Dear USN Sub Commanders,

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Admiral DadMan
Posts: 3366
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit

Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by Admiral DadMan »

YOU HAD NEARLY 20 FAT, JUICY, OIL CARRYING SHIPS TO SHOOT AT. WHY THE FLIP ARE YOU SHOOTING AT A LITTLE FLIPPING ESCORT?!?!?!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[font="Courier New"]Sub attack near Saishu To at 96,57

Japanese Ships
E Hiyodori
DD Hagikaze
E Hayabusa
E Otori
E Hachijo
AV Kamikawa Maru
AV Akitsushima
AO Teibo
AO Sata
AO Notoro
AO Hayamoto
AO Erimo
TK Eisho Maru
TK Amato Maru
TK Gyoshin Maru
TK Bushu Maru
TK Kenwa Maru
TK Kyokuho Maru
TK Kurogane Maru
TK Hofuku Maru
TK Toa Maru
TK Tatibana Maru
TK San Clemente Maru
TK Nissyo Maru
TK Hakko Maru
DD Suresushio
DD Katsutade
DD Shikinami
DD Hibiki

Allied Ships
SS Runner, hits 5

SS Runner launches 2 torpedoes at E Hiyodori

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Takao at 83,64

Japanese Ships
DD Michishio
xAK Shikano Maru
xAK Sanuki Maru
xAK Kosin Maru
xAK Somedono Maru
xAK Nanko Maru
xAK Syohei Maru
xAK Mogamigawa Maru
xAK Yamazuki Maru
xAK Kenyo Maru
xAK Akiura Maru
DD Arashio

Allied Ships
SS Mingo, hits 2

SS Mingo launches 2 torpedoes at DD Michishio

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sub attack near Torishima at 107,66

Japanese Ships
E W-26
xAP Hoten Maru
xAP Suwa Maru
xAP Katori Maru
E Nasami

Allied Ships
SS Tambor, hits 2, heavy damage

SS Tambor launches 2 torpedoes at E W-26[/font]
Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:
Image
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

Welcome to my world.
The Moose
User avatar
Capt Hornblower
Posts: 244
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:09 pm
Location: Massachusetts, USA

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by Capt Hornblower »

I'd say it's cuz the 9 escorts were doing their job, keeping the subs at bay. (Were these attacks made at night or during the day?)
User avatar
Admiral DadMan
Posts: 3366
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by Admiral DadMan »

ORIGINAL: Capt Hornblower

I'd say it's cuz the 9 escorts were doing their job, keeping the subs at bay. (Were these attacks made at night or during the day?)
Night shots, May/June 1943.

I'm going to give it until June 1944 before I really start getting ticked off.
Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:
Image
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

ORIGINAL: Capt Hornblower

I'd say it's cuz the 9 escorts were doing their job, keeping the subs at bay. (Were these attacks made at night or during the day?)
Night shots, May/June 1943.

I'm going to give it until June 1944 before I really start getting ticked off.

It doesn't really change. I think the escort/no escort is a coefficient of some kind, modified by a small random or randoms. I've tried all kinds of CO stats, boat classes, deep versus shallow, etc. and I don't see any trend lines. The escort attack rate is HUGE versus history. Enough to get the COs relieved if it had happened in RL. You just have to deal with the fact the sub war will never be very historical.
The Moose
User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by crsutton »

Always has and always will be the case. Sorry. I don't think any American commander should expect to win the war with his subs. I pretty much bitched this one to death in the early days of the game, but not much was done to fix targeting. I doubt at this stage you will ever see anything different from what we have now. You are just going to have to find your pleasure elsewhere.[;)]
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17459
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by John 3rd »

At least DaBabes fixed it for partial shots instead of six bow shots with each firing. That is about as positive of message as I can give...
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

At least DaBabes fixed it for partial shots instead of six bow shots with each firing. That is about as positive of message as I can give...

I don't think I've ever run out of torpedoes before I ran out of fuel.
The Moose
User avatar
Admiral DadMan
Posts: 3366
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2002 10:00 am
Location: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by Admiral DadMan »

I thought that I remembered that USN subs were working ok during development. I can't find my notes about it.

I went dark soon after release, and didn't come back until about a 18 months ago. I can say that they are not working as they should, at least from an historical context. The Allied player should be able to start having a major impact in the shipping lanes by late 1943. Even with crap torps, USN subs did considerable damage.

As memory serves, there was concern in alpha/beta about USN subs breaking the game from 1944 onward. So perhaps that is why USN subs are behaving as they are.

IJN subs are crazy effective unless you ASW them to death. They scare the hell out of me, as they should.

Sorry for the rant. It must mean I'm enjoying the hell out of myself.
Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:
Image
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24063
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by Lowpe »

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

At least DaBabes fixed it for partial shots instead of six bow shots with each firing. That is about as positive of message as I can give...

I don't think I've ever run out of torpedoes before I ran out of fuel.

Jocke just had a sub fire something like 12 torpedoes during a surface fight with one of my AK's. They all missed, and then the sub ate an 8cm shell hit to boot![;)]

I think it takes a lot of clicks and work and observation to make subs work somewhat better,but they do seem to target the escorts a lot. I can only imagine how much more clicks per turn that would take in 1944 and 1945 for the Allies.

Certainly using subs somewhat historically you get subpar results.




User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24063
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by Lowpe »

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan
IJN subs are crazy effective unless you ASW them to death. They scare the hell out of me, as they should.

I am hearing that a lot lately.
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6395
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by JeffroK »

I recall that PACWAR allowed you to set a target priority, pity this didnt come along as the game evolved.

PS I'm sure the IJB subs could be softened a bit if the ratings are looked at and edited.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9303
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

At least DaBabes fixed it for partial shots instead of six bow shots with each firing. That is about as positive of message as I can give...

I don't think I've ever run out of torpedoes before I ran out of fuel.

Mine run out of torpedoes on occasion. It's rare, though. I also tend to use pretty small PZs.
ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan
IJN subs are crazy effective unless you ASW them to death. They scare the hell out of me, as they should.

I am hearing that a lot lately.

I really think it's a function of crew experience and it being compared to late war Allied ASW - check the manual on the multipliers, and check what the Allied crew experience is at the start. Also, the actual ASW devices themselves in the early war are really awful.

Aside from the super-E's (which DBB and Andy's database changes fixed), how often do IJN depth charges actually sink an Allied submarine? How often do Allied depth charges actually sink an IJN submarine? A USN sub might have to return to base after an attack and the ensuing ASW due to maybe one hit, whereas an IJN submarine that gets hit usually gets finished off once the Allied war machine has ramped up. But people see that, or remember that from their last game, and then start a new one where the Allied ASW is really crappy by comparison, and well...
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Aside from the super-E's (which DBB and Andy's database changes fixed), how often do IJN depth charges actually sink an Allied submarine? How often do Allied depth charges actually sink an IJN submarine? A USN sub might have to return to base after an attack and the ensuing ASW due to maybe one hit, whereas an IJN submarine that gets hit usually gets finished off once the Allied war machine has ramped up. But people see that, or remember that from their last game, and then start a new one where the Allied ASW is really crappy by comparison, and well...

In our game in April 1944, when I have used my subs in places they aren't safe, you have sunk 16 by DC. (The most-productive device for you. Mines are one, and air-dropped bombs and torpedoes are only a handful more.) The DC bag is low by historical standards as that includes a bunch of Dutch. And I'm fine with it, if only they were more productive. When the code prevents multi-ship attacks per encounter, having them also over-target escorts just makes them a relative non-factor in the strategic picture of the war.
The Moose
User avatar
geofflambert
Posts: 14887
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:18 pm
Location: St. Louis

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by geofflambert »

I think this is perhaps well modeled. In a circumstance like the one given the sub commander sometimes opts for self defense. On the other flipper, if he spots a CV and isn't willing to risk the ship to get her, that would be an offense appropriate to a court-martial.

User avatar
geofflambert
Posts: 14887
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:18 pm
Location: St. Louis

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by geofflambert »

Did I say "on the other flipper"? Oops. Obviously I meant "in the other claw".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azEOeTX1LqM

User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by HansBolter »

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I think this is perhaps well modeled. In a circumstance like the one given the sub commander sometimes opts for self defense. On the other flipper, if he spots a CV and isn't willing to risk the ship to get her, that would be an offense appropriate to a court-martial.

Yes, but that is also highly situational.

In the example provided by the OP with 9 escorts shepherding 18 charges I can understand it would be difficult for the sub to get into position for a firing solution on a fat target without having to deal with one of the escorts.

In a situation where one escort is assigned to shepherd 12 charges, the sub would have a far better change of getting into position without having to deal with the escort.

I have no idea if the targeting algorithm is sophisticated enough to assess an escort/escorted ratio to provide a modicum of situational variability, but it sure doesn't seem like it.
Hans

User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9303
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I think this is perhaps well modeled. In a circumstance like the one given the sub commander sometimes opts for self defense. On the other flipper, if he spots a CV and isn't willing to risk the ship to get her, that would be an offense appropriate to a court-martial.

Yes, but that is also highly situational.

In the example provided by the OP with 9 escorts shepherding 18 charges I can understand it would be difficult for the sub to get into position for a firing solution on a fat target without having to deal with one of the escorts.

In a situation where one escort is assigned to shepherd 12 charges, the sub would have a far better change of getting into position without having to deal with the escort.

I have no idea if the targeting algorithm is sophisticated enough to assess an escort/escorted ratio to provide a modicum of situational variability, but it sure doesn't seem like it.

I don't think it does, really. I mean, more escorts should mean the escorts have a better chance of sighting the sub before it can attack.

However, I think once you reach a certain point (like 3-5 escorts for any size of convoy), escorts get attacked far more than they should and the rate doesn't really vary.
User avatar
Marshall
Posts: 227
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 9:11 am

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by Marshall »

I do not see anything odd in this attack,

The American commander went for the Warships, instead of the unarmed cargo ship on a peaceful mission for humanity.

I take it the commander is now counting the dents in his sub, and pumping water.

And the name of the sub was not a big inspiration for the crew as well.

Next shipment will be tankers full of sunscreen for the troops as they are now sunbathing 7 months on the beaches of tropical islands.

[8D]

DR
jmalter
Posts: 1673
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 5:41 pm

RE: Dear USN Sub Commanders,

Post by jmalter »

that's a massive IJ convoy, given the # of escorts, so let's drop some several mines at its point of origin.
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”