Doctrine ought to govern (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message


spence -> Doctrine ought to govern (4/19/2011 11:03:48 PM)

I just started a PBEM (Scen 2) and made a boo-boo right off. I completely forgot about the remnants of Force Z when I made my first move. So it turns out that the 4 DDs that survived turn 1 go off on a ride to glory up to Khota Bharu.

A surface action results between them and the big IJN covering force (BBs,CAs,CLs and DDs). Amazingly the 4 Brit/Aussie DDs get in to 6000 yds before they even get detected: and then they start duking it out with the BBs with their "fearsome" guns. Not one Allied DD makes a torpedo launch (althought the IJN fires off pretty much every torpedo they have scoring no hits). Amazingly the gun duel pretty much goes to the Brits (although a few 4.7" hits on a BB isn't much) and the Allied DDs retire to Singapore.

It is my believe that there was not one DD skipper of any nation who wouldn't use the only weapons he has with any chance of inflicting significant damage on a BB/CA. It was certainly the practiced doctrine of the RN (and every other nation for that matter) for DDs to use their torpedoes against heavier ships.

The doctrine should govern. It should not be a matter of luck.




ADB123 -> RE: Doctrine ought to govern (4/19/2011 11:23:09 PM)

quote:

The doctrine should govern. It should not be a matter of luck.


What? Doctrine over Luck in a Gary Grigsby game? [sm=00000289.gif] [sm=00000280.gif] [sm=00000289.gif] [sm=00000280.gif] [sm=00000289.gif] [sm=00000280.gif] [sm=00000289.gif] [sm=00000280.gif] [sm=00000289.gif] [sm=00000280.gif] [sm=00000289.gif] [sm=00000280.gif] [sm=00000289.gif] [sm=00000280.gif] [sm=00000289.gif] [sm=00000280.gif]

Keep dreaming...




greg_slith -> RE: Doctrine ought to govern (4/20/2011 1:46:55 PM)

I cringe whenever a SAG of mine runs into an enemy force if there are destroyers in it. I woulod say that 90% of the time my destroyers will launch their torps against enemy destroyers and pass up BB's, CA's, AK's and even Carriers[:@]. The only hope is 1)that my guys get into knife fighting range undetected because of night and weather, then they MIGHT[8|] shoot at the big guys. Or 2) sink ALL the DD's by gunfire at long range before moving in to mix it up with the heavies or more valuable targets.




Oldguard1970 -> RE: Doctrine ought to govern (4/20/2011 3:03:23 PM)

Doctrine over luck....   Hmmm....

As a retired officer, I can tell plenty of real life stories about people deviating from doctrine. (... and sometimes I was mighty glad they did.)  As for luck, (or chance), it is certainly significant in military operations.

I am frustrated when units in my game act as if their commanders are cement-headed.  Then again, I felt that way while I was serving, too.  [:D]




crsutton -> RE: Doctrine ought to govern (4/20/2011 11:42:38 PM)

There are about a 100 different ways to make contact with the enemy in a night action. I suppose only a few of those will give a favorable postion to work up a good solution for a torpedo attack. It was not just automatic.




Joe D. -> RE: Doctrine ought to govern (4/21/2011 12:36:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

It is my believe that there was not one DD skipper of any nation who wouldn't use the only weapons he has with any chance of inflicting significant damage on a BB/CA. It was certainly the practiced doctrine of the RN ....


... whose torpedoes actually worked at the beginning of hostilities.




Big B -> RE: Doctrine ought to govern (4/21/2011 1:44:21 AM)

I am pretty certain nothing on the surface combat routines was changed in AE.

That being said, it seems to me that the question ought to be -

"Were there any significant night actions fought in WW2 (and I specify night actions because of the close range involved) where opposing destroyer forces actually did not fire any torpedoes at all - when targets of cruiser or capital ships were present?"
I'm not talking torpedo hits - just firing torpedoes... I'm not sure what the real answer to that question is.

Either way, I don't believe it has anything to do per say with AE....the code probably hasn't changed since UV.





freeboy -> RE: Doctrine ought to govern (4/21/2011 5:38:33 AM)

well, remember the dd should be acting as screans and not allowing an enemy dd force easy close in torp attacks, and a torp attack against a turning ship at over 6k is an excerise in futilty. So, while I too always want my dd's to get fish into the enemy, not firing at capital ships would not seem abnormal, on the other hand a sub attacking a small pb instead of a large tanker is my big complaint




Kubel -> RE: Doctrine ought to govern (4/21/2011 2:57:08 PM)

IMHO its people who challenge doctrine and do things inovative thats changes doctrine. One reason why we tend to prepare for the next war using the tactivs of the last.
Oh VC's to the Destroyer Captains...[sm=00000436.gif]




crsutton -> RE: Doctrine ought to govern (4/21/2011 7:46:57 PM)

I will add that Ark and I have had a game going for about 700 turns now and the torpedo hits in surface actions seem to be just about right. It is still late 43 and the edge goes to the Japanese but it really is one aspect that seems very well balanced. Most surface actions see torpedoes fired but really we get a hit or two in perhaps 1 out of four or five actions. The most likely to eat a fish are ships that are already damaged and slowed down. Now if you get a DD force in amongst some transports the hit ratios go up big time.




AW1Steve -> RE: Doctrine ought to govern (4/21/2011 8:06:28 PM)

And what makes you think Americans follow their own doctrine?[&:] Read their own training manuals? [:D]


I've just finished Neptune's Inferno. While it talks about USN (Not RN) , commanders were hesitant about shooting their fish due to "Blue on Blue" concerns. It seems like in at least half the battles USN commanders would order a "cease fire own ships" order , while engaging Japanese ships. And the TF commander in the Japanese Flagship sent out the message "Idiots" at the USN ships, thinking he was being fired on by own ships.


Ship commanders often fall back on the weapons that they feel most comfortable (That is train the most with).Torpedo practice was far more expensive (that is , done less often) than gunnery practice. On the second day of the war, I don't find it unreasonable to be 1)cautious and 2) concerned about the weapons. And isn't it possible that the DD's never got a good shot (maybe due to being TOO close) with their torpedos. Since so few torpedo's are carried, is it unreasonable that the commanders might be "saving them for a perfect shot/target"?


I don't know, I just wanted to throw these points out for consideration. [:)]




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.734375E-02