ORIGINAL: spence
How do you wish to be able to improve as the Allies?
To begin with perhaps the addition of Mk 27 and Mk 28 homing torpedoes (escort killers: in actual use 33 hits/106 fired).
Talk about ability to react... the best action against these guys is to open your range. At less than 20 (16/19.6) knots and 4k yards max range you have to fire them at point blank range or go completely undetected to fire. I find myself wondering how the effectiveness of these changed over time. I can see these easily gaming out as ineffective over time.
Now... let's take a different tack. You are lamenting the fact that your subs can't carry a war shot which will kill a 215 ton PB 33% of the time. Your subs carry say... 24 torpedoes. So figure 3 torpedoes per escort for the expectation of 1 hit (note kill is not guaranteed). Go for it dude. Load out those suckers on every sub and kill my escorts. I'd rather see them go glug, glug, glug than a TK. Mod those puppies in, just make sure they take up ammo slots on your boats and make sure they run at the speeds and ranges they did historically.
ORIGINAL: spence
Since SONAR is not included as a weapons system at all the high frequency FM SONAR that allowed US submarines to invade the Sea of Japan in spite of heavy mining is another omission. As mentioned previously the Allies were able to adapt to changes in enemy tactics/operations at least as well as the enemy adapted such changes as they adopted.
Japan's mine capabilities are already screwed to begin with:
1. One of the more senseless issues inherited from Scenario 1 is the Mine Tender situation. Many (but not all) of Japan's larger ports get Port size x 50 mines. Japan's 4 largest ports (Tokyo, Osaka, Hiroshima, and Fukuoka) get 500 mines. It would require 4 ACM's at start in each port to maintain those mines. Only Hiroshima gets enough ACM, Osaka gets ONE, and Fukuoka and Tokyo get NONE. In TOTAL, Japan gets 18 ACM to start and can convert another 37 in 15 days. Japan needs most of the at start ACM just to maintain the minefields at it's 4 largest ports.
To fully maintain all the starting minefields requires 55 to 80 ACM's. (4 size 10 ports requiring 3-4 ACM each, 5 size 9 ports requiring 3 ACM each, 3 size 7 ports requiring 2-3 ACM each, 2 size 6 ports requiring 2ACM each, 8 size 5 requiring 1-2 ACM each, and 10 size 4 ports requiring 1-2 ACM each). Even if Japan converts EVERY possible ACM, mines will still decay at major ports. That says nothing of the minefields Japan will lay as the game progresses.
2. After the first mine is hit, the likelihood that any mine will be hit goes down drastically because the minefield is detected. The 550 mines in Ominato and Hakodate are far less powerful than they appear because the DL on the minefield goes to non-zero once you hit a single mine.
3. A sub tender located in the Aleutians makes it actually more efficient to enter the Sea of Japan between Hokkaido and Sakhalin where no mining can impact you and aircraft are less likely to see you.
Your perception of risk associated with entering the Sea of Japan is out of kilter. The distance from Midway to Hakodate is 58 hexes. The distance from Attu to Hakodate is 36 hexes. The distance from Attu to Wakkanai it 32.
ORIGINAL: spence
Japanese ASW doctrine and weapons was very certainly deficient to begin the war and stayed that way throughout the war. They most assuredly could have improved but the game assumes that the Allies would have done nothing whatever to change in response to whatever the Japanese did. That essentially removes the most effective weapon from the Allied arsenal. The Japanese were behind the eight ball re ASW from the start. In innovation they would always start from a position of disadvantage re their Allied opponents.
Yup and I listed 15 ways that the IJN player legitimately can place greater emphasis on ASW ... You've given me issues I have a hard time seeing as all that big a deal.
ORIGINAL: spence
Also as mentioned previously it is the inability of the Allied Player to respond to the increased emphasis the Japanese placed on ASW. The idea that only one side can get better at what they do in warfare is ridiculous.
You have 70 years of military technology development to help you: how MIGHT you counter it? The fundamental problem of a WW2 submarine is that it spent most of its time on the surface, running on it's diesels. That means it was subject to aerial(and later radar) detection. Sufficient aerial search in an area would make effective sub patrols difficult because of limited battery life. Even snorkeling, it was subject to detection. Black sky ASW is effective in WitP:AE and it should be. Until you solve the problem of battery power, you can't solve the problem of the WW2 submarine against Black Sky ASW and determined attempts to prosecute sub contacts.
You can, however, mitigate it. It means you have to operate your subs more circumspectly than you might in the face of an opponent that does not seek to improve their ASW efforts.
1. Accept that the JFB that expends more resources on ASW is going to be more effective than the IJN was historically.
2. Understand that the linchpin of IJN ASW efforts is aerial detection and that DL/MDL plays a huge role in that.
3. Further understand that night naval search is critical to maintaining MDL. At the start of each 12 hour phase, the sub's MDL is halved. MDL is much harder to maintain at night when moonlight is low/weather is bad and ops losses are higher.
4. Operate further from airbases. Suppose I have 24 aircraft conducting an ASW patrol. Logically, how many planes search a given hex?
4 hexes from the base? 24 planes / 24 hexes at range 4 = 1 plane that searches the hex.
3 hexes from the base? 24 planes / 18 hexes at range 3 = 1.33 planes that search the hex
2 hexes from the base? 24 planes / 12 hexes at range 2 = 2 planes that search the hex
1 hex from the base? 24 planes / 6 hexes at range 1 = 4 planes that search the hex
5. Operate when moonlight is low. At the top of your game screen, two very important facts are on display: % Moonlight and forecast. Both can play a part in safer operation of your subs. A new moon = 0% moonlight. Full moon = 100% and werewolves. Operate your subs when you don't have to worry about getting bit by a werewolf.
6. Naval Searching (or any air op) in bad weather is less effective and more prone to Ops losses than in good. Operate more aggressively when the weather is bad.
7. See
tm.asp?m=4410656 and review the suggestions there for additional hints. Pay particular attention to the points witpqs makes in post 4 which Korvar illustrates in Post #5