From: Chicago, Illinois
Don't know which, but logically it seems that you don't want to be searching south into North Oz for submarines or KB. Although that would make an interesting Combat Report.
Yea...I recall there was some debate on this in the older posts; if a random search arc covers land are the flights re-routed to water. I don't recall there was a conclusion which is why in these circumstances I still use explicit. At some point 40% land? 20% land? it's likely mote, no opinion on what the % is, my rough rule of thumb is around 50%...and how much time I want to spend on that particular turn .
Ian - excellent point, I know I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed so it was quite a while before I figured that out (balance search with attack (Nav or ASW) & training)! Especially helpful for early war Allied with a need to train up/deploy initial low skill pilots and IJ at any point in the war to maximize the training base while filling in operational needs.
This also brings up an additional use for explicit arcs. A single Sqdn doing double duty as in Ian's post (e.g. 60% search, 20% ASW, 10% Tng, 10% rest) with low(er) plane counts due to split missions as well as coastal duty (like Knavery's Darwin example) I'll use explicit zones, especially for ASW (or whatever is the smaller of two missions) part of the mission. But as before, when it's mostly water (e.g. around an atoll), it's all set to random.
Good feedback all around! I recall similar debates way back in the day, and I've always played using random except when there's a big landmass in play, like Darwin.
Also, good to see a fellow Chicagoan on the board! Did you enjoy that snow yesterday morning?