Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: ASW in 1944

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: ASW in 1944 Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: ASW in 1944 - 6/29/2009 10:37:29 PM   
flaggelant


Posts: 262
Joined: 1/25/2009
From: Netherlands
Status: offline
seeing recon planes attacking subs always makes me laugh
(and doubt the capability of the pilot...)


*Pilot fires flare gun at sub*



supposed a betty/ nell would fly extended range, not carrying torps that would be a situation where you might score a hit,
but thats a lot of work to go trough for some sub drifting along hundreds of miles out of the coast..


(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 31
RE: ASW in 1944 - 6/29/2009 10:39:55 PM   
Barb


Posts: 1637
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Slovakia
Status: offline
Cant that be caused by having 1x800kg AP bomb instead of torpedo (for Nell and Betty) ? With 1 bomb you are not going to hit many targets (in WITP). Having 4-6-8 bombs (in Hellen and Sally) are much better at achieving hits in WITP. Having B-17 or B-24 with 16 bombs in a bomb bay, well that is another story


_____________________________


"Hello IT. Have you tried turning it off and on again?"

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 32
RE: ASW in 1944 - 6/30/2009 12:30:31 AM   
thegreatwent


Posts: 3009
Joined: 8/24/2004
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline
Ok, Helens at 5k ASW and 75+exp are now getting hits. Sally and Lily seem to be homely belles at the ball. Mary and Anne are making out as they have in the past, as though they are playing for a different side. Enemy fish seem to still like my TKs. Once again thanks for the pointers they do seem to be helping. Hope to finish the game even with AE tempting me.

(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 33
RE: ASW in 1944 - 6/30/2009 12:56:34 AM   
Fallschirmjager


Posts: 6388
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline
This is coming from both Allied and Japanese games. I find aircrew experience to be a much more deciding factor in ASW ops rather than plane type.
Even navalized versions of B-24s with loads of bombs and good ranges rarely ever get sub detections and kills if they have low exp.
Meanwhile my SBDs get an enourmous amount of detections and kills since they are usualy in the 80+ exp range.
Put your carrier based attack planes on 100% ASW or 100% naval search and they will rack up detections and kills at very impressive rates.

(in reply to thegreatwent)
Post #: 34
RE: ASW in 1944 - 6/30/2009 1:38:10 AM   
pompack


Posts: 2520
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline
In stock I have gotten many, many hits with Sally or Helen on either 100% search or 100% ASW

Significant points
1. Patrolling a/c attack with their standard loadout. Betty, PBY, Nell, etc will attack but logically they will rarely hit a sub with a torpedo, although I have seen it happen (Betty) once.

2. Experience is absolutely critical. However Helen/Sally trained to 85+ will hit a LOT. I no longer have the numbers available from an old test, but about six units flying out of Truk against 20-30 subs within normal range were hitting 3-5 per turn.

3. No longer can find the data, but I do not remember ASW getting significantly better results than normal search; however that could have been an artifact of the test since there were more targets to find outside of ASW range

4. For patrolling a/c, experience increased with each detection and with each hit. (I started with 85 for each unit and after ten turns one was over 90)

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)
Post #: 35
RE: ASW in 1944 - 6/30/2009 1:57:29 AM   
Charles_22


Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pompack

In stock I have gotten many, many hits with Sally or Helen on either 100% search or 100% ASW

Significant points
1. Patrolling a/c attack with their standard loadout. Betty, PBY, Nell, etc will attack but logically they will rarely hit a sub with a torpedo, although I have seen it happen (Betty) once.

2. Experience is absolutely critical. However Helen/Sally trained to 85+ will hit a LOT. I no longer have the numbers available from an old test, but about six units flying out of Truk against 20-30 subs within normal range were hitting 3-5 per turn.

3. No longer can find the data, but I do not remember ASW getting significantly better results than normal search; however that could have been an artifact of the test since there were more targets to find outside of ASW range

4. For patrolling a/c, experience increased with each detection and with each hit. (I started with 85 for each unit and after ten turns one was over 90)

Thank you. I was always wondering if flying a patrol and not spotting or hitting anything would help gain experience. I know the chances of that being the case weren't great, but it just sounded like something the programmers would miss. I don't think the game rewards planes, experience-wise for just damaging enemy planes, but just for kills, and if that's the case, it would sound like something that would skirt by, concerning patrols and what they spot and/or attack, that they would only gain experience through kills (excepting that being in flight alone could make them gain experience).

(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 36
RE: ASW in 1944 - 6/30/2009 7:25:53 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


It's not a waste. They will still spot subs for your ASW work, which is far more effective at killing them than plane bombs.



you donīt mean that serious do you? I would prefer a hundred times a 250kg bomb hit on a sub (that puts it under in 1 out of 3 times, or at least forces it back to itīs home port in 9 out of 10 times) than having it just spotted... You spot it... and? You have to move in an ASW group and have to FIND the sub (a good PBEM player moves it anyway). And then? Just because you get into the same hex perhaps doesnīt mean anyhting. Perhaps you lose a DD because the sub shoots first. In 50% of the time your DDs do nothing, if the ratio isnīt worse. When dropping DCs, what does that mean. Mostly near misses that just rack up some sys damage. Two direct hits is what you want at least and you have to have your ASW TF in the same hex as a sub at least one and a half dozen times to actually achieve that. Speaking about IJN ASW.

Preferring a spotting over a 250kg bomb hit? No way sir...

< Message edited by castor troy -- 6/30/2009 7:29:52 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 37
RE: ASW in 1944 - 6/30/2009 7:27:22 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: flaggelant

seeing recon planes attacking subs always makes me laugh
(and doubt the capability of the pilot...)


*Pilot fires flare gun at sub*



supposed a betty/ nell would fly extended range, not carrying torps that would be a situation where you might score a hit,
but thats a lot of work to go trough for some sub drifting along hundreds of miles out of the coast..





nothing to do with extended range. All torp carrying aircraft carry (should carry) bombs when being on nav search. But that doesnīt work for IJN 2e bombers in my WITP version.

You are correct about the recon planes, thatīs just odd...

_____________________________


(in reply to flaggelant)
Post #: 38
RE: ASW in 1944 - 6/30/2009 12:13:56 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline
A spotted sub has a lowered chance to find and attack a TF than one that is unspotted.  Of course a sub that was attacked and damaged has an even lower chance, but there is an advantage to knowing where the sub is; TF's will attempt to route around where a known sub is located.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 39
RE: ASW in 1944 - 6/30/2009 12:58:01 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

A spotted sub has a lowered chance to find and attack a TF than one that is unspotted.  Of course a sub that was attacked and damaged has an even lower chance, but there is an advantage to knowing where the sub is; TF's will attempt to route around where a known sub is located.



they only route around the sub at the beginning when you set a destination. The AI isnīt smart enough to alter the TFs heading when itīs underway already. And in late 43 or early 44+, the "lower chance" of attacking for Allied subs with radar isnīt really striking as they will still attack most times anyway. So if you donīt do anything against the spotted sub, it will just sink your ships as if it wouldnīt be spotted. Just look at the spotted subs sitting in base hexes for days/weeks. You may think how vulnerable they would be and place two ASW TFs above them. Daily spotted, nothing happens. Your AK TFs enters the hex, boom, AK sunk by the sub.

_____________________________


(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 40
RE: ASW in 1944 - 6/30/2009 1:46:32 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22531
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: flaggelant

seeing recon planes attacking subs always makes me laugh
(and doubt the capability of the pilot...)


*Pilot fires flare gun at sub*



supposed a betty/ nell would fly extended range, not carrying torps that would be a situation where you might score a hit,
but thats a lot of work to go trough for some sub drifting along hundreds of miles out of the coast..





nothing to do with extended range. All torp carrying aircraft carry (should carry) bombs when being on nav search. But that doesnīt work for IJN 2e bombers in my WITP version.

You are correct about the recon planes, thatīs just odd...

At least some recon planes have bomb(s) in their loadout.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 41
RE: ASW in 1944 - 6/30/2009 2:14:58 PM   
USS America


Posts: 16263
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Apex, NC, USA
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

A spotted sub has a lowered chance to find and attack a TF than one that is unspotted.  Of course a sub that was attacked and damaged has an even lower chance, but there is an advantage to knowing where the sub is; TF's will attempt to route around where a known sub is located.



they only route around the sub at the beginning when you set a destination. The AI isnīt smart enough to alter the TFs heading when itīs underway already. And in late 43 or early 44+, the "lower chance" of attacking for Allied subs with radar isnīt really striking as they will still attack most times anyway. So if you donīt do anything against the spotted sub, it will just sink your ships as if it wouldnīt be spotted. Just look at the spotted subs sitting in base hexes for days/weeks. You may think how vulnerable they would be and place two ASW TFs above them. Daily spotted, nothing happens. Your AK TFs enters the hex, boom, AK sunk by the sub.


I have seen, first hand, TF courses altered by the "AI" after they are underway, once a sub is spotted along the previous path.

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me


Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 42
RE: ASW in 1944 - 6/30/2009 8:52:14 PM   
mdiehl

 

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
Are people complaining that Japanese ASW is not very effective? From a historical point of view it's hard to see anything wrong with that.

_____________________________

Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?

(in reply to USS America)
Post #: 43
RE: ASW in 1944 - 6/30/2009 11:13:01 PM   
thegreatwent


Posts: 3009
Joined: 8/24/2004
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline
My question was based not on history, rather I wished for tips on playing the game better. Mdiehl if you want a history thread start your own. Other players of the game have given me tips, if I want a lecture on one persons interpretation of history I'll PM you.

(in reply to mdiehl)
Post #: 44
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 2:39:21 AM   
Mynok


Posts: 12119
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline




_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to thegreatwent)
Post #: 45
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 3:15:00 AM   
mdiehl

 

Posts: 5998
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
quote:

My question was based not on history, rather I wished for tips on playing the game better.


When I said "people" I had it in mind to refer to the thread in general, not you specifically. Try not to be too hurt if every comment isn't directed at assuaging your concerns.

quote:

Mdiehl if you want a history thread start your own.


No thanks. I'm good with this one.

quote:

if I want a lecture on one persons interpretation of history I'll PM you.


If you prefer ignorance, you can always use the green button.



_____________________________

Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?

(in reply to flaggelant)
Post #: 46
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 4:13:04 AM   
thegreatwent


Posts: 3009
Joined: 8/24/2004
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline
As The Elf said "Disregard"

< Message edited by thegreatwent -- 7/1/2009 4:22:24 AM >

(in reply to mdiehl)
Post #: 47
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 8:39:24 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: flaggelant

seeing recon planes attacking subs always makes me laugh
(and doubt the capability of the pilot...)


*Pilot fires flare gun at sub*



supposed a betty/ nell would fly extended range, not carrying torps that would be a situation where you might score a hit,
but thats a lot of work to go trough for some sub drifting along hundreds of miles out of the coast..





nothing to do with extended range. All torp carrying aircraft carry (should carry) bombs when being on nav search. But that doesnīt work for IJN 2e bombers in my WITP version.

You are correct about the recon planes, thatīs just odd...

At least some recon planes have bomb(s) in their loadout.



depends on the mod probably. Never played a mod that had armed recons in and stock definetely hasnīt. At least not for the Japanese and Iīm not aware of a bomb armed Allied recon either in stock.

_____________________________


(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 48
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 8:41:43 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: USS America


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

A spotted sub has a lowered chance to find and attack a TF than one that is unspotted.  Of course a sub that was attacked and damaged has an even lower chance, but there is an advantage to knowing where the sub is; TF's will attempt to route around where a known sub is located.



they only route around the sub at the beginning when you set a destination. The AI isnīt smart enough to alter the TFs heading when itīs underway already. And in late 43 or early 44+, the "lower chance" of attacking for Allied subs with radar isnīt really striking as they will still attack most times anyway. So if you donīt do anything against the spotted sub, it will just sink your ships as if it wouldnīt be spotted. Just look at the spotted subs sitting in base hexes for days/weeks. You may think how vulnerable they would be and place two ASW TFs above them. Daily spotted, nothing happens. Your AK TFs enters the hex, boom, AK sunk by the sub.


I have seen, first hand, TF courses altered by the "AI" after they are underway, once a sub is spotted along the previous path.



and how often does that happen? One in a thousand times or more often? With usually two dozen subs spotted each turn in an average PBEM turn some time in mid 43 the AI would have at least two dozen chances to alter the convoy routes every turn but it never does in my games. And I donīt blame it for not doing it as this is the job of the player IMO anyway.

_____________________________


(in reply to USS America)
Post #: 49
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 12:20:40 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22531
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: flaggelant

seeing recon planes attacking subs always makes me laugh
(and doubt the capability of the pilot...)


*Pilot fires flare gun at sub*



supposed a betty/ nell would fly extended range, not carrying torps that would be a situation where you might score a hit,
but thats a lot of work to go trough for some sub drifting along hundreds of miles out of the coast..





nothing to do with extended range. All torp carrying aircraft carry (should carry) bombs when being on nav search. But that doesnīt work for IJN 2e bombers in my WITP version.

You are correct about the recon planes, thatīs just odd...

At least some recon planes have bomb(s) in their loadout.



depends on the mod probably. Never played a mod that had armed recons in and stock definetely hasnīt. At least not for the Japanese and Iīm not aware of a bomb armed Allied recon either in stock.

i thought some of the Dutch recon planes had a bomb, but i'll check...

EDIT: when i get home in about 9 hours...

< Message edited by rtrapasso -- 7/1/2009 12:30:37 PM >

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 50
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 12:31:57 PM   
Chris H

 

Posts: 3785
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Bexhill-on-Sea, E Sussex
Status: offline
Historical the US lost 50+ subs during the war spread evenly through out it duration.

The number and effectiveness of US subs increased markedly towards the end of 1943 to such and extent that the Japaesed lost 5,0000,000+ tons of shipping in total to US subs and for one period during 1944 were sinking 50 ish ships per week.

In the game the best Jap a/c is the Liz but this isn't available in Stock. Use you a/c to find them and PC to sink them.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 51
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 12:34:06 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: flaggelant

seeing recon planes attacking subs always makes me laugh
(and doubt the capability of the pilot...)


*Pilot fires flare gun at sub*



supposed a betty/ nell would fly extended range, not carrying torps that would be a situation where you might score a hit,
but thats a lot of work to go trough for some sub drifting along hundreds of miles out of the coast..





nothing to do with extended range. All torp carrying aircraft carry (should carry) bombs when being on nav search. But that doesnīt work for IJN 2e bombers in my WITP version.

You are correct about the recon planes, thatīs just odd...

At least some recon planes have bomb(s) in their loadout.



depends on the mod probably. Never played a mod that had armed recons in and stock definetely hasnīt. At least not for the Japanese and Iīm not aware of a bomb armed Allied recon either in stock.

i thought some of the Dutch recon planes had a bomb, but i'll check...

EDIT: when i get home in about 9 hours...



donīt know about the Dutch. Never used the 2 hex ranged biplanes for anything I guess and the 5 hex ones (donīt know the type of either of the two aircraft) isnīt carrying bombs afaik. But of course I could be wrong.

_____________________________


(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 52
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 12:35:02 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12284
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

Historical the US lost 50+ subs during the war spread evenly through out it duration.

The number and effectiveness of US subs increased markedly towards the end of 1943 to such and extent that the Japaesed lost 5,0000,000+ tons of shipping in total to US subs and for one period during 1944 were sinking 50 ish ships per week.

In the game the best Jap a/c is the Liz but this isn't available in Stock. Use you a/c to find them and PC to sink them.



while Allied subs can be a real pain in the game, the usual outcome in a PBEM is the subs being far more impotent than they were in real life.

_____________________________


(in reply to Chris H)
Post #: 53
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 12:40:09 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22531
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

Historical the US lost 50+ subs during the war spread evenly through out it duration.

The number and effectiveness of US subs increased markedly towards the end of 1943 to such and extent that the Japaesed lost 5,0000,000+ tons of shipping in total to US subs and for one period during 1944 were sinking 50 ish ships per week.

In the game the best Jap a/c is the Liz but this isn't available in Stock. Use you a/c to find them and PC to sink them.



while Allied subs can be a real pain in the game, the usual outcome in a PBEM is the subs being far more impotent than they were in real life.

Too true... a bit surprising given the overall increased bloodiness of the game overall (compared to actual events), but maybe Grigsby likes airplanes and hates subs?

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 54
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 12:41:39 PM   
Chris H

 

Posts: 3785
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Bexhill-on-Sea, E Sussex
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

Historical the US lost 50+ subs during the war spread evenly through out it duration.

The number and effectiveness of US subs increased markedly towards the end of 1943 to such and extent that the Japaesed lost 5,0000,000+ tons of shipping in total to US subs and for one period during 1944 were sinking 50 ish ships per week.

In the game the best Jap a/c is the Liz but this isn't available in Stock. Use you a/c to find them and PC to sink them.



while Allied subs can be a real pain in the game, the usual outcome in a PBEM is the subs being far more impotent than they were in real life.


I have to say I've not noticed this but it's difficult to calculate against history as you cannot measure the tonnage in the game, only ships.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 55
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 1:02:51 PM   
AW1Steve


Posts: 12997
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: ME-FL-DC-GM-WA-NE-IL ?
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

Historical the US lost 50+ subs during the war spread evenly through out it duration.

The number and effectiveness of US subs increased markedly towards the end of 1943 to such and extent that the Japaesed lost 5,0000,000+ tons of shipping in total to US subs and for one period during 1944 were sinking 50 ish ships per week.

In the game the best Jap a/c is the Liz but this isn't available in Stock. Use you a/c to find them and PC to sink them.



while Allied subs can be a real pain in the game, the usual outcome in a PBEM is the subs being far more impotent than they were in real life.


That might be because in real life, most of the pre-war skippers were replaced for not being agressive. How many players really take the effort to change out every skipper, and how many just leave the timid ones in place?

_____________________________

"Geezerhood is a state of mind, attained by being largely out of yours". AW1Steve

"Quit whining and play the game. Or go home". My 7th grade baseball coach. It applies well to WITP AE players.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 56
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 1:03:48 PM   
Local Yokel


Posts: 1494
Joined: 2/4/2007
From: Somerset, U.K.
Status: offline
If you haven't already done so, it may be worth taking a look at these threads:

Leo's ASW TEST (and scenario) - problems spotted!
Leo's air ASW Search TEST WitP v1.795...

My usual (but not invariable) practice is to fly naval search at 6000' and ASW missions at 1000' - 2000'.

_____________________________




(in reply to thegreatwent)
Post #: 57
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 1:37:49 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22531
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris H

Historical the US lost 50+ subs during the war spread evenly through out it duration.

The number and effectiveness of US subs increased markedly towards the end of 1943 to such and extent that the Japaesed lost 5,0000,000+ tons of shipping in total to US subs and for one period during 1944 were sinking 50 ish ships per week.

In the game the best Jap a/c is the Liz but this isn't available in Stock. Use you a/c to find them and PC to sink them.



while Allied subs can be a real pain in the game, the usual outcome in a PBEM is the subs being far more impotent than they were in real life.


That might be because in real life, most of the pre-war skippers were replaced for not being agressive. How many players really take the effort to change out every skipper, and how many just leave the timid ones in place?

i have, but with tepid results.

You get a bit on increased number of attacks when you change them out... but you are not going to approach actual war numbers of ships sunk, nor tonnage if you bother to calculate that... the best results i've seen was by Speedy in his game against fabertong, but even that wasn't nearly what was historical.

The game gets better results with IJA ASW (although IJN is emasculated, as noted)... with stock, there are way more aircraft than what there were in actual events... the two combine to really put the hurt on any sub efforts.

Maybe in CHS you'd get better results, but, in our Threadwar game i think we had >50 consecutive attacks by Allied subs that all failed recently... something like 2-3 weeks without a single hit. The war is yet young, however, and i am hoping that things will improve.

There is also a weird bug (?glitch ?feature) that keeps popping up where a sub will "intercept" ships in a port hex... reports an attack, but no ship is seen, nothing seems to happen (sometimes animations don't even run for the "attack")... this happened 4x for the same sub in the prior turn, and 2-3x turn for multiple days before that... when you get several subs doing this, it makes for a frustrating sub war.

i don't know if anyone has mentioned this before, but i thought i'd bring it up here to see if this is a general problem or a "one-off" thing.

EDIT: i should mention that i've always seen this as a sporadic situation, but it seems to have become a more generalized problem in our game lately.

< Message edited by rtrapasso -- 7/1/2009 2:00:51 PM >

(in reply to AW1Steve)
Post #: 58
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 2:16:59 PM   
Charles_22


Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: flaggelant

seeing recon planes attacking subs always makes me laugh
(and doubt the capability of the pilot...)


*Pilot fires flare gun at sub*



supposed a betty/ nell would fly extended range, not carrying torps that would be a situation where you might score a hit,
but thats a lot of work to go trough for some sub drifting along hundreds of miles out of the coast..





nothing to do with extended range. All torp carrying aircraft carry (should carry) bombs when being on nav search. But that doesnīt work for IJN 2e bombers in my WITP version.

You are correct about the recon planes, thatīs just odd...

At least some recon planes have bomb(s) in their loadout.



depends on the mod probably. Never played a mod that had armed recons in and stock definetely hasnīt. At least not for the Japanese and Iīm not aware of a bomb armed Allied recon either in stock.

Oh no, there was definitely a recon plane for IJ that had a bombing capability. I know this as fact because for my very limited playtime (I only play stock), early on I had a group of these planes and they were the terror of subs. They by far outperformed other IJ planes in hitting subs. The problem was their payload was slight, so they would probably never sink anything, but you would assume they were at least damaging them. I think there is only 1-2 groups of that plane the entire game. I can't remember what they were called. One of them starts on the east China coast somewhere.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 59
RE: ASW in 1944 - 7/1/2009 3:08:23 PM   
denisonh


Posts: 2187
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Northern Virginia
Status: offline
One of the issues being looked at in AE addresses part of the issue with reaching historical levels of US Sub effectiveness: no need for the IJN player in WITP stock to use merchant shipping to sustain the ecnomy in the home islands.

Without the need to use merchant shipping historically, there are fewer ships moving around providing fewer targets.

_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Charles_22)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: ASW in 1944 Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.129