American Destroyer Escorts

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

American Destroyer Escorts

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific >> American Destroyer Escorts

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

American Destroyer Escorts - 3/24/2003 6:36:51 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

Hey all, I am a newbie to the game, and I must say I love it. I've been playing scenario 17 against the Japanese AI, and I finally won a massive carrier battle. So all the Japanese have at this stage (June of '43) in the way of flattops is the Akagi and the Kaga. So it is now just a matter of protecting supply convoys to prepare the invasion of Bougainville (I have both New Guinea and Lunga, as well as a base at Lambetti, in New Georgia). So now I have a question. Where are the destroyer escorts???? I see the main mid war classes in the index (Rudderow, Evarts, and Buckley), yet it seems that I don't get them ever. What gives? I have no problem using regular DD's to escort convoys, but I have several that are badly beat up and I need something a little more "expendable". Plus, since Japanese CV's are no longer a problem, I'd rather use purpose built ASW ships (other than SCs and PGs) to escort convoys. Plus, I'd like to make "Hunter/Killer" groups of a CVE and 4 DEs. So Any info? Well, thanks a lot.

_____________________________

Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med

Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.

Post #: 1

- 3/24/2003 8:59:53 AM

Nasrullah

Posts: 44
Joined: 2/14/2003
From: Annapolis, Md, USA
Status: offline

Your problem may be that you're winning too well. Already
you may have your allotment of ships in theater. Check the top
line on ship availibilty screen. If probability is "LOW", Pearl won't
release ships until you lose some or Japan gains some.
This is not an authoritive statement, just a guess on limited exp.

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 2

- 3/24/2003 9:22:38 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

That's what I thought, but if you look on the ship availablity, at least for me, DE's aren't even listed. I see TKs, SS, SC, PG, AP, AK, AO, DD, CL, CLAA, BB, CVE, CVL, and CV, but no DEs, yet they are listed as being in the game. Wierd.

_____________________________

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 3

- 3/25/2003 5:08:48 AM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

I don't think many if any DEs were found in the South Pacific during the time frame of this game. If so, perhaps they were used to escort convoys from the states.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 4

- 3/25/2003 8:48:07 AM

HawaiiFive-O

Posts: 295
Joined: 12/21/2002
From: USA
Status: offline

I believe there are ships and equipment in the UV database that are not included on any of the scenario OOBs.

Could be that while the American DEs are defined in the database, they aren't included in the Scenario 17 OOB, and thus you'll never get to play with them.

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 5

- 3/26/2003 3:38:07 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

That's what I thought, but I never saw them in any scenario. Could it be that like some of the prewar era American BBs they were included for custom scenarios? The game's database did seem to include a lot more units than what were historically used, so they could be what if purposes I guess. Maybe. So I guess I'll just have to use my Fletchers for convoy duty then. Thanks all.

_____________________________

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 6

- 3/26/2003 4:34:24 AM

Feinder

Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline

Use your SCs for "mundane" convoy duty. Those things really are expendable (at only 1vp each). One their exp is over 50, they're quite capable little sub-killers (and in June 43, their exp should be over 50 no problem).

Your convoy escorts might then be 1 DD + 3 SCs, instead of 4 DDs. You can never have enough DDs tho, those things really are work-horses. But the 1+3 combination certainly isn't quite as effective as 4 DDs, but it is relatively effective vs. subs. They SCs aren't nearly as good at AAA as a DD tho if that's what you're worried about.

Use SCs just like they were DEs "in the backfield". They're cheap and yet quite capable at their job. For your convoys to foward bases, you might be more inclined to to use DDs for their better anti-air and anti-sub. But again, if you're looking for throw-aways, the SCs fit the bill.

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 7

- 3/27/2003 1:38:23 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

Well, I wasn't looking so much for "throw-aways" as I was for effective sub-killers that could free up full fledged destroyers for AAA duty in Carrier groups and gun platforms for surface forces. I do agree though, you can never have enough destroyers. Until the begginning of '43 when the Fletchers started to arrive in full swing, I was hard pressed. There were never enough to go around (at one point, for about 3 weeks I had to actually stop convoys altogether to free up 12 destroyers for my invasion of Guadalcanal. Protecting 3 troop convoys, 2 carrier TFs, and 3 surface TFs needs a lot of "tin-cans"! Well, thanks for the tip. I actually need to start using SC's I kinda forgot I had them, lol.

_____________________________

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 8