Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

JFBs Unite - ASW

 
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 >> JFBs Unite - ASW Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 1:29:31 PM   
vonSchnitter


Posts: 310
Joined: 7/2/2004
From: Germany - still
Status: offline 		O.K. chaps.

IJN/IJA ASW is supposed to be lousy for the duration. Fine. Now What ?
Any self respecting Jap player learned the ASW lesson as been told by the USN Silent Service, right ? The Subs won the war - on a strategical level, without the need to secure foreward bases for 4Es, or strategical bombing or even nukes - just by doing the tonnage thing and strangling the IJ economy. (A bit overstated - on purpose)

Once you heard the news - as the IJN alegedly never did - what to do ?

PBs - basically beefed up trawlers - are pretty good at keeping subs out of gun range. At day and night. How that works at night - lacking Radar - is a story in itself.

SCs - mostly short ranged, but with high (8) ASW ratings, bases on model. In deep whater hexes, I never got a single hit.
I lost more SCs to subs, than subs SCs.

End of part one
Post #: 1
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 1:44:14 PM   
morganbj


Posts: 3634
Joined: 8/12/2007
From: Mosquito Bite, Texas
Status: offline 		My experience as an Allied player has been just the opposite. In fact, I have lost so many subs that I have pulled them all back to port. I was seeing 20+ hits on every sub during nearly every ASW attack. By 1945, I was losing a sub a day, and one day I lost 6. I'm playing the AI, still in Early '45.

(in reply to vonSchnitter)
Post #: 2
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 1:51:56 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline 		Check the commanders of your PB´s, check TF commanders, support with airborne ASW, choose your ASW hunting grounds wisely.

On blue water missions without airborn ASW support your task should be to drive away the subs anyway, not kill.
Use combinations of dedicated ASW hunter groups and TF escorts with ASW capability and adjust TF commanders depending on agg values. 

_____________________________


(in reply to morganbj)
Post #: 3
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 1:56:40 PM   
Miller


Posts: 2226
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline 		Jap ASW more or less follows historic performance until the start of 43, then it goes ballistic. I estimate I am sinking at least one sub a week with several others badly damaged (Its Aug 44 in my game).

Of course the Jap player has the benefit of hindsight..........

< Message edited by Miller -- 6/15/2010 2:07:18 PM >

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 4
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 2:00:04 PM   
vonSchnitter


Posts: 310
Joined: 7/2/2004
From: Germany - still
Status: offline 		No takers ?

IJA airgroups on ASW. (gauging by a Dec 42 AI game)

IJA air groups trained to the 60s in the ASW skill at altitudes between 3000 and 5000 feet do a pretty good job detecting subs - however it takes something in the 60s at "low naval attack" to hit subs at all.

Without any statistical evidence to rely on: Equal skill in "naval search" as compared to ASW plus low naval should result in equal results (surpressing subs, hitting) with a bonus versus surface ships.

IJA 1E bombers or Lilies are fine for training issues, but useless because of bomb load/size in case of hit.
Early Sallies are fine for operational ASW groups, while the eraly Helens should be kept (at least 30 production) because of their special equipment for IJA ASW groups

(in reply to vonSchnitter)
Post #: 5
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 2:09:16 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vonSchnitter

No takers ?


Pardon?

quote:


IJA airgroups on ASW. (gauging by a Dec 42 AI game)

IJA air groups trained to the 60s in the ASW skill at altitudes between 3000 and 5000 feet do a pretty good job detecting subs - however it takes something in the 60s at "low naval attack" to hit subs at all.

Without any statistical evidence to rely on: Equal skill in "naval search" as compared to ASW plus low naval should result in equal results (surpressing subs, hitting) with a bonus versus surface ships.


I´m not sure I understand what exactly your question is, but if its that you have to combine nav search with ASW and have a decent ASW skill on ASW missions and decent navS skill on search missions
the answer is: yes.
I dont´get the "bonus versus surface ships though...


quote:


IJA 1E bombers or Lilies are fine for training issues, but useless because of bomb load/size in case of hit.
Early Sallies are fine for operational ASW groups, while the eraly Helens should be kept (at least 30 production) because of their special equipment for IJA ASW groups


I would not waste early Sallies or Helens on the ASW role.


_____________________________


(in reply to vonSchnitter)
Post #: 6
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 2:15:01 PM   
Bradley7735


Posts: 2073
Joined: 7/12/2004
Status: offline 		I'm not sure what point you're trying to make? Are you sarcastically saying that, historically, US subs were not the strategic weapon they are in game? Are you making the point that, historically, US subs strangled Japan and there was no need for strategic bombers or nuclear weapons? (true, btw)

Are you sarcastically saying that Japan ASW is too weak in game? (it is not)
Are you saying that IJN ASW is too strong?

Are you looking for pointers on how to use your ASW tools from other Japan players?

In my experience vs the AI, Allied subs sink more targets faster than irl, but at a cost of sunk subs that exponentially exceeded history. It takes me an average of 6 torpedoes to sink an IJN ship, whereas it took around 10 irl. However, I lose way more than the historical 40 lost to ASW/mines in the war. (no shallow water, not close to ports, etc etc.)

_____________________________

The older I get, the better I was.

(in reply to vonSchnitter)
Post #: 7
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 2:35:25 PM   
vonSchnitter


Posts: 310
Joined: 7/2/2004
From: Germany - still
Status: offline 		LoBaron.

cross posts. Lack of patience on my part. Sorry.

At a closer look.

As far as IJA ASW goes, I am not sure it is ASW "skill" to rely on. I have no idea how "low naval" comes into play, when a sub is detected (since ASW groups are flying something betwen 1k an 5k feet)

Unfortunately I trained some IJA group for ASW first - with little results in terms of hits. and then went for cross training at search and low naval with many more "hit" reports, bogus or not.

If "ASW" turnes out to be a secondary skill - pending input - low naval fo IJA bombers could be preferable. Since it may help to score on surface ships ?

As for 2Es on ASW _ early on any Sally is going into more important things - what is left of them goes to ASW - which is to say: 1Es or Lillies - even if hitting a sub - just cause scratches



(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 8
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 2:47:26 PM   
vonSchnitter


Posts: 310
Joined: 7/2/2004
From: Germany - still
Status: offline 		Hi Bradley,

I have no intention to come up sarcastic on any issue of war. Real people sacrificed their health, limbs and lives for what they thought, believed or got told was right. Since I served my country, I honour those guys. Past or present.
Since we are talking 1s and 0s in a game (or simulation, if you prefer), I do not mind to question the design decesions of the developers - with your leave. In honour - the way I understand it - of those toing the line in the past supposed to supply the role model.

And yes, since it is 1s and 0s - I care for the input of Japan players.

Cheers


(in reply to vonSchnitter)
Post #: 9
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 2:57:05 PM   
Fletcher


Posts: 3386
Joined: 10/26/2006
From: Jerez, Spain, EU
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Check the commanders of your PB´s, check TF commanders, support with airborne ASW, choose your ASW hunting grounds wisely.

On blue water missions without airborn ASW support your task should be to drive away the subs anyway, not kill.
Use combinations of dedicated ASW hunter groups and TF escorts with ASW capability and adjust TF commanders depending on agg values. 

Wise...
I am only not agree about KI-49 Hellens in ASW role, they are MAD equipped, and valuable in ASW tasks.
Best of wishes
ramón

_____________________________



WITP-AE, WITE

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 10
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 3:08:51 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline 		Thanks Fletcher, you are right, forgot about the MAD.

But do the early versions already wear that stuff? Cannot check DB as I´m at work still...

_____________________________


(in reply to Fletcher)
Post #: 11
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 3:16:29 PM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bjmorgan

My experience as an Allied player has been just the opposite. In fact, I have lost so many subs that I have pulled them all back to port. I was seeing 20+ hits on every sub during nearly every ASW attack. By 1945, I was losing a sub a day, and one day I lost 6. I'm playing the AI, still in Early '45.


Ditto, ditto, +1 ditto!

After Patch 3, IJN ASW became hyper-powered. Type 2 DCs became tactical nukes. I did exactly the same thing--I pulled 60 boats back to PH and sat them there for six months.

I'm in May 1945, with top COs and experienced crews, and it's 60/40 against that I'll lose the sub in an attack on a convoy with one (1) IJN escort. Deep water too. (Shallow water it's 90/10.)

I was in 1944 already when Patch 3 came out, so I don't know what happens in a Patch 3 new game. But I think I'm going to dial back the Type 2 DC in the editor before I start the next game.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to morganbj)
Post #: 12
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 3:16:50 PM   
Cavalry Corp

 

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline 		Hi Von S

I play Japan in WITP and in AE ( but only guadalcanal scn so far 3 times ) . In both games the key is sending in ASW assets ( air and surface ) when the DL level is high. So Jakes and other recon spot the Subs remember I do not need them to attack JUST spot and then surface assets ( or my specialist Aunt Sallies) target them especially in shallow water.

In WITP ( Dec 43 ) I have about 4 units of Sally with exp 80s+ just dedicated to naval search but they need spotted subs if possible to attack and have good chances to kill.

I find all hits on subs do a lot of damage from planes.

Also if you keep the allied subs well spotted you can run your convoys out of their way, as my big oil and Res convoys approach Japan I use 2 ASW groups to follow then in, always.

Japan has the advantage of hindsight on this issue and in all my games I have always sunk more allied subs than RL. BUT I had a phase recently in WITP where I lost about 10 ASW PG/ PC / DD etc in about a week of concentrated allied effort in DEI but soon the Sallies sank about three allied subs in three days. I have about 8 allied subs around Tokyo but one by one they get damaged and I have lost the odd AK.

The best asset I lost to allied sub was a CVL just a few turns ago Nov 43 ( my only CV lost ) . I have sunk with subs a damaged BB , 2 CVE and put 2 fish in Saratoga . I have also lost less subs than the allies by DEC 43 .I would say that attacking the allied CV TF with several ASW TF with them is suicide - must have lost 10 subs like that.

I think you are just having a run of bad dice...

Cav.

(in reply to vonSchnitter)
Post #: 13
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 3:22:07 PM   
vonSchnitter


Posts: 310
Joined: 7/2/2004
From: Germany - still
Status: offline 		Fletcher, LoBaron

right, the early Helen (only) gets MAD in late 44 (only Army Bomber) - that is why I keep a factory of 30 for the model going.

The question - sallies and helens at par by bomb load in 42 an 43 - still remains: what skill to train for:
Naval kill, ASW, Low naval ?

Nad what is more: What to exspect or care for ?

Detect and subdue allied subs or score hits/sink them

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 14
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 3:34:21 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline 		What you train them for is what you will use them for. There is no "perfect" setup. Come up with a plan,
see what your plan requires and then set the training accordingly.
You will need many of your IJA bombers for other missions than ASW, this was why I am a bit reluctant to train
em in a role they wont be used in.

That said LowN is the way to go for level bombers in the ASW role, but this is a "emergency mission" because the kill
should be done by ASW ships on patrol with react > 0 while the DL is provided by the planes.
Airborne ASW is only effective in areas that are really swarmed by subs.

_____________________________


(in reply to vonSchnitter)
Post #: 15
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 3:37:31 PM   
vonSchnitter


Posts: 310
Joined: 7/2/2004
From: Germany - still
Status: offline 		Cavalry,

thx mate - I started out along your lines of thinking. Witp plank owner (and the previous one).

Even though some chaps got me wrong - I am not complaining about IJ sub success or the lack of ASW kills per se.
My problem is: What options to maximize the historical limited assets are there.

What is more: Does the IJ player go for a sub kill - and how - are just for avoidance - as cavalry says ?

Which means:; forget about ASW trainng ?


(in reply to vonSchnitter)
Post #: 16
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 3:47:23 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline 		Afaik ASW skill is the same as nav search only for ASW missions.
When you actually attack a sub it comes down to NavB or LowN skill dependinkg on altitude.

But I´m only 90% sure on this....

_____________________________


(in reply to vonSchnitter)
Post #: 17
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 4:37:58 PM   
Cavalry Corp

 

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline 		I would still train up some Helen , Betty whatever in specialist ASW Low N whatever. Send them where it is worst but avoid allied bases where there might be CAP . It is better to have some planes like this , just makes you feel better if nothing else . I have also found the the Emily carry out good attacks sometimes at long range . I thought I read somewher that Subs in "safe waters " are more likely to be caught on the surface.

Same with ships keep some ships in specialist ASW units ( probably with aggressive comander ) , as Japs you get quite a few good ASW ships in 43 . I would however avoid using DD in this task. If you have say one DD then there is at least a chance the ASW ships will eat the torp.

In ALL my games I have found what the Japs cannot afford to looe DD .

If you cannot kill em then at least spot them and make the efforts in clicking to go round rather than take the chance.

Cav

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 18
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 4:59:47 PM   
xj900uk

 

Posts: 1340
Joined: 3/22/2007
Status: offline 		I have had some success with hunter-killer surface TF's - take a CS and use its Jakes/Petes in the ASW role (you will need to train them up beforehand) operating with decent DDs and the '8' SC's. It will also need a good accomplished & agressive TF commander. Wherever your search planes find a sub send this elite unit in to sink it

(in reply to Cavalry Corp)
Post #: 19
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 6:23:06 PM   
Cuttlefish

 

Posts: 2454
Joined: 1/24/2007
From: Oregon, USA
Status: offline 		I have heard that late-war Japanese ASW ships are very effective, but alas I have not yet taken a game deep enough into the war to confirm this. During the early and middle parts of the war Allied subs are a menace on par with history and it takes some work to sink them even at the historic pace.

A lot depends on how the Allies use their subs. If they keep them to deep-water hexes and are diligent about moving them - good luck. If they play a more aggressively, bringing them close to shore and even into ports, then you can score some kills (you will also lose more ships - it's a trade-off for the Allies).

For your ASW ships crew experience is very important. Most Japanese sub chasers start out with day/night experience of 35/35 or 45/45 and this is why they are useful mostly as target practice for Allied submarines. Japanese destroyers, in particular those who have had their ASW rating upgraded to 4, are very dangerous to Allied subs because of their high skill levels. But using front-line destroyers to chase submarines may not be the best use for them, and you will lose some destroyers.

In my game against Q-Ball I sank a grand total of two submarines with aircraft. Both kills were scored by Sallys with high (70+) ratings in ASW and decent LowB skills. But I imagine that other types of bombers with similar ratings might also get lucky. I would dedicate maybe one or two bomber groups for this task and start training them at the start of the war.

In the early war the best defense against aggressive Allied submarines is minefields. It does not have to be a large minefield - even 100 mines at a base will soon discourage Allied submarines from hanging around the place.

Overall, I found that the best defense against Allied submarines was in how I routed my convoys. Try to place at least two escorts with high-value convoys because a convoy stripped of its escorts can be savaged by submarines. Use waypoints to avoid obvious chokepoints (going down the center of the Luzon Strait, for example). If there is heavy Allied submarine activity in an area then send your convoys someplace else. If the Allies try to beat this tactic by camping places you cannot avoid sending ships (for example, Palembang) then use those minefields. Don't forget to convert some AKLs to ACMs, you will need them.



_____________________________


(in reply to vonSchnitter)
Post #: 20
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 8:49:02 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cavalry
In both games the key is sending in ASW assets ( air and surface ) when the DL level is high. So Jakes and other recon spot the Subs remember I do not need them to attack JUST spot and then surface assets


Pretty much how I understand it as well. Works for me.

Air spotting to drive up the DL.
Surface hitting when the DL is high.
Good commanders on surface important.
# ASW weapons = # of potential attacks, so that's important too.

Playing either side, this is working for me. Right now, allies in early '42 and I'm starting to get regular hits. SF -> SD is now clear as well as Midway/PH area. Doubt I sank many (any?), but hits will drive them home and that is good enough for me. the convoys sail ...

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Cavalry Corp)
Post #: 21
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 9:43:40 PM   
Ametysth

 

Posts: 74
Joined: 12/10/2009
Status: offline 		Protected sea lines is an answer (note; Not The Answer, but an...).

You build a line of small island bases stretching from Japan to major forward bases while staying over shallow water as much as possible. Some bases along the way get Airfield companies to build AF 2 to house some light aircraft like Ki-30, but any ac with decent bomb (100 kg +) can do this. I use Ki-30's over 'safe' areas and Vals closer the front. Convert some of those small cargo vessels to AGs and stuck them into every other base on your line to keep rest of the class (Kiso's IIRC), which are converted to PBs, in depth charges and rice. These PBs then form ASW patrols to run between the bases while the aircraft are set on very narrow ASW search patern along the same route. This reguires fewer ac than it first seems, as single divided Ki-30 sentai fills 1,5 bases, so four groups is almost enough to staff two such lines (one South to Truk and another West to Hanoi and along the coast, Singapore). Add few SC groups, I prefer 10 kts variant due high number of DC's, to act as hunter-killer groups to be directed towards detected subs and lines are ready.

Point of all this is to run main convoys along the corridor and thus concentrate every asset on one area. Enemy subs can and will hunt all over the area, but if you are dilligent in running of your convoys, these lines are only places where they can hope to hit anything important and if they try to enter them, they are detected and you can route your traffic around them while ASW ships pound the sub with anything they got (reloading from AGs). I find this a good way to get those vital resources and gallons of fuel back to Japan and supplies to the front. Added bonus; Most enemy subs waste time and fuel patrolling empty ocean.

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 22
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/15/2010 11:22:45 PM   
Sredni

 

Posts: 705
Joined: 9/30/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline 		Do Airplanes on ASW flying at 6000 use NavB, or LowN?

It's kinda getting silly what skills we need to train for our ASW pilots. I've seen people claim they need ASW, Nav Search, NavB, LowN, and Staf in various threads.

(in reply to Ametysth)
Post #: 23
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/16/2010 1:27:05 PM   
xj900uk

 

Posts: 1340
Joined: 3/22/2007
Status: offline 		It is interesting that, considering its poor RL record against subs, the Japanese were the only country that developed in WWII a plane solely designed for ASW work, the Kayaba KA-1 autogyro... not that it was very successful although it was reported to have sunk at least 1 US sub. Ironically the IJAAF then commissioned & launched their countries first pure ASW carrier to mount the Ka-1, the Akitsu Maru, that was then promptly sunk by the subs it was supposed to be combatting...

(in reply to Sredni)
Post #: 24
RE: JFBs Unite - ASW - 6/16/2010 2:38:33 PM   
bklooste

 

Posts: 1104
Joined: 4/10/2006
Status: offline 		Get them in the narrows ,

Dont relly on any one thing  i prefer in decreasing order
Mines
Air Search
ASW  Naval task forces with 4 or 8  ships
ASW air units.

Prefferable all 4.  Without great air search and detection levels it seems to be much harder.

Changing commanders works great but is gamey esp when using your best admirals.


_____________________________

Underdog Fanboy

(in reply to xj900uk)
Post #: 25
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> JFBs Unite - ASW 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

2.344