Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Using naval search for combat purposes

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Using naval search for combat purposes Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 12:49:39 PM   
Zigurat666


Posts: 374
Joined: 9/26/2008
Status: offline 		Just played a turn where multiple units of dauntless were finding (via search) a convoy I had parked over an island. The scrolling progress doesnt say they were hit or anything as the turn plays through but after the turns done The ships are listed as sunk sunk ships display by 500lb bombs
Is this tactic considered gamey? I mean, searches arent intercepted by my CAP, the direction from which they came is not shown and there doesnt seem to be a way to defend against this.
Has anybody made a house rule to limit this perhaps by setting combat aircraft to no more than 10-20% search?
Post #: 1
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 12:51:20 PM   
wwengr


Posts: 678
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin, USA
Status: offline 		Do you have Fog of War (FOW) turned on? Sometimes combat reports are very inaccurate.

_____________________________

I have been inputting my orders for the campaign game first turn since July 4, 2009. I'm getting close. In another month or two, I might be able to run the turn!

(in reply to Zigurat666)
Post #: 2
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 12:55:18 PM   
Zigurat666


Posts: 374
Joined: 9/26/2008
Status: offline 		Well I,m the jap and wether or not it said they were just looking or dropping bombs,there is no doubt there were two undamaged transports and during their search well... like Mr Magic says "Presto-chango!! now I have none...

(in reply to wwengr)
Post #: 3
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 1:00:50 PM   
cantona2


Posts: 3749
Joined: 5/21/2007
From: Gibraltar
Status: offline 		Not at all gamey. Consider the spotted ships targets of opportunity. The Dauntlesses were bombed up, spotted a ship, swooped down to get an id and decided to drop a bomb on it. Quite plausible I think. ASW efforts in ww2 were done like this, fly in your patrol zone, if you spot a sub zero in on it and kill it. No doubt enemy ships spotted were also attacked. Chance of hit is I think reduced vs normal naval attack and sometimes you even get strikes on spotted CV's, well an extremely rare occurance that has only happened once in my years of Witp

_____________________________

1966 was a great year for English Football...Eric was born


(in reply to Zigurat666)
Post #: 4
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 1:08:08 PM   
Zigurat666


Posts: 374
Joined: 9/26/2008
Status: offline 		Then if its not a questionable tactic,how in game terms are you supposed to defend against this. I guess my Zero's saw them but decided that since they were just looking around that they were,nt worth the trouble I guess

(in reply to cantona2)
Post #: 5
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 1:11:45 PM   
CapAndGown


Posts: 3206
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline 		I would say you were unlucky. CAP can and does shoot down search planes, though that seems to be toned down since WitP.

(in reply to Zigurat666)
Post #: 6
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 1:16:28 PM   
Vladd


Posts: 69
Joined: 10/24/2004
Status: offline 		CAP does work against searches, although combat animations are never shown. If you can place a large CAP over your TF, then when you check the aircraft losses screen next turn you will often see kills. Small, one-aircraft elements sneaking up on your forces will always be hard to stop completely though.

(in reply to Zigurat666)
Post #: 7
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 1:16:54 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		CAP can and does intercept these missions but a single plane is harder than a raid.

Whe totally outmatched its soemtimes the only way to slip through dsome strike aircraft.

IMO not gamey just remember when facing Hellcat Caps later in the war and you need to get a few Mavis or Betties through


(in reply to CapAndGown)
Post #: 8
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 1:22:25 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zigurat666

Just played a turn where multiple units of dauntless were finding (via search) a convoy I had parked over an island. The scrolling progress doesnt say they were hit or anything as the turn plays through but after the turns done The ships are listed as sunk sunk ships display by 500lb bombs
Is this tactic considered gamey? I mean, searches arent intercepted by my CAP, the direction from which they came is not shown and there doesnt seem to be a way to defend against this.
Has anybody made a house rule to limit this perhaps by setting combat aircraft to no more than 10-20% search?



nav search with divebombers in AE seem to result in a hell a lot of ships sunk, if you have enough bombers on nav search, you don´t need a nav strike to sink some merchants. Am experiencing this against my PBEM opponent, when 95% of the ships in range of KB actually got sunk by nav search...

my experience so far is that nav search is VERY effective, don´t know about the nav search settings of my opponent though.

_____________________________


(in reply to Zigurat666)
Post #: 9
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 1:27:41 PM   
Cavalry Corp

 

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline 		Try using high exp NS with long range like a Nell
In my previous WITP game several ships with a huge amount of CAP were hit by these lone rangers who otherwise would not have got through - fair enough I suppose.

Cav

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 10
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 1:51:03 PM   
Rainer79

 

Posts: 603
Joined: 10/31/2008
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
my experience so far is that nav search is VERY effective, don´t know about the nav search settings of my opponent though.


To answer your question, my typical nav search settings are 20%. I never went higher than 30% and that was when I had to wade through your sub infestation off the Australian coast.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 11
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 1:53:24 PM   
cantona2


Posts: 3749
Joined: 5/21/2007
From: Gibraltar
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zigurat666

Then if its not a questionable tactic,how in game terms are you supposed to defend against this. I guess my Zero's saw them but decided that since they were just looking around that they were,nt worth the trouble I guess



You sometimes get the message in blue text that search plane has been destroyed by CAP

_____________________________

1966 was a great year for English Football...Eric was born


(in reply to Zigurat666)
Post #: 12
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 1:54:36 PM   
xj900uk

 

Posts: 1340
Joined: 3/22/2007
Status: offline 		It can happen in real life.
At the start of the battle of Santa Cruz (Oct '42) a couple of SBD's on search from the Enterprise came across the IJN carrier Zuiho and dropped a pair of 500-pounder bombs on the aft end of its flight deck, rendering it incapable of retrieving any aircraft and effectively knocking it out of the battle.

(in reply to Rainer79)
Post #: 13
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 2:00:06 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rainer79

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
my experience so far is that nav search is VERY effective, don´t know about the nav search settings of my opponent though.


To answer your question, my typical nav search settings are 20%. I never went higher than 30% and that was when I had to wade through your sub infestation off the Australian coast.



which is what I´ve thought as it would be quite bold to have most of the dbs on nav search when you try tried to hunt down my carriers. I would call nav search too effective then. Far too effective. All my transports near the North Australian coast and every single AK that was near KB later on got sunk from nav search only. There were even some nav strikes but those went in against ships that were already dead from hits during the search phase.

boy, far too effective when 100% of the ships are spotted and 90% went down immedietely after taking multiple hits from nav search.


_____________________________


(in reply to Rainer79)
Post #: 14
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 2:07:35 PM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline 		I've seen reports of ships attacked by my DB's on naval search but didn't know if it was FOW or reality.  Sometimes I'd get airstrikes launched against these sightings and sometimes I wouldn't, even if it was just single ship sightings.  The # of times I've seen "patrol planes shot down by CAP" appear to be few and far between though.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 15
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/1/2010 2:13:20 PM   
xj900uk

 

Posts: 1340
Joined: 3/22/2007
Status: offline 		I've even had British search planes from Singapore bombing dutch subs...

(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 16
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/2/2010 10:23:16 PM   
khyberbill


Posts: 1941
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline
quote:

I mean, searches arent intercepted by my CAP

I have had many search planes shot down by CAP. The CV divebomber is also the search plane for US CV's. Early in the war they have one squadron dedicated to search.

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to Zigurat666)
Post #: 17
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/3/2010 1:40:32 PM   
xj900uk

 

Posts: 1340
Joined: 3/22/2007
Status: offline 		Hence the old working title 'VS' - the dive bombers were originally there for scouting/intelligence/recce ahead of the 'grand fleet'.  Of course,  nobody failed to realise at the time other than a few far-sighted officers on Yamamoto's staff that carriers were now becoming the capital ships of WWII...

(in reply to khyberbill)
Post #: 18
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/3/2010 6:30:29 PM   
Feinder


Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline 		Yes, CAP does intercept search planes.
Yes, plenty of search planes get thru (hense your frustration).

Historically, yes, they did arm the VS-squadrons (divebombers on CVs) with a 500# bomb. The intent was that, if the DB found an enemy carrier, it would radio it's position. The DB would then make it's attack, hopefully damaging the flight deck of the CV, thus prohibiting a return strike by the enemy CV (all the while, the alpha-strike from the Allied carrier was on it's way).

Do there seem to be quite a few hits that you can't do anything about?

Well, that's the debate...

-F-

_____________________________

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


(in reply to xj900uk)
Post #: 19
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/3/2010 6:56:10 PM   
jb123


Posts: 276
Joined: 8/6/2009
Status: offline 		I'm super frustrated trying to hit a CA TF hanging around off Koepang with about 40 A-24s carrying 1000 lbs. Several nav attack strikes with no hits. Next turn a PBY hit a CA with a torp, so I set my a-24s to nav search and got a couple hits over the course of the next turn.

(in reply to Feinder)
Post #: 20
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/3/2010 6:57:31 PM   
jb123


Posts: 276
Joined: 8/6/2009
Status: offline 		actually... do dive bombers carry a reduced load when on search? maybe those numerous hits were only 500 lbs? the PBYs carry torps on search.

(in reply to jb123)
Post #: 21
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/3/2010 8:04:57 PM   
Ikazuchi0585

 

Posts: 108
Joined: 1/25/2008
From: United States
Status: offline 		all planes carry an reduced load on naval search

(in reply to jb123)
Post #: 22
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/3/2010 8:07:46 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jb123

actually... do dive bombers carry a reduced load when on search? maybe those numerous hits were only 500 lbs? the PBYs carry torps on search.



AFAIK PBYs should carry bombs on search, just like every other ac on search does too.

_____________________________


(in reply to jb123)
Post #: 23
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/4/2010 12:55:46 AM   
jb123


Posts: 276
Joined: 8/6/2009
Status: offline 		Hmmm, I didn't think about that. The reduced load for PBYs is bombs, eh. I actually set PBYs on nav attack against some AKs and TBs once, they did pretty well but took some losses. I was all excited thinking the Mogami got a torp. Oh well.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 24
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/4/2010 5:35:46 AM   
byron13


Posts: 1589
Joined: 7/27/2001
Status: offline 		I've lost five AK's in five separate events where they were docked in fairly large ports with CAP and destroyed at the end of the turn. No combat report. Just sunk - all by a fairly small bomb. Considering where they were docked, I think about the only thing that could have reached was a Mavis.

I just have this picture in my mind of everyone scratching their heads as to why the SS Schmedlap sank after an explosion. Anything on radar? No sir. Observation posts see or hear anything? No sir. What about the fighter CAP? No sir. Did any of the AA batteries surrounding the harbor hear or see anything? No sir, everything was quiet and then she just went "Boom!" Huh. Well, must have been a freak accident.

I mean, how does a Mavis waddle in unseen, sink a ship with a single small bomb, and get away? It raises the blood pressure, it does.

(in reply to jb123)
Post #: 25
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/4/2010 7:08:15 AM   
Puhis


Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: byron13

I've lost five AK's in five separate events where they were docked in fairly large ports with CAP and destroyed at the end of the turn. No combat report. Just sunk - all by a fairly small bomb. Considering where they were docked, I think about the only thing that could have reached was a Mavis.

I just have this picture in my mind of everyone scratching their heads as to why the SS Schmedlap sank after an explosion. Anything on radar? No sir. Observation posts see or hear anything? No sir. What about the fighter CAP? No sir. Did any of the AA batteries surrounding the harbor hear or see anything? No sir, everything was quiet and then she just went "Boom!" Huh. Well, must have been a freak accident.

I mean, how does a Mavis waddle in unseen, sink a ship with a single small bomb, and get away? It raises the blood pressure, it does.


So this seems to be same for both sides. So far I've lost several big japanese tankers to search planes, not to mention smaller ships.

I think search planes are too good ship killers. I mean they got way more hits than planes on a naval attack mission! And basicly there's nothing player can do to stop them, I just lost docked AK when I had 40 zeros flying CAP...

I'm not saying that search planes shouldn't attack at all, but my opinion is that at the moment they got too many hits.

(in reply to byron13)
Post #: 26
RE: Using naval search for combat purposes - 2/4/2010 1:28:57 PM   
byron13


Posts: 1589
Joined: 7/27/2001
Status: offline 		Understand that my beef is the attacks on ships docked in well-defended harbor. At sea would be a different matter, though I understand your beef to be that the single scouts are getting a much higher hit rate than dedicated missions. I wouldn't be surprised: my divebombers have a pathetic hit rate.

(in reply to Puhis)
Post #: 27
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Using naval search for combat purposes Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.188