Subs not losing efficiency

[stjeand]

I know WPP is different than WPE but...

I am not seeing my subs on convoy lanes losing efficiency. They go out with 100...come back with 100...

Shouldn't it drop?

[*Lava*]

Been that way the whole time.

A sub subjected to the efficiency losses of surface ships would return with 0% efficiency from a patrol and take at least 2 months to recover.

[stjeand]

Interesting...
Must be because of the efficiency loss changes here.

WPE they lose Efficiency I think when they get hit.

But it makes subs pretty overpowered.

[ncc1701e]

We had already a debate about this here:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 4#p4979404

For me they should. Watch this video and form your own opinion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5e0Tor2kMg

[stjeand]

I guess you are correct.

Subs are highly overpowered. Guess I should just build tons of those.

[AlvaroSousa]

Subs against 10 escorts with late war technology get killed quite easily.

[ncc1701e]

Subs against 10 escorts with late war technology get killed quite easily.

Before or after the May Incident?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_J._May

May was responsible for a major release of highly confidential military information during World War II known as the May Incident. U.S. submarines had been conducting a successful undersea war against Japanese shipping during World War II, frequently escaping their anti-submarine depth charge attacks. May revealed the deficiencies of Japanese depth-charge tactics in a press conference held in June 1943 on his return from a war zone junket. At this press conference, he revealed the highly sensitive fact that American submarines had a high survival rate because Japanese depth charges were exploding at too shallow a depth. Various press associations sent this leaked news story over their wires and many newspapers published it, including one in Honolulu, Hawaii.

After the news became public, Japanese naval antisubmarine forces began adjusting their depth charges to explode at a greater depth. Vice Admiral Charles A. Lockwood, commander of the U.S. submarine fleet in the Pacific, estimated that May's security breach cost the United States Navy as many as 10 submarines and 800 crewmen killed in action. He said, "I hear Congressman May said the Jap depth charges are not set deep enough. He would be pleased to know that the Japs set them deeper now." A report from the U.S. Navy's Pacific Submarine Fleet determined that Japanese anti-submarine warfare (ASW) forces failed to uncover the maximum test depth ability of U.S. fleet submarines during the war. However, the report made no finding as to whether or not Japanese ASW forces altered their depth charge attacks to deeper settings as a consequence of May's revelation to the press.

[AlvaroSousa]

In general but once a nation has convoy escorts 1943 that is the turning point.

This is just a "by chance" incident that can't be fitted into the game or doesn't have enough of an impact. This accounts for 1 sub being lost in total from 1943 to 1945 in game terms.

The Japanese simply didn't have the ASW systems the UK and USA had in place. But since we know history any Japanese player would be foolish not to invest in ASW.

Somethings we need to make smart assumptions others we can't because they are game breaking. For example when the Allies strategically bombed Germany they were close to knocking out the whole country without knowing why. After the war was over it was learned they blew up so many power stations that it almost shut down Germany. If the Allies exclusively targeted power stations the factories would not have mattered as they would have no power to build arms.

That hindsight can't be in the game as it is game breaking.

But allowing the Axis player to develop ASW is rational and not game breaking.

[ncc1701e]

Absolutely, on this subject, I recommend this Osprey Publishing book from Mark Stille. Duel n°117.
Very good summary of the ASW that the Japanese tried to put in place.

---

Duel 117.JPG (50.93 KiB) Viewed 231 times