Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

ASW

 
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 >> The War Room >> ASW Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
ASW - 3/1/2016 7:31:54 PM   
Revthought


Posts: 285
Joined: 1/14/2009
From: San Diego (Lives in Indianapolis)
Status: offline
Greetings! So I am about to embark on my first PBEM game (maybe) and I've been training myself by, ofc, playing the campaign AI. One thing that I noticed I'm terrible at is ASW. For example, no matter how many ASW TFs I seem to have patrolling, I've noticed that Pearl Harbor is always crawling with Japanese submarines.

This has culminated in the Enterprise eating a torpedo and being knocked out for 303 days (ugh). So I thought I'd ask here about best practices on how to deal with submarines.

Post #: 1
RE: ASW - 3/1/2016 8:31:45 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 5359
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: online
Your personal experience depends heavily on how far into the game you played.

Allied Naval ASW assets have very low ASW ratings (these upgrade over the course of the war) and very low crew experience.

It will be months before daily patrolling starts bringing concrete results.

Couple your naval ASW patrols with air naval search and vector your surface TFs to spotted sub locations.

Patrol in patterns around spotted sub locations with a reaction range (it does work for ASW TFs).

IN addition start training for and actively patrolling with air ASW platforms.

Again, it will be months before you see concrete results. ASW skill has to get to 60-65 before you will start getting regular reports of attacks and hits.

You have to keep in perspective how unprepared and untrained the Allied forces were when the war started.

The game models this exceedingly well.



_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Revthought)
Post #: 2
RE: ASW - 3/1/2016 9:13:25 PM   
Revthought


Posts: 285
Joined: 1/14/2009
From: San Diego (Lives in Indianapolis)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Your personal experience depends heavily on how far into the game you played.

Allied Naval ASW assets have very low ASW ratings (these upgrade over the course of the war) and very low crew experience.

It will be months before daily patrolling starts bringing concrete results.

Couple your naval ASW patrols with air naval search and vector your surface TFs to spotted sub locations.

Patrol in patterns around spotted sub locations with a reaction range (it does work for ASW TFs).

IN addition start training for and actively patrolling with air ASW platforms.

Again, it will be months before you see concrete results. ASW skill has to get to 60-65 before you will start getting regular reports of attacks and hits.

You have to keep in perspective how unprepared and untrained the Allied forces were when the war started.

The game models this exceedingly well.




I have been doing this largely; however, I haven't gone past February 1942, so this explains why I have had so little success. I do have a follow up question, if I set up ASW forces to patrol and set their reaction to something greater than zero, will they actually react to submarine contacts?


(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 3
RE: ASW - 3/1/2016 9:20:09 PM   
kaleun

 

Posts: 5062
Joined: 5/29/2002
From: Colorado
Status: offline
quote:

I have been doing this largely; however, I haven't gone past February 1942, so this explains why I have had so little success. I do have a follow up question, if I set up ASW forces to patrol and set their reaction to something greater than zero, will they actually react to submarine contacts?


Mine do. They still don't actually hit anything, but I'm sure they force the enemy skippers to break out the depth charge medicine (Sake in heir case)

_____________________________

Appear at places to which he must hasten; move swiftly where he does not expect you.
Sun Tzu

(in reply to Revthought)
Post #: 4
RE: ASW - 3/1/2016 10:15:33 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 5359
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: online
They do indeed react.

It can easily be April or May before you start seeing any success and well into late summer or early fall before you start getting regular attacks and hits.

Takes time to build up naval crew experience and getting aerial ASW experience to 65 or better.

< Message edited by HansBolter -- 3/1/2016 10:16:02 PM >


_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to kaleun)
Post #: 5
RE: ASW - 3/2/2016 6:15:19 AM   
DanSez


Posts: 811
Joined: 2/5/2012
Status: offline

The success off ASW efforts depends on training your land based air units.
The number of planes, range and altitude settings are critical.
Having one unit of 12 planes going 6 hexes at 5k with low skilled pilots will probably get you some ghost sightings at best.

Land Based ASW Bomber Squadron:
NOTE: Range is half the hexes set for ASW
Normal setting
ASW 40%
TRAINING 30%
REST 30%
High Threat setting
ASW 60%
Traning 20%
Rest 20%

Better to have 3 units of 12 planes going 4 hexes (Range would be set at 8) at various altitudes (4k, 2k, 1k).

Point is:
The more you have the better and numbers of planes will help you against the low skills odds.
Don't forget in a high threat area, to add a Night Naval Search squadron at low altitude (2k).

Finally, did you do your due diligence?
Did you watch the combat reports before the turn you moved your carriers from port?
Did you check your combat and intel reports for any sightings (ghost or solid)
-or-
Did you just look at the map and didn't see any enemy units and assumed none were there?
Hey, I have been there and getting sucker punched by some sneaking sub really sucks. Lessons are to be learned.

For a high valued target like a carrier group, running out of a port that I suspect have heavy subs packs lurking about, I would take extreme precautions like this:

Create a 3 ship ASW TF and have it lead the Carrier TF out of the zone.
Set the Carrier TF to follow the ASW TF by 1 hex and set Reaction to 2. Remain On Station. Set Home Port to something near your destination.
And if you have enough assets around create a 3rd ASW TF and have it Follow the carrier TF, Same hex
Be sure to set all your carrier bombers to some level of ASW search.

And I would plot a path that would take your fleet away from any sightings with the way-point function until I got 8-10 hexes from port, then either release the ASW escorts or absorb some of them in the carrier TF and go toward your final destination.


(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 6
RE: ASW - 3/2/2016 7:53:31 AM   
Pilsator

 

Posts: 45
Joined: 11/24/2014
Status: offline
setting search arcs in the direction of the suspected subs also helps- Arcs have to be shown black on the map, so the planes will search in both air phases this part of the map. It is esp. important for search/asw Ranges of more than four hexes.

And the effort depends on the Exp/Skill of the pilots and ship crews. Mine start to show effect beginning in April 42. ANd with effect I dont mean that they sink or attack, but at least they detect something. Before April the detection was usually done by AKs ot TKs...

(in reply to DanSez)
Post #: 7
RE: ASW - 3/2/2016 2:09:19 PM   
dr. smith

 

Posts: 221
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: lost in space
Status: offline
Air ASW really won't be of any early help, your only chance is at sea.
I'm also doing an AI game(just hit April '42), and though I have a mess of ASW air groups, I've gotten zero hits from them and don't expect to.

So ASAP convert your 4 stacker Clemson class DD into APD. They turn a 66 AA, 2 ASW ship into a ship that has the 2nd highest ASW in the start (6 vs an 8 for some Limey DDs and HDMLs). You don't have any US ship with an ASW > 2 until you convert the Clemsons. I've "maybe" sunk 1 or 2 subs, but have been getting hits on subs. Sending a sub back for repair is as good as sinking since it will take a long time to replace a West Coast I-boat. Your WC Yippies (YP) only serve to help I-boats expend torpedoes.

You start with 24 of Clemsons, important to get the 4 in Philippines out safe. Think (working from an old data dump) you got 5 in Borneo, 4 in Java, 1 in Pearl, 10 in West Coast. You'll need them in 3 areas - WC, Pearl, East Coast Oz (Brisbane). I also use the Canadian KVs to help the Seattle and San Fran areas, think their ASW is 4. PS-just found you start with 1 APD in San Diego, great!

PBEMmers tend to send more to interdict West Coast - Pearl, and more to interdict Australia. The first hoping to nail some hurting heavies as they make their way to the navy yards of Seattle. The Canadian KVs can help cover your banged up TFs on their way to Seattle and SF.

In February some DD's upgrade to an ASW of 6, so that will help protect your CVs. Since the Clemsons don't add much AA after conversion, keep these as sub hunters.

< Message edited by dr. smith -- 3/2/2016 2:12:38 PM >

(in reply to Pilsator)
Post #: 8
RE: ASW - 3/2/2016 2:17:51 PM   
John B.


Posts: 625
Joined: 9/25/2011
From: Virginia
Status: offline
One thing to remember is that the British ships tend to be quite good with ASW even early in the war. They are not near Pearl, alas, but they do get a bonus as I recall while early on IJN ships are just awful, perhaps even worse than the American ones. Things really start to improve for the Americans after the first round of destroyer upgrades in early 42. Make sure you take full advantage of those. Oh, and if you can, save some Dutch destoyers. In 1943 they can upgrade to ASW strengths of 11. No range but good for base patrols.

(in reply to dr. smith)
Post #: 9
RE: ASW - 3/2/2016 2:31:31 PM   
Revthought


Posts: 285
Joined: 1/14/2009
From: San Diego (Lives in Indianapolis)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DanSez


The success off ASW efforts depends on training your land based air units.
The number of planes, range and altitude settings are critical.
Having one unit of 12 planes going 6 hexes at 5k with low skilled pilots will probably get you some ghost sightings at best.

Land Based ASW Bomber Squadron:
NOTE: Range is half the hexes set for ASW
Normal setting
ASW 40%
TRAINING 30%
REST 30%
High Threat setting
ASW 60%
Traning 20%
Rest 20%

Better to have 3 units of 12 planes going 4 hexes (Range would be set at 8) at various altitudes (4k, 2k, 1k).

Point is:
The more you have the better and numbers of planes will help you against the low skills odds.
Don't forget in a high threat area, to add a Night Naval Search squadron at low altitude (2k).

Finally, did you do your due diligence?
Did you watch the combat reports before the turn you moved your carriers from port?
Did you check your combat and intel reports for any sightings (ghost or solid)
-or-
Did you just look at the map and didn't see any enemy units and assumed none were there?
Hey, I have been there and getting sucker punched by some sneaking sub really sucks. Lessons are to be learned.

For a high valued target like a carrier group, running out of a port that I suspect have heavy subs packs lurking about, I would take extreme precautions like this:

Create a 3 ship ASW TF and have it lead the Carrier TF out of the zone.
Set the Carrier TF to follow the ASW TF by 1 hex and set Reaction to 2. Remain On Station. Set Home Port to something near your destination.
And if you have enough assets around create a 3rd ASW TF and have it Follow the carrier TF, Same hex
Be sure to set all your carrier bombers to some level of ASW search.

And I would plot a path that would take your fleet away from any sightings with the way-point function until I got 8-10 hexes from port, then either release the ASW escorts or absorb some of them in the carrier TF and go toward your final destination.




This is great information, thanks! What I had been doing, because air crews at the start of the war are rather novice, is setting the training quite higher. So I will adjust that.

What is the best altitude for ASW missions? I've been defaulting this to somewhere between 1 and 2 thousand feet depending on the airframe.

(in reply to DanSez)
Post #: 10
RE: ASW - 3/2/2016 4:00:51 PM   
leehunt27@bloomberg.net


Posts: 530
Joined: 9/6/2004
Status: offline
Its late 1944 and I'm the Japanese in a PBEM game. Almost 95% of my subs are gone, if it makes you feel any better playing as the Allies. You will get them eventually!!

_____________________________

John 21:25

(in reply to Revthought)
Post #: 11
RE: ASW - 3/2/2016 4:23:56 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 7191
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John B.

One thing to remember is that the British ships tend to be quite good with ASW even early in the war. They are not near Pearl, alas, but they do get a bonus as I recall while early on IJN ships are just awful, perhaps even worse than the American ones. Things really start to improve for the Americans after the first round of destroyer upgrades in early 42. Make sure you take full advantage of those. Oh, and if you can, save some Dutch destoyers. In 1943 they can upgrade to ASW strengths of 11. No range but good for base patrols.

Be careful reading the ASW numbers. An ASW rating of 11 means you have ammo for 11 attacks. It does not tell you how effective those attacks might be. The real effectiveness gauge is the number of devices that can drop ASW weapons. Ships that can lay a big pattern are most likely to get a hit on an squirming sub.

For an example, look at one of the AMs at PH on Dec. 7th - ASW rating 9, one depth charge rack! Then look in the reinforcement queue for a DE in 1943...

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 12
RE: ASW - 3/2/2016 4:28:42 PM   
jamesjohns

 

Posts: 85
Joined: 12/2/2013
Status: offline
quote:

Be careful reading the ASW numbers. An ASW rating of 11 means you have ammo for 11 attacks. It does not tell you how effective those attacks might be. The real effectiveness gauge is the number of devices that can drop ASW weapons. Ships that can lay a big pattern are most likely to get a hit on an squirming sub.

For an example, look at one of the AMs at PH on Dec. 7th - ASW rating 9, one depth charge rack! Then look in the reinforcement queue for a DE in 1943...
Thanks BBfanboy, this is interesting. If I understand your comment correctly ASW platforms that have a diversity of ASW weapons systems are more effective. Never really thought about it that way, tended to only just look at the number


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 13
RE: ASW - 3/2/2016 4:41:01 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 7191
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jamesjohns

quote:

Be careful reading the ASW numbers. An ASW rating of 11 means you have ammo for 11 attacks. It does not tell you how effective those attacks might be. The real effectiveness gauge is the number of devices that can drop ASW weapons. Ships that can lay a big pattern are most likely to get a hit on an squirming sub.

For an example, look at one of the AMs at PH on Dec. 7th - ASW rating 9, one depth charge rack! Then look in the reinforcement queue for a DE in 1943...
Thanks BBfanboy, this is interesting. If I understand your comment correctly ASW platforms that have a diversity of ASW weapons systems are more effective. Never really thought about it that way, tended to only just look at the number



Not necessarily diverse, but more launchers in total. For example when units start to get hedgehog or squid launchers, they are generally used on their own to attack ahead of the ship (but with multiple mortar bombs) so the depth charges do not come into play during these attacks. Hedgehog usually has a smaller ammo capacity so it might be able to make only 4 attacks whereas the depth charges can go 6 or more rounds.

Don't be fooled by the limited animation of the ASW attacks - it will show hedgehog going off like a depth charge but it is a contact weapon, not a depth triggered weapon, so it will only get a hit when one of the circle of bombs hits. There should be no "Near miss rattles sub" - that is just random fluff in the animation.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to jamesjohns)
Post #: 14
RE: ASW - 3/2/2016 6:47:05 PM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 742
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline
Given the heavy traffic between Pearl and San Francisco, I like to check the courses of the TF shuttling between them, and set autonomous ASW TF along the path, at least for the first four or five hexes, along with a squadron devoted to this arc at each node. It seems the highest danger is close to the ports, and the ocean is too vast to effectively patrol for subs everywhere.
But once I have CVEs and more escorts, I put a TF with ASW air wings along the lane too, to clear the path in mid-ocean.

This is against the AI however - I believe a PBEM player would quickly find my sealane...

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 15
RE: ASW - 3/2/2016 7:04:12 PM   
John B.


Posts: 625
Joined: 9/25/2011
From: Virginia
Status: offline
@BBFanboy, as the ASW numbers get larger I've noticed that the types of weapons used get more diverse such as adding in Hedgehogs so I've always thought it reflected overall capability rather than just a mere tally of the number of host a ship gets. My SCs for example, get better weapons when their number goes up but it does not seem like there are additional rounds of combat that they get.

(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 16
RE: ASW - 3/3/2016 5:11:22 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 7191
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
Rounds of combat fought in a single engagement is a series of dice rolls involving the relative naval skills of the sub and escort commanders, crew experience and aggression ratings.

It is quite common in 1943 for an escort ship to use up all of its ASW ammo in attack after attack. This is what I was referring to about the ASW rating meaning the ammo supply. A higher number means more attacks are possible.

Again, the effectiveness of the attacks depends on the human factors mentioned above plus the number of weapons fired off in each attack. So a ship that has two depth charge racks and two launchers (throwers) on each side will have a better chance than one with only two racks and one launcher on each side.

So if you are trying to decide which is the best ASW vessel to put with at TF, it depends whether you want one with stamina (big magazines) or a short but dangerous capability. A few ships have both.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to John B.)
Post #: 17
RE: ASW - 3/3/2016 10:50:54 AM   
DanSez


Posts: 811
Joined: 2/5/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Revthought

This is great information, thanks! What I had been doing, because air crews at the start of the war are rather novice, is setting the training quite higher. So I will adjust that.

What is the best altitude for ASW missions? I've been defaulting this to somewhere between 1 and 2 thousand feet depending on the airframe.


Setting training to 100% will get those numbers up faster when they are raw replacements, but they won't be doing any work finding the bad guys. Depends on how many units you want to dedicate to ASW. You can have some 'basic training' units set to 100% with raw recruits and then shuffle those pilots into other units which are actually doing split hunting/training. Depends on how much time you want to invest to micro manage pilot placement.

Best ASW altitudes are 4k and under which increase the chances the aircraft will attack the subs they stumble upon. I like to mix layers if I have more than 1 unit operating out of the same base. If it is a single unit, I tend to search at 4k which may give the pilot a little wider coverage area.

Nav Search layered in with ASW, especially night search, at 5k also seems to increase the DL which I believe will help your ships avoid being attacked.

Once your pilots get into the 70's in ASW experience, they become pretty good at killing subs if you put them in the right airframes. Something single engined, relatively slow with a big payload. Remember for most planes, flying low level missions will cut your payload.


(in reply to Revthought)
Post #: 18
RE: ASW - 3/3/2016 12:39:02 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 10429
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Be careful reading the ASW numbers. An ASW rating of 11 means you have ammo for 11 attacks. It does not tell you how effective those attacks might be. The real effectiveness gauge is the number of devices that can drop ASW weapons. Ships that can lay a big pattern are most likely to get a hit on an squirming sub.

For an example, look at one of the AMs at PH on Dec. 7th - ASW rating 9, one depth charge rack! Then look in the reinforcement queue for a DE in 1943...


I looked at my AMs at PH in a Scen 2 AI game, December 12th. all of them are ASW 1. What is the name of this ASW 9 vessel?

I have never seen any analysis that correlates ASW level to magazine size. Do you have a link? ASW upgrades don't expand the hull.

A 1944 PF and a DE are both ASW 11, yet a PF has Ammo of 20 and the DE Ammo of 4. Each have 11 launchers.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 3/3/2016 12:45:33 PM >


_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 19
RE: ASW - 3/3/2016 12:41:05 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 10429
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Not necessarily diverse, but more launchers in total. For example when units start to get hedgehog or squid launchers, they are generally used on their own to attack ahead of the ship (but with multiple mortar bombs) so the depth charges do not come into play during these attacks. Hedgehog usually has a smaller ammo capacity so it might be able to make only 4 attacks whereas the depth charges can go 6 or more rounds.

Don't be fooled by the limited animation of the ASW attacks - it will show hedgehog going off like a depth charge but it is a contact weapon, not a depth triggered weapon, so it will only get a hit when one of the circle of bombs hits. There should be no "Near miss rattles sub" - that is just random fluff in the animation.


It is true that was the way Hedgehogs behaved in RL, but I have never seen a dev discuss that contact-ASW weapons have their own algorithm for contact only, or that there is any forward-firing code. Do you have a link?

Looking at the editor, it appears the mortar-type ASW weapons all have very small effects versus DCs, and much greater ranges. The "Static" box is also checked for the mortars; I don't know what that does. I don't see any way to make a mortar weapon act as a contact fused weapon in the ASW realm of devices.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 3/3/2016 12:51:49 PM >


_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 20
RE: ASW - 3/3/2016 2:41:09 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 4857
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jamesjohns

quote:

Be careful reading the ASW numbers. An ASW rating of 11 means you have ammo for 11 attacks. It does not tell you how effective those attacks might be. The real effectiveness gauge is the number of devices that can drop ASW weapons. Ships that can lay a big pattern are most likely to get a hit on an squirming sub.

For an example, look at one of the AMs at PH on Dec. 7th - ASW rating 9, one depth charge rack! Then look in the reinforcement queue for a DE in 1943...
Thanks BBfanboy, this is interesting. If I understand your comment correctly ASW platforms that have a diversity of ASW weapons systems are more effective. Never really thought about it that way, tended to only just look at the number




No.

The ASW number does not have any connection with ammo for attack.

A diversity of ASW weapons does not make the ASW platform more effective.

Alfred

(in reply to jamesjohns)
Post #: 21
RE: ASW - 3/3/2016 2:44:09 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 4857
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Not necessarily diverse, but more launchers in total. For example when units start to get hedgehog or squid launchers, they are generally used on their own to attack ahead of the ship (but with multiple mortar bombs) so the depth charges do not come into play during these attacks. Hedgehog usually has a smaller ammo capacity so it might be able to make only 4 attacks whereas the depth charges can go 6 or more rounds.

Don't be fooled by the limited animation of the ASW attacks - it will show hedgehog going off like a depth charge but it is a contact weapon, not a depth triggered weapon, so it will only get a hit when one of the circle of bombs hits. There should be no "Near miss rattles sub" - that is just random fluff in the animation.


It is true that was the way Hedgehogs behaved in RL, but I have never seen a dev discuss that contact-ASW weapons have their own algorithm for contact only, or that there is any forward-firing code. Do you have a link?

Looking at the editor, it appears the mortar-type ASW weapons all have very small effects versus DCs, and much greater ranges. The "Static" box is also checked for the mortars; I don't know what that does. I don't see any way to make a mortar weapon act as a contact fused weapon in the ASW realm of devices.


Correct, there are no contact fused effects in the ASW combat algorithms.

The "Static" box is there to effectively limit the device only to vessels.

Alfred

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 22
RE: ASW - 3/3/2016 2:57:43 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 4857
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Be careful reading the ASW numbers. An ASW rating of 11 means you have ammo for 11 attacks. It does not tell you how effective those attacks might be. The real effectiveness gauge is the number of devices that can drop ASW weapons. Ships that can lay a big pattern are most likely to get a hit on an squirming sub.

For an example, look at one of the AMs at PH on Dec. 7th - ASW rating 9, one depth charge rack! Then look in the reinforcement queue for a DE in 1943...


I looked at my AMs at PH in a Scen 2 AI game, December 12th. all of them are ASW 1. What is the name of this ASW 9 vessel?

I have never seen any analysis that correlates ASW level to magazine size. Do you have a link? ASW upgrades don't expand the hull.

A 1944 PF and a DE are both ASW 11, yet a PF has Ammo of 20 and the DE Ammo of 4. Each have 11 launchers.


Again correct Bullwinkle.

The ASW number is only a quantity metric of how many ASW weapons are carried. It conveys no other meaning.

The ASW number does not indicate how good the weapon is. Nor does it indicate how much ammo per weapon. Neither does it indicate how many ASW attacks may be prosecuted. It doesn't hint whether it will be a penetrating hit, or whether the ratio of hits is better, nor how deep it operates to, or whether it will only hit within its depth range, nor whether it works better in shallow or deep water. Nor does it indicate the size of port required for rearming, nor the cost in terms of supply for rearming. It does not indicate how long it will take to repair the damaged ASW weapons, nor how long the ship will be out on patrol. It does not improve the crew experience in conducting ASW combat as opposed to any other kind of combat.

The ASW number is only a quantity metric of how many ASW weapons are carried. It conveys no other meaning.

This has been stated on several occasions by devs and myself. How ASW is conducted has been detailed on those occasions.

Alfred

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 23
RE: ASW - 3/3/2016 4:31:55 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 10429
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


The "Static" box is there to effectively limit the device only to vessels.

Alfred


That makes sense. An air-dropped Hedgehog would be a very expensively-delivered tiny bomb.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 24
RE: ASW - 3/3/2016 4:46:23 PM   
bushpsu

 

Posts: 381
Joined: 10/30/2007
From: san jose, ca
Status: online
For the air assets, would there be an advantage training as a 究plit究quadron? By this I mean dividing an existing squadron and have 蘑in nav search, while 步系ains in ASW. After training is complete recombine the squadron. Will those pilots trained for a specific mission be more likely to conduct it from the squadron shell, or are the pilots assigned to the mission going to be selected randomly? I am thinking about having either NavSearch or ASW set to 50%

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 25
RE: ASW - 3/4/2016 2:39:28 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 4857
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bushpsu

For the air assets, would there be an advantage training as a 究plit究quadron? By this I mean dividing an existing squadron and have 蘑in nav search, while 步系ains in ASW. After training is complete recombine the squadron. Will those pilots trained for a specific mission be more likely to conduct it from the squadron shell, or are the pilots assigned to the mission going to be selected randomly? I am thinking about having either NavSearch or ASW set to 50%


No advantage.

If you have more active pilots on an air group roster than ready planes, the code selects pilots on the basis of least fatigued. With a surplus of pilots, those too fatigued automatically get moved to inactive status. Pilot skills does not come into consideration.

Alfred

(in reply to bushpsu)
Post #: 26
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> ASW 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

0.148