending on setting arcs is when I first transfer a unit to a base. After that, I use the Z hotkey to check arcs often.

[Major Shane]

I preface this by saying I am not as an experienced player here as most. But I think part of the discussion about arcs is finding a balance between reality and computer playing overload. In real life someone is giving an order to every search plane or squadron for every mission. Reconnaissance assets are managed carefully and precisely. Searches are planned based on Intel and Ops assessments. So if you want the ultimate reality you would only assign arcs. But going into that level of detail every turn would become boring and take away the game fun. IMO the developers gave you an option here that lets you balance your game play and focus.

[zuluhour]

All JFB, please post your search arcs here.  X thank you [:D]

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: m_shane_perkins

I preface this by saying I am not as an experienced player here as most. But I think part of the discussion about arcs is finding a balance between reality and computer playing overload. In real life someone is giving an order to every search plane or squadron for every mission. Reconnaissance assets are managed carefully and precisely. Searches are planned based on Intel and Ops assessments. So if you want the ultimate reality you would only assign arcs. But going into that level of detail every turn would become boring and take away the game fun. IMO the developers gave you an option here that lets you balance your game play and focus.

Yeah, and that's fine and all... But there really are lots of occasions where you only have to set up the squadron's search arcs once. If you keep the unit at around 50-60% search (for low SR aircraft), you'll never have to manage them except to periodically make sure they have enough aircraft. With the high SR aircraft, you'll have to make sure you stand them down from time to time and probably use a lower search percentage.

[Major Shane]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: m_shane_perkins

I preface this by saying I am not as an experienced player here as most. But I think part of the discussion about arcs is finding a balance between reality and computer playing overload. In real life someone is giving an order to every search plane or squadron for every mission. Reconnaissance assets are managed carefully and precisely. Searches are planned based on Intel and Ops assessments. So if you want the ultimate reality you would only assign arcs. But going into that level of detail every turn would become boring and take away the game fun. IMO the developers gave you an option here that lets you balance your game play and focus.

Yeah, and that's fine and all... But there really are lots of occasions where you only have to set up the squadron's search arcs once. If you keep the unit at around 50-60% search (for low SR aircraft), you'll never have to manage them except to periodically make sure they have enough aircraft. With the high SR aircraft, you'll have to make sure you stand them down from time to time and probably use a lower search percentage.

That's my point. You made your analysis then assigned arcs in order to provide reconnaissance and security. You didn't leave it up to the Squadron commander to decide. That's all I was trying to say. I assume most players don't use arcs with float planes from surface task forces unless they are requiring information on a certain base or sea area.

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: m_shane_perkins

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: m_shane_perkins

I preface this by saying I am not as an experienced player here as most. But I think part of the discussion about arcs is finding a balance between reality and computer playing overload. In real life someone is giving an order to every search plane or squadron for every mission. Reconnaissance assets are managed carefully and precisely. Searches are planned based on Intel and Ops assessments. So if you want the ultimate reality you would only assign arcs. But going into that level of detail every turn would become boring and take away the game fun. IMO the developers gave you an option here that lets you balance your game play and focus.

Yeah, and that's fine and all... But there really are lots of occasions where you only have to set up the squadron's search arcs once. If you keep the unit at around 50-60% search (for low SR aircraft), you'll never have to manage them except to periodically make sure they have enough aircraft. With the high SR aircraft, you'll have to make sure you stand them down from time to time and probably use a lower search percentage.

That's my point. You made your analysis then assigned arcs in order to provide reconnaissance and security. You didn't leave it up to the Squadron commander to decide. That's all I was trying to say. I assume most players don't use arcs with float planes from surface task forces unless they are requiring information on a certain base or sea area.

I don't either. And actually, almost all of my surface float planes are left on night Recon missions (sometimes with 50% search as well if the group is large enough) for when I use the ships in bombardment TFs. Save the search for the longer range aircraft.