Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Submarine Warfare

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Submarine Warfare Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Submarine Warfare - 4/11/2013 8:14:48 PM   
blueatoll


Posts: 157
Joined: 3/28/2013
Status: offline
First thanks for all the help on the logistics questions.

I am beginning to think that the computer controlled sub warfare system is not working, is stupid, or insufficient. Again, I'm in March 1942 as the Allies, my first war patrols using the automated sub system were very productive. Now I've got a bunch of subs sitting in bases like Brisbane and Pearl Harbor going on weird little missions and patrols. There is one sub that is patrolling the Bay next to Adelaide and everytime I re-route it, the AI just assigns a new sub to patrol that area.

Should I be running my own Sub Campaign? Any recommendations on hunting grounds and what bases to run things out of it I do? Is Dutch Harbor (Level 3 Port) or Midway (Level 2 Port soon to be Level 3) good places to strike the Home Islands from?

Thanks again.
Post #: 1
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/11/2013 8:40:59 PM   
Roger Neilson 3


Posts: 969
Joined: 4/12/2012
From: Bedlington, Northumberland, UK
Status: offline
Sub warfare is stealth and anticipation. I would never trust the computer to be cunning enough. You need to be managing your subs, managing their patrol areas, varying these as your opponent takes countermeasures, and changing your skippers to get the best results.

Where the enemy shipping is will change over time as their needs change, also what do you want to do, sink ships, hinder logisitics, annoy his navy, recce where hs is, drop mines? You can't do everything. You must decide on your own priority.

Any base with an AS that is supplied will service undamaged subs... the bigger the base the faster the turnaround and perhaps the easier to repair minor dents and scratches. You want bases that are not going to be too far away fromwhere you will be trying to sink his ships - so your patrol leg is large and your transit legs are short - on the other hand if you are too close to him with your bese he may just decide to take it out and that's a bit of a nuisance.

This game does not have easy ansswers.... that's why its so frustraitngly good.

Roger

_____________________________


(in reply to blueatoll)
Post #: 2
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/11/2013 8:50:07 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 6972
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
Computer controlled sub ops can indeed be idiotic. I would only ever use it if I couldn't be bothered to (even just periodically) manually set my sub patrol zones.

Any base that is close enough to submarine target zones (Home Islands, Formosa area, etc.) but far enough away from potential raiding threats is a good one for subs. Midway is known to be an example of this. Any place that is closer than Pearl and still safe enough to use is a good option. Just keep in mind that you will need an AS in the port stocked with supplies (don't forget to bring a small escort along to scare off enemy submarines trying to mess up your day, either) and fuel. The AS needs supplies on board in order to replenish torpedoes.

I prefer Hollandia or NW New Guinea for my subs, but I also prefer a "southern strategy" to my Allied play.

(in reply to blueatoll)
Post #: 3
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/11/2013 8:59:58 PM   
Speedy

 

Posts: 15428
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline
I love the sub element of the game. I have almost always had success with my Allied subs.

To do this though it requires a LOT of man management and degree of the success will always depend on the skill level of the Japanese opponent (their focus on LBA ASW, ASW TF use, routing convoys etc).

One thing I would say is that IMO it's almost impossible to measure the Allied sub campaign in AE to the RL Allied sub effort. Unless the Japanese player is a numpty and routes ships out of convoy with limited ASW effort etc you just won't achieve the historical results.

I don't want to give too much away, as my current opponents can read this, but I manage subs a lot, move them frequently, change patrol ones, choose leaders for each sub + a few other things I don't want to disclose.

In short you have to manually control your subs to gain results and the more time you invest in them the more successful you will be.
The best base to house subs will vary depending on your game situation. I base them out of harms way from the front but as near as possible to enemy territory. I always have an AS (to re supply) and an AR for low level repairs.

Suitable areas will depend on how your opponent routes his/her ships. Good areas I have typically found are south of Japan, around Luzon, Near Balikpapan, Palembang, Southern Indochina and don't neglect around Hokkaido......

< Message edited by Speedy -- 4/11/2013 9:03:44 PM >


_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 4
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/11/2013 9:42:34 PM   
kbfchicago


Posts: 208
Joined: 10/17/2009
Status: offline
Roger is on it...never have, never will let the AI run my sub campaign. While the AI in general for this game is very good compared to any other computer game I've played, it doesn't "think".

I've done 2 PBEMs (disclosure, a@@ got kicked in the first one...) and "a few" tune up games as Allied vs AI. In my 2nd PBEM we're in pretty much the same spot (our game is in mid Apr 42).

Where to base...

You should have a number of AS ships, use them but be cautious about basing out of too many locations. Just because you have an AS available does not mean you need to open a new sub base. Check the manual, pg 287 has the listing of what's needed to rearm based on size of port in lieu of or in addition to AS ships. You'll also want to position ARs for repair where possible. I like;

Adak for covering East Coast of Japan, between Japan/Korea/Mongolia; in 42 just a few subs based here, all coming in as reinforcements. (as does the AS, through Panama @ Feb/March I think). You can eventually (usually by 43) build Adak up as a respectable port. Be wary of an IJ player who is aggressive in Aleutians. You may have to fight for it...

Central Japan, China Sea, Formosa, Einwok islands areas I cover from long range boats at Pearl. I deploy about 2/3 of Pearl's starting subs there, with limited reinforcements in '42. I don't bother to forward stage an AS to Midway in '42, leery of an early loss there and harassment. I will keep a couple of subs back for deploying harassing mines in IJ locations. (use the DMs to deploy defensive mines in conjunction with troop deployments to Midway/Baker/Canton, etc). Short range boats cover Wake/Midway/Johnson Island approaches as an early warning line.

The bulk of US subs start in Manilla, I send them out to Turk, Formosa, Philippines, South China, Vietnam, and Cebe Sea. The short range boats focus on defense of Philippines (between Phillp/Formosa around the Phillip beaches/approaches) remain based out of Manilla and will likely get one refuel there. The longer range boats I change the base to Darwin (Cebe), DEI (Saraj...something...the big port) (Viet/South China) or Sydney (Formosa/Turk & 1 or 2 East of the Philippines)during the initial turn(s). As the long range boats come into refuel the fight for the Philippines is usually about done and they get re-positioned to defend approaches to the DEI, New Guinea, Nomea, etc. The short range boats get shifted to Port Herden (sp? / NW Aussie) and Darwin to support DEI/Aussie defense.

US West Coast short range boats at the start of the game I deploy in a screen line beyond the range of my PBYs for an additional early warning barrier.

Dutch boats defend Eastern Malaya, N. Burma, and Cebe initially, rolling back to DEI as pressed by the IJ. The Dutch "O" boats deploy the Dutch sub mine arsenal at 2-3 area's I'm looking to make into strong points before going out on patrol duties (will take a few months ~ if you've not been leveraging sub mines...get to it!). As DEI falls, shift boats to Perth/Port Herden/Colombo. Be wary of overloading Darwin as your ability to get fuel into Darwin should the IJ press you there will get "difficult". (lesson learned the hard way...)

Reinforcements in '42:
Brit ~ all Indian ocean based, used almost exclusively in 42 to deploy mines (while they last)
US West Coast ~ short range boats to Pago Pago, long range to Adak then shifting to Pearl.
Panama ~ mix of Pago Pago and Sydney ~ depending on where the IJ seems to be pressing (Central Pacific or New Guinea/E Aussie area)
US East Coast ~ Port Herden/Perth or Colombo (depending on how well I'm doing in DEI) via Cape
Dutch ~ get a few boats that pop up, just add them into the DEI defense mix.

42 Summary:
Manilla (usually falls by Mid March/Apr)
Pearl
Colombo
Saraj...(DEI, a few short range US Boats shifted from Manilla)
Sydney
AS (AS comes from...) - Darwin (Manilla), Port Herden (Saraj or Manilla), Adak (US reinf.), Pago Pago (Pearl)

On a related topic...I've not seem much traffic on the "best IJ Merchant traffic lanes" to wait in. With PBEM I would assume your IJ counterpart will not let those fall to default routes (and your likely asking for a lot of merchant reefs if you only use computer generated as allied). In 42 I tend to play more "offensive-defense" using subs as early warning to what the IJ is up to, guarding key approaches to objectives, and watch a few choke points for tankers around Burma/Cebes with just enough subs around the home islands/China to keep him honest and using SCs, PBs, and DDs, etc in the rear areas. The AI is usually much, much more careless with guarding his merchants than a PBEM opponent. The AI also was more aggressive then my PBEM opponent in harassing West Coast ports and "cross" traffic between ports. Somewhere there was a good post for Allied players facing heavy US West Coast sub presence and shifting your shipping to only 1 or 2 heavily patrolled ports in '42.

If playing with realistic duds (the only way to play!)... don't get too frustrated in 42, your time will come. Even if you don't get massive sinkings, you'll be tying up ASW resources with your presence (at least that's what I keep telling myself )

Happy gaming!

(in reply to blueatoll)
Post #: 5
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/11/2013 9:56:48 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41452
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
Listen to Speedy. He's a veteran of running unrestricted submarine warfare.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to kbfchicago)
Post #: 6
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/12/2013 12:01:25 AM   
topeverest


Posts: 2931
Joined: 10/17/2007
From: Houston, TX - USA
Status: offline
Agree. Subs need to be managed manually - and every single turn of the game...every turn. You will not achieve historical results as the allies against a skilled empire opponent, but you can achieve great things to be sure. I also agree on the fluid nature of the campaign. the empire has to move booty, and the allies need to determine how it is being done to deploy their subs to best effect.

A couple hints then wihtout giving away the ship...As the allied player in 42 with the american dud problem, you need to manage the subs that dont suffer dud's carefully. they will be the ones that bring home most of the kills in 42. Dont overplay any patrol. bring home subs with damage in any register more than 10. understand the value of flooding a combat zone with subs versus merchant roles.

If you pay attention every turn, you will pick up many tricks over the course of several games.

_____________________________

Andy M

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 7
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/12/2013 4:50:46 AM   
AcePylut


Posts: 981
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline
I try to use some subs in an air-crew rescue manner, in the odd belief that having a sub or two or few in places where you bomb helps to return pilots who's planes don't make it back to base, instead of having them end up mia or kia.

< Message edited by AcePylut -- 4/12/2013 5:08:51 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to topeverest)
Post #: 8
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/12/2013 4:57:52 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 10831
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: blueatoll
I am beginning to think that the computer controlled sub warfare system is not working, is stupid, or insufficient.


Right. The AI is not even capable of being stupid because it's just software. Don't let the AI (which is an oxymoron because there is no intelligence involved) run anything that you can run yourself. I know, it's so time consuming, but if you're not doing it yourself, what's the point of playing this game?

(in reply to blueatoll)
Post #: 9
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/12/2013 7:38:24 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12370
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy

I love the sub element of the game. I have almost always had success with my Allied subs.

To do this though it requires a LOT of man management and degree of the success will always depend on the skill level of the Japanese opponent (their focus on LBA ASW, ASW TF use, routing convoys etc).

One thing I would say is that IMO it's almost impossible to measure the Allied sub campaign in AE to the RL Allied sub effort. Unless the Japanese player is a numpty and routes ships out of convoy with limited ASW effort etc you just won't achieve the historical results.

I don't want to give too much away, as my current opponents can read this, but I manage subs a lot, move them frequently, change patrol ones, choose leaders for each sub + a few other things I don't want to disclose.

In short you have to manually control your subs to gain results and the more time you invest in them the more successful you will be.
The best base to house subs will vary depending on your game situation. I base them out of harms way from the front but as near as possible to enemy territory. I always have an AS (to re supply) and an AR for low level repairs.

Suitable areas will depend on how your opponent routes his/her ships. Good areas I have typically found are south of Japan, around Luzon, Near Balikpapan, Palembang, Southern Indochina and don't neglect around Hokkaido......



yeah, Speedy loves it, Faber not so much...

sorry, couldn't resist

_____________________________


(in reply to Speedy)
Post #: 10
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/12/2013 2:01:05 PM   
Speedy

 

Posts: 15428
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline
Pffft who's side are you on castor?

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 11
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/12/2013 5:03:18 PM   
rjopel

 

Posts: 602
Joined: 12/19/2007
From: Charlottesville, VA, USA
Status: offline
What the best way to arrange a sub picket line? Been having trouble setting those up.

(in reply to Speedy)
Post #: 12
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/12/2013 5:35:46 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 6972
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rjopel

What the best way to arrange a sub picket line? Been having trouble setting those up.


Well, are you playing the IJ or the Allies? Because it's a lot easier with the Glen boats. I love those things.

(in reply to rjopel)
Post #: 13
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/12/2013 6:15:30 PM   
Speedy

 

Posts: 15428
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rjopel

What the best way to arrange a sub picket line? Been having trouble setting those up.


As the Allies the best way is to have a batch of subs on overlapping Patrol Zones. Have react range set to 1. Ideal world you want to have each sub having each leg of it's patrol zone maximum being it's daily move rate. For example if a sub can move say 5 hexes on mission speed in a day then you want one 'side' of it's patrol zone to be 5 hexes long maximum. Alternate your subs so that they're covering multiple hexes of the sea.

Not sure if this makes sense. Easier to show I feel!

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to rjopel)
Post #: 14
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/12/2013 6:47:18 PM   
rjopel

 

Posts: 602
Joined: 12/19/2007
From: Charlottesville, VA, USA
Status: offline
I'm playing the allies currently

(in reply to Speedy)
Post #: 15
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/13/2013 12:43:31 AM   
Mistmatz

 

Posts: 1397
Joined: 10/16/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy
...
Ideal world you want to have each sub having each leg of it's patrol zone maximum being it's daily move rate. For example if a sub can move say 5 hexes on mission speed in a day then you want one 'side' of it's patrol zone to be 5 hexes long maximum. Alternate your subs so that they're covering multiple hexes of the sea.
...



What I never understood is where subs actually have a chance to hit enemy vessels. Is it in the start and end hex of the sub, of the target or in each hex along the way?

For example assume a vessel starts at hex 0 and makes it to hex 7 by the end of a turn. The sub starts at hex 1 and makes it to hex 6 by the end of the turn. In which hexes can a attack occur (assuming no air recon and react set to 1)?

_____________________________

If you gained knowledge through the forum, why not putting it into the AE wiki?

http://witp-ae.wikia.com/wiki/War_in_the_Pacific:_Admiral%27s_Edition_Wiki


(in reply to Speedy)
Post #: 16
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/13/2013 4:30:06 AM   
jmalter

 

Posts: 1649
Joined: 10/12/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mistmatz
What I never understood is where subs actually have a chance to hit enemy vessels. Is it in the start and end hex of the sub, of the target or in each hex along the way?

IMO subs (or ASW ships) can possibly attack in any of those hexes - start, end, or anywhere along the route. It depends on whether or not the attacker's route intersects w/ the defender's route as each travels along its path during the movement phases (as calculated by the game-engine), as well as whether or not the a/d start off/end up sharing a hex at the beginning/end of the phases.

also consider the sub's ability to detect an enemy TF - a sub equipped w/ its own radar or search-planes, or if it's operating under friendly NavSearch that might raise the detection-level of enemyTFs along its path has a better chance of spotting the enemy than a subTF w/o those advantages.

I'm dubious about the ability of a subTF to 'react' to an enemy TF, but I always set its react to 1 out of habit. but I'm more sure that a subTF that is 'under way' has a better chance of intercepting a potential target - in other words, it's better to assign the subTF to a 2- or 3-hex patrol zone, w/ 1 day spent in each hex, than it is to set a subTF to 'remain on station' in a single hex.

(in reply to Mistmatz)
Post #: 17
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/13/2013 5:48:54 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 4915
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mistmatz


quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy
...
Ideal world you want to have each sub having each leg of it's patrol zone maximum being it's daily move rate. For example if a sub can move say 5 hexes on mission speed in a day then you want one 'side' of it's patrol zone to be 5 hexes long maximum. Alternate your subs so that they're covering multiple hexes of the sea.
...



What I never understood is where subs actually have a chance to hit enemy vessels. Is it in the start and end hex of the sub, of the target or in each hex along the way?

For example assume a vessel starts at hex 0 and makes it to hex 7 by the end of a turn. The sub starts at hex 1 and makes it to hex 6 by the end of the turn. In which hexes can a attack occur (assuming no air recon and react set to 1)?


The difference in naval movement between classical WITP and AE is well explained by jwilkerson in post #14 of this thread.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2017354&mpage=1&key=sub%2Cintercept�

Combat may occur whenever both sides have naval assets in a hex. In AE this may arise as hex by hex movement of the different set paths is calculated and intersection of the paths occurs, or as a result of reacting from the set path towards the other side's naval assets.

Alfred

(in reply to Mistmatz)
Post #: 18
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/13/2013 5:59:25 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 4915
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jmalter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mistmatz
What I never understood is where subs actually have a chance to hit enemy vessels. Is it in the start and end hex of the sub, of the target or in each hex along the way?

IMO subs (or ASW ships) can possibly attack in any of those hexes - start, end, or anywhere along the route. It depends on whether or not the attacker's route intersects w/ the defender's route as each travels along its path during the movement phases (as calculated by the game-engine), as well as whether or not the a/d start off/end up sharing a hex at the beginning/end of the phases.

also consider the sub's ability to detect an enemy TF - a sub equipped w/ its own radar or search-planes, or if it's operating under friendly NavSearch that might raise the detection-level of enemyTFs along its path has a better chance of spotting the enemy than a subTF w/o those advantages.

I'm dubious about the ability of a subTF to 'react' to an enemy TF, but I always set its react to 1 out of habit. but I'm more sure that a subTF that is 'under way' has a better chance of intercepting a potential target - in other words, it's better to assign the subTF to a 2- or 3-hex patrol zone, w/ 1 day spent in each hex, than it is to set a subTF to 'remain on station' in a single hex.


You can leave your scepticism at the cloak room. Subs do react.

There are however some circumstances where a sub on "patrol" or moving to it's destination will not react notwithstanding a reaction range of 1 has been set. Subs will not react if it would result in:

* entering a known minefield
* entering a medium or larger sized port

Subs in position and set to "remain on station" do not react irrespective of what range the player has in the reaction field.

Alfred

(in reply to jmalter)
Post #: 19
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/13/2013 6:07:10 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 4915
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
As the OP is a newbie, and it has been a little while since the subject of sub operations has been raised and covered in depth, I think the OP and all newbies would benefit from reading this thread (and all the linked threads therein I provided).

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2889330&mpage=1&key=wolfpack�

One thing which the above thread (and links) doesn't focus on is the strategic AI utilisation of defensive sub patrols. I'll leave the OP to search the forum for that issue.

Alfred

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 20
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/13/2013 6:51:30 AM   
jmalter

 

Posts: 1649
Joined: 10/12/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: jmalter
I'm dubious about the ability of a subTF to 'react' to an enemy TF, but I always set its react to 1 out of habit.


You can leave your scepticism at the cloak room. Subs do react.

There are however some circumstances where a sub on "patrol" or moving to it's destination will not react notwithstanding a reaction range of 1 has been set. Subs will not react if it would result in:

* entering a known minefield
* entering a medium or larger sized port

Subs in position and set to "remain on station" do not react irrespective of what range the player has in the reaction field.

Alfred

hi Alfred, I'm glad to learn that subs do react, it's just that I've never seen an in-game or ops-report msg that said "TF #nn reacting to...", nor have I paid enough fine-grained attention to my subTFs to see if one pulled out of its patrol-zone to follow a slow-speed target.

wrt 'reaction' in general, which of these settings is more likely to respond to an enemy:
A) a TF in its home-port, w/ react>0, no destination set & 'retirement allowed'
or
B) a TF in its home-port, w/ react>0, set to a single-hex patrol-zone (>0 days) in its home-port hex?

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 21
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/13/2013 7:46:05 AM   
AcePylut


Posts: 981
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline
Well, when you set your subs to patrol one hex from the 3 hex Tsushima Straights Mine of Death with react to one, and then you read about that sub striking a mine in Tsushima, you know they react :)

Not, of course, that that had evvvveeeeerrrr happened to me. No sir-ree, not me.

_____________________________


(in reply to jmalter)
Post #: 22
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/13/2013 9:19:05 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 4915
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jmalter


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: jmalter
I'm dubious about the ability of a subTF to 'react' to an enemy TF, but I always set its react to 1 out of habit.


You can leave your scepticism at the cloak room. Subs do react.

There are however some circumstances where a sub on "patrol" or moving to it's destination will not react notwithstanding a reaction range of 1 has been set. Subs will not react if it would result in:

* entering a known minefield
* entering a medium or larger sized port

Subs in position and set to "remain on station" do not react irrespective of what range the player has in the reaction field.

Alfred

hi Alfred, I'm glad to learn that subs do react, it's just that I've never seen an in-game or ops-report msg that said "TF #nn reacting to...", nor have I paid enough fine-grained attention to my subTFs to see if one pulled out of its patrol-zone to follow a slow-speed target.

wrt 'reaction' in general, which of these settings is more likely to respond to an enemy:
A) a TF in its home-port, w/ react>0, no destination set & 'retirement allowed'
or
B) a TF in its home-port, w/ react>0, set to a single-hex patrol-zone (>0 days) in its home-port hex?


Hmm, bit of a defensive mindset? Have you received Sigint that a Maru is loaded up with the Imperial Guards and is headed to the Frisco area?

Probably much of a muchness. In general terms, to improve the odds of reacting you need

1. Good detection, the higher the better

2. An aggressive TF commander

Both of the above are independent of the two options you posed but will be more important in generating a reaction. I note that in the past you were loathe to select high aggression leaders for your sub TFs, preferring instead to choose on the basis of naval skill. However, in this particularly defensive mindset environment, you might want to revisit the earlier decision.

I don't place subs into base hexes for defensive purposes. Nor can I find a dev directly commenting on this situation. So I can't give a definitive answer. If I had to choose between having the sub TF without a PZ and one with a PZ, I would plump for denoting a PZ. But not using "Patrol Around Target". IOW I would set using at least 2 boundaries for the reason that there are important differences between surface and sub TFs with regard to reactions.

1. Surface Combat TFs have much higher speeds than sub TFs.

2. Surface Combat TFs may have embedded floatplanes which sub TFs don't, unless it is one of the Japanese float plane equipped subs.

3. Surface Combat TFs tend to be comprised of many more vessels than sub TFs.

4. You can set a reaction range of up to 6 for a surface combat TF but only a range of 1 for a sub TF.

The importance of these details are as follow.

(a) Due to its higher speed, a Surface Combat TF which is loitering in its base hex, without a specified PZ, if it reacts, will not be outrun by the enemy TF it is reacting to. The same cannot be said of a sub TF reacting. This speed disparity is not much of an issue when subs are used offensively in a PZ because they will have plenty of equally slow merchantmen/damaged ships to target in a reaction. In your hypothetical, unless it is that Maru heading for Frisco noted at the beginning, you are almost certainly going to be confronted with high speed enemy warships.

(b) Consequently I would prefer to be out moving in the PZ and relying upon the hex by hex movement deliberations rather than reaction to get an interception.

(c) With its own floatplanes, should one of them spot an enemy TF, the surface TF is more likely to react than the sub TF which is relying upon a third party spotter. A surface TF just loitering is not particularly penalised compared with one out in its PZ but the sub TF will only itself spot the enemy TF when it arrives at the base hex. Which makes having a 1 hex range reaction rather moot for the sub.

(d) A multiple ship surface combat TF which reacts to an enemy TF, has the potential of sinking in toto the enemy. That ain't gonna happen with a single sub intercepting at best 1 hex away from its port. At least if the sub TF were at sea in its PZ some hexes away from its port you have the possibility of the contact being renewed the next turn/s and some meaningful damage being inflicted before the enemy arrives at the port.

Bottom line to me is that subs are offensive weapon platforms best used in deepwater, interdicting enemy sea lanes. Not underemployed on home port defence. But if they must be used defensively, giving them a PZ still retains an offensive element to their operation.

Alfred


(in reply to jmalter)
Post #: 23
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/14/2013 7:38:46 AM   
jmalter

 

Posts: 1649
Joined: 10/12/2010
Status: offline
hi Alfred,

thanks for your considerate & well-considered reply. I'll be able to defend my ports better, based on the points you've mentioned. Note that I agree that subs are a poor defensive weapon, I don't use them for port defense!

Rather, I'm trying to figure out how to use surface forces in my DBB_B game vs. the IJ AI. I've got a bunch of light ships, mere naval gerbils such as YMS & AMc, trying to defend against IJ subs mining my ports in the Malacca Straights, while IJ DDs & SCs are actually circumnavigating Hokkaido (I own its eastern half), running into my ports, torping CAs & shelling LSTs in the face of PT & DD TFs that just aren't doing the job on defense.

I've had relatively good results on offense, sending TFs out to intercept these interlopers, but my point-defense TFs have had no effect.

Also, I choose Naval skill over Aggression for sub commanders, in the belief gleaned from forum-posts that these guys are more 'canny' & would be more likely to shoot at transports rather than escorts.

best regards,
jM

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 24
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/14/2013 8:48:36 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 4915
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
Overall, selecting your sub TF leaders on the basis of their naval rating rather than their aggression rating it the correct one. It is just that if you want to maximise the chances of a reaction occurring, you have to select on the basis of their aggression rating. If I ever finish my leadership document, a task set back by my recent HD crash and a general sense of why bother dealing with some of the denizens of the board, the vexed issue of leader selections should become clearer.

Neither naval or aggression rating really has a role in determining target selection. The naval rating deals with how well the attack will be prosecuted and the aggression rating deals with how keen they will be to move to "the sound of the guns firing" (aka reacting) and continue to face up to receiving enemy fire.

Much more of a factor in how targets are selected is the perceived danger threat posed by the individual components of the enemy TF.

As to the use of the ants, before Easter I posted some links on how to use those assets. However I would suggest that you might want to visit the modders sub-forum and appropriately "phrase" your experience there because that is where the real DaBabes experts reside and they might give you some useful pointers on how to deploy the ants. Caught in this current thread, those experts may not see your last post.

Alfred

(in reply to jmalter)
Post #: 25
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/14/2013 7:42:03 PM   
Mac Linehan

 

Posts: 1431
Joined: 12/19/2004
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline
Original:

"Overall, selecting your sub TF leaders on the basis of their naval rating rather than their aggression rating it the correct one. It is just that if you want to maximise the chances of a reaction occurring, you have to select on the basis of their aggression rating. If I ever finish my leadership document, a task set back by my recent HD crash and a general sense of why bother dealing with some of the denizens of the board, the vexed issue of leader selections should become clearer."

Hi, Alfred!

This is awesome news, can't wait to see your thoughts and observations on leadership.

This is one denizen who respects the fact that you know of what you speak - on anything AE, and I am more than willing to listen to what you have to say.

Loyal AEist Denizen Mac




_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 26
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/14/2013 7:53:09 PM   
Mac Linehan

 

Posts: 1431
Joined: 12/19/2004
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline
Gents -

As always, us little minnows learn much from hanging with The Big Boys...

Thank you all for you this excellent discussion.

And:

Alfred Lives!!!

Mac

_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 27
RE: Submarine Warfare - 4/14/2013 8:42:41 PM   
Speedy

 

Posts: 15428
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline
Hi all,

For those interested (except my 2 current opponents Fabertong and Apbarog) I've posted a few more detailed thoughts on my sub tactics on my AAR against Fabertong. Any other queries just PM me.

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Mac Linehan)
Post #: 28
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Submarine Warfare Page: [1]
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

0.145