ASW procedure

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

ASW procedure

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 >> ASW procedure

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

ASW procedure - 2/18/2003 8:09:21 AM

Drex

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline

In my attempt to protect my transports from sub attacks, I have been forming small ASW TFs of DDs, SCs/PGs and having them follow the transport TF. The Transport TF will have some escorts but only a few. I guess my question is: is an accompanying ASW TF more effective than incorporating them into the Transport TF itself. It seems to me that the extra ASW TF is effective. Any comments?

Post #: 1

- 2/18/2003 8:24:59 AM

Raverdave

Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline

Also make sure that the DDs have a high ASW number, 8 is very good, 6 is good, 4 is ok, and 2....well don't bother !

You can check the ASW rating of a DD by right clicking on the ship in the "selection" menu when you are forming a TF.

With SCs, unless they have an exp rating of over 50, then they are going to be nothing more than a target for the subs.

_____________________________

Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 2

- 2/18/2003 8:44:39 AM

Drex

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline

Thanks Raverdave. I do check out the ASW ratings but sometimes what you see is what you get. But what I want to know is: is an escorting TF more effective in protecting a Transport TF than incorporating the escort into the TF proper? It seems to me that escorts within the TF seem less effective against subs than an escort TF.

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 3

- 2/18/2003 11:16:34 AM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

Drex -

If you want to kill subs, set up dedicated hunter/killer groups. Use around 6 to 8 ships. If you are playing the Allies, just use DDs once you start to get them in droves. If you are short on DDs, mix them with SCs or PGs. Using DDs gets you good surface commanders rather than the retreads and rookies that you get with SC/PG-only TFs. Set up several of those TFs and keep sending them to where you expect the subs to be. Also, keep some air nearby on naval search. Only bother with escorts in transport TFs when you are going in harm's way and want some support against air strikes.

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 4

- 2/18/2003 11:27:16 AM

CapAndGown

Posts: 3206
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline

From my experience, it does no good to have an ASW TF follow, or even be in the same hex as the TF to be escorted. The sub [I]might[/I] attack your ASW group, but I have generally seen the subs attack the APs instead (US subs, that is). I would go ahead and add the escorts directly to the TF to be escorted.

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 5

- 2/18/2003 11:39:01 AM

Drex

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline

Thanks Cap. That's the answer I was looking for. and if that is the case, then what is the optimum mix for escorts and transports to keep the subs away? I realize in the beginning no one on either side has the assets, but a month or two into the game there are enough escorts to form a good convoy. But what is the perfect convoy?

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 6

- 2/18/2003 12:38:48 PM

Mr.Frag

Posts: 13410
Joined: 12/18/2002
From: Purgatory
Status: offline

[QUOTE]then what is the optimum mix for escorts and transports to keep the subs away[/QUOTE]

24 DD's per TF if you are Japan and you'll still loose the Transport :D

Seriously, you want to pre-spot the sub with airpower then send a dedicated group to park on the sub. Even if you do not sink the sub, it will burn out fuel and have to head home.

Mixing stuff into the TF doesn't really help as the sub is still likely to get a shot off and odds are it will be into one of the transports. The DD's can move and react much better without the transports, and are harder to spot so less likely to get pounced by local air power.

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 7

- 2/18/2003 12:47:56 PM

Drex

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline

Okay I am getting two suggestions here: 1) add to the transport escort and 2) keep the ASW TF separate. How about some others? I am suggesting to protect a transport TF what is the best method? Add extra escorts to the transport TF( and if so what should be the ratio?) or make up a separate ASW TF to follow the supply TF?

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 8

- 2/18/2003 5:12:07 PM

Raverdave

Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline

Keep the ASW DDs [I]with[/I] the AK/AP/AO TF....if you sent a ASW TF to follow, it could still be on the "otherside" of the 30 mile hex......and would have to race-like-hell to get over and cover the Transport TF. Well at least that is what I think in theory. Practice also shows that even if one of the transports in a mixed TF gets a torp, the "escorting" DDs will try to detect the sub.....where as a ASW TF following might not for the reasons layed-out above.

_____________________________

Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 9

- 2/18/2003 6:22:10 PM

Veer

Posts: 2231
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Excuse me
Status: offline

3-4 DD's in a Transport TF seem to be a good number. 1-2 have too little chance of finding the sub, and anything above 4 dosn't seem to give you 'that' much of a greater advantage.
Raver is right - a DD TF on follow will not always attack the sub which torped your transports, but the escorts will do something (hopefully).
There is no 'safe' or 'sure' way of protecting your transports. I've found that keeping even 1 DD is better than none, mainly because it seems to disuade the sub from attacking rather than finding and killing it.
Other than that it's just cross your fingers.

I leave ASW to aircraft. Not worth the effort to actually go out and find those subs unless they're sitting in your port and you HAVE to do something about them.

I've found that leaveing subs on computer control leads to best results. As IJN I lose several transports and even got a few holes in capital ships, but I have been able (or at least my escorts have) to sink allied subs - 3 to date (Oct' 42). in my latest game.

_____________________________

In time of war the first casualty is truth. - Boake Carter

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 10

- 2/18/2003 6:31:12 PM

derwho

Posts: 236
Joined: 8/22/2002
From: Finland
Status: offline

My 10c worth.

Using ships to hunt down and kill US subs is a waste of time for the IJN.

USN players are tempted to move their subs in number to the following places:

a) Around Rabaul and Kavieng to intercept TF's to and from Rabaul
b) Around Gili Gili to harass shipping and get some lucky CV or BB intercepts.
c) Around the corridor from Shortlands to Lunga

Do this immediately when you spot a sub within range:

Nells and Bettys supported by Kates and Vals are your best ASW asset as the IJN. Fly your LBA's at 1kft and 100% asw. Fly your Mavises at 10kft and 100% naval search. If you have Mavieses to spare, fly them also at 1kft and 100% ASW. Fly your Val's at 10kft and 100% ASW and fly your Kate's at 1kft and 100% ASW.

Fly all available floatplanes at 1kft and 100% ASW, from bases, not from your AV's or CS's that are docked at port. Not sure if this _actually_ has anything to do with it but I feel that it does.

A PBEM-opponent mine who I don't wish to name-and-shame sent 6 subs to patrol around Rabaul. I had 2*27 Bettys, 2*27 Val's, approx 30 Kates, Mavises and a ****load of floatplanes doing what I just described. A week later four subs provided homes for crabs at the ocean floor and two limped back home.

Use your best assets at this, let your lower EXP airgroups do something else.

You should be getting reports of subs getting hit in a few turns depending on the weather. It is of no real consequence if you sink a sub or not. It's not like you get 100 points for one. They repair forever. A sub in a USN port or in Pearl Harbour at 30% SYS DMG is a sub not harassing you and out of the game for a few months - it's as good as sunk.

If you want to protect a Transport-TF from subs I've noticed this is a good tactic. 3-4 DD's with high ASW rating and 4-5 PG's. A experienced and carefull admiral. Add a AV or CS (or a few if you have them in abundance and you don't do convoy raiding) in the TF flying 100% ASW at 1kft. Move the TF so that you stay clear from the most obvious hexes of attack. Eg, just west of Kavieng, the shallow water hexes between Shortlands and Lunga.

_____________________________

Imperial Field Service Code (senjinkun):
"Remember always the good reputation of your family and the opinion of people of your birthplace. Do not shame yourself by being taken prisoner alive; die so as to not leave behind a soiled name."

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 11

- 2/18/2003 8:47:05 PM

Drex

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline

Excellent advice from all. Ask and you shall receive:)

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 12

SC use by US - 2/18/2003 9:54:53 PM

dtx

Posts: 72
Joined: 8/13/2002
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline

As noted, US DDs are much better sub killers than SCs. However, when playing against the AI, many jap subs appear near Nomeau and early in the game, DDs are too valuable to keep back just to attack subs.

Also, the loss of a DD is much more costly in victory point terms than lossing a SC (only 1 pt). Hence, although you'll lose some SCs in attacking subs, it matters little and overall they'll sink more subs than the subs sink of them.

To do this, early in the game, move all SCs to Nomeau. Keep them out of port as much as possible until they attain experience of 55. (despite success in sinking subs, this is likely the maximum experience that they'll ever achieve).

I'm real interested to try Dr. Who's various flt altitude recommendations.

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 13

- 2/18/2003 10:08:37 PM

Drex

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline

i do use my planes on ASW aat 100' and 1000' but Vals at 10000'?I'm going to try it but it seems a little high.

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 14

- 2/18/2003 11:12:38 PM

Veer

Posts: 2231
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Excuse me
Status: offline

high Altitudes help to spot, low alltiudes help to attack.

Generally I keep all ASW at 1kt and Naval search at 6-10kt.

It helps, but not as much as more planes help.

_____________________________

In time of war the first casualty is truth. - Boake Carter

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 15

- 2/19/2003 11:42:04 PM

derwho

Posts: 236
Joined: 8/22/2002
From: Finland
Status: offline

VALs are divebombers. You need to fly them high enough that they can dive for the attack.

_____________________________

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 16

- 2/20/2003 12:01:41 AM

Drex

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline

Yes, of course, but for spotting does 10k make it a little difficult? And what would be the minimum height required for bomb release? A sub is not the same as a CA so perhaps they would not need the greater height.

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 17

- 2/20/2003 1:00:03 AM

crsutton

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

Vals could and were used for glide bombing so I am not sure if altitude is all that critical but who knows.

Most certainly, use your American PCs often to gain experience. They have those dang mousetrap things and when they work-it's not fun for any Japanese sub. Experience makes the difference.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 18

- 2/20/2003 1:19:29 AM

Drex

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline

there must have been a ratio of escorts-to-transports that was preferred or most effective. what would that be?

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 19

- 2/20/2003 3:06:09 AM

derwho

Posts: 236
Joined: 8/22/2002
From: Finland
Status: offline

My findings for the IJN are that 2*DD 3*PG/PC and 10 AK/AP is usually a good mix. I might add a MSW or maybe even 2 if there is the possibility of mines, but then I'd add one DD and 2 PG/PC for that extra bit of protection.

_____________________________

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 20

- 2/20/2003 10:25:11 AM

bradfordkay

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

Early in this thread Raverdave mentioned checking the ASW ratings of the escorts. I have looked and must be completely blind, because I do not see any ASW rating when I examine my DDs in this game. I have always had to check the weapons loadout to be sure that the ships I'm choosing have depth charges. Can someone point out to this idiot just where the ASW rating is shown in the game? I am using v2.20.

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 21

- 2/20/2003 10:52:40 AM

Drex

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline

When you are choosiing your escorts, right click on them and it will bring up loadout values including ASW from 2 to 10. Obviously the 8 and 10 are subkillers par excellence but the crew experience is important too.

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 22

- 2/20/2003 12:58:39 PM

bradfordkay

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

I honestly had never tried that. I always left clicked on the unit, which brought up the detail on its weapons loadout. Does this ASW rating (which took me awhile to find, hidden there in the middle of the screen!) include the sonar capability?

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 23

- 2/20/2003 1:46:45 PM

denisonh

Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Upstate SC
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bradfordkay
[B]I honestly had never tried that. I always left clicked on the unit, which brought up the detail on its weapons loadout. Does this ASW rating (which took me awhile to find, hidden there in the middle of the screen!) include the sonar capability? [/B][/QUOTE]

I do not think so. I believe it is a measure of the ASW weapons loadout.

_____________________________

"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 24

- 2/20/2003 1:48:13 PM

HawaiiFive-O

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

No, the ASW rating is just a count of ASW weaponry on the ship.

It does not take into account which weapons are better.

ASW weapons have 2 key characteristics, Accuracy and Effect.

For the Allies, here's how the weapons breakdown:

Mk6 Depth Charge: ACC=8, EFF=300
Mk7 Depth Charge: ACC=9, EFF=600
Mk7/m1 Depth Charge: ACC=13, EFF=600
MkVII Depth Charge: ACC=10, EFF=290
(there's also a Mk9 in the database ACC=30, EFF=200, but I haven't seen it on any ships to date).

Mk20 Mousetrap: ACC=60, EFF=35
Mk22 Mousetrap: ACC=80, EFF=35 (haven't seen this yet, either)

Now take a look at your Allied DDs. The Farraguts, Porters, Mahans, Gridleys, and Benhams all only have 2 Mk7 depth charges. These are very poor ASW platforms.

The Sims are the best you are going to have in the early going, with 2 Mk6 + 2 Mk7s. I hate it when I lose a Sims early.

Later on you get the good ASW DDs, the Bensons, Bristols, and Fletchers. They boast 2 Mk7s and 6 Mk6s. As an added bonus, these are also the best AAA destroyers (upgraded Porters are good at AAA too). These make up the bulk of my CV groups.

Please note that Mk7s are upgraded to Mk7/m1s after awhile (haven't pinned down an exact date yet, ship upgrades are still sort of a black box for me).

The Aruntas make good ASW platforms too, with 6 MkVIIs. The Kiwis are not bad either (4 MkVIIs). And the SCs have the Mousetrap, accurate if they fire it (get their experience up!). The Mousetrap may not kill the sub (low EFF), but it should drive it back to Japan, as good as a kill in my book.

The IJN is in much worse shape. Their depth charges breakdown like this:

Type 91 Depth Charge: ACC=5, EFF=220
Type 95 Depth Charge: ACC=7, EFF=324
Type 2 Depth Charge: ACC=9, EFF=357

No IJN DD carries more than 4 depth charge mounts. The IJN's best ASW platform is the Akitsuki class, with 4 Type 2s. It goes down hill from there...

4x Type 91s: Mutsukis, Fubukis, Kamikazes, Minekazes
4x Type 95s: Akatsukis, Hatsuharus, Shiratsuyus, Asashios, Yugumos
2x Type 95s: Kageros
2x Type 2s: Shimakazes

The PCs + PGs are pretty lousy too, with either 2 or 3 mounts, and none have the Type 2.

(in reply to Drex)

Post #: 25