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 question

 
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 >> ASW question Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
ASW question - 5/3/2016 12:14:21 AM   
Ormbane


Posts: 80
Joined: 5/17/2013
Status: offline 		If I ask the task force manager to create an ASW TF it chooses 4 ships. Is this any more effective than merely creating a TF of a single ship (assuming all ships have the same ASW rating)?

Now the off topic part: have been taking a hiatus from the game for some time but on a recent vacation I visited the Codetalkers museum in Tuba City and the Codetalkers memorial in Window Rock and much of my vacation time after that was spent recalling how much I enjoyed this game and how I wanted to start a new one (against the AI, noobie that I am).

_____________________________
Post #: 1
RE: ASW question - 5/3/2016 12:33:49 AM   
btd64


Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline 		1. I always select my own ships. Better control in keeping same speed and or endurance. These numbers are more important to me than the weapons number.
2. It is much easier to pin down a sub with more rather than 1....GP

_____________________________

Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to Ormbane)
Post #: 2
RE: ASW question - 5/3/2016 1:19:19 AM   
rustysi


Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline 		The rule of thumb in the game is three vessels for an ASW TF, and yes take the time to pick your own.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to btd64)
Post #: 3
RE: ASW question - 5/3/2016 2:12:21 AM   
Grfin Zeppelin


Posts: 1515
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline 		Yes use three if you can. Two are adequate tho if you are stretched. Four is either overkill or as some say contra productive.

_____________________________



(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 4
RE: ASW question - 5/3/2016 2:34:59 AM   
rustysi


Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
quote:

Four is either overkill or as some say contra productive.


Yep, like the 'law of diminishing returns' in economics.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to Grfin Zeppelin)
Post #: 5
RE: ASW question - 5/4/2016 12:08:44 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Four is either overkill or as some say contra productive.


Yep, like the 'law of diminishing returns' in economics.


Iran-Contra comes to mind. A single ASW capable ship is way better than none, and two is better than one...

But, you know, if I'm trying to protect a CV TF I use 6 to 8 or even more. Let's get some comments about that as well.

< Message edited by geofflambert -- 5/4/2016 12:11:45 AM >

_____________________________



(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 6
RE: ASW question - 5/4/2016 12:28:43 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline 		One of the Devs, Symon IIRC, once stated that three is optimum and the fourth provides diminishing returns.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 7
RE: ASW question - 5/4/2016 4:48:39 PM   
IdahoNYer


Posts: 2616
Joined: 9/6/2009
From: NYer living in Boise, ID
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

One of the Devs, Symon IIRC, once stated that three is optimum and the fourth provides diminishing returns.



That is my understanding as well, but I seldom see more than one ship prosecute an ASW attack on an individual sub.

I've learned the hard way never to send a single ship ASW TF out - when it runs out of depth charges, its just a target! Two work pretty well - and I guess 3 provides just that much more redundancy? Or does the extra ships in the ASW TF enhance an attack on a sub?

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 8
RE: ASW question - 5/4/2016 8:20:45 PM   
Bullwinkle58


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

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

One of the Devs, Symon IIRC, once stated that three is optimum and the fourth provides diminishing returns.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
There is a recent thread (in the last month or so) on ASW where Symon/JWE says the algorithm is optimal at three ASW ships in the TF, not four. I believe I'm remembering that correctly. Don't know why that would be, but he's seen the code. In RL I could see why, especially in low visibility. Three would allow a good "round-robin" with one dropping and two listening. But I don't know how that would be modeled in the game's odds. I have been experimenting myself though.

Without opening the overcoat, there’s a lot of info out there that suggests why this may be so. The code is rather primitive and doesn’t work in double precision. In broad, each algorithm follows a rather simple statistical profile. In fine, certain of the algorithms are related through passed variables.

It’s pretty fundamental that the more shots you get (the more selections you get from Shewharts bowl) the greater the probability you will pull the prize. That was the fundamental problem with the Japanese E types. They had enough aggregated “shots” to ensure a 92% hit rate.

Same thing is true for ASW ships in a TF. Put in lots and you get guaranteed kills. Not goodnik.

So michaelm did the same “diminishing returns” thing for ASW that he did for Arty oh, so long ago. It was in the term-decreasing DLs for the next subsequent ship. Don’t really care what the IRL model would be, it is what it is and seems to work.

So, given diminishing returns, one can figure out where the high points are and get a rough estimate of sigma. 3 ships work well within the mean. Doesn’t mean 4 are bad, they are ok, just not significantly better. 5 is at the end of the distribution but a really good die roll might let it play.

Do you understand what I’m saying?

Ciao. JWE

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3447116&mpage=1&key=three+AND+ships�
_____________________________

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 9
RE: ASW question - 5/5/2016 12:14:52 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline 		Back to the CV TF. More flak anyway. I don't know if this is built in (probably not I suppose) but more DDs equal more depth charges.

_____________________________



(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 10
RE: ASW question - 5/5/2016 2:46:13 AM   
AW1Steve


Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline 		I've always wondered ....you have 10 highly rated DD's in a surface warfare group. Does that mean it won't hunt subs?

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 11
RE: ASW question - 5/5/2016 6:30:24 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

I've always wondered ....you have 10 highly rated DD's in a surface warfare group. Does that mean it won't hunt subs?

I have no proof but my experience has been that the SCTF DDs have a lower chance of detecting a sub than an equal number and type of ASW TF DDs. The code may give them a lower probability of detecting it because they are not pinging in normal ASW search patterns or travelling at the right speed for sonar effectiveness. So there is still a chance that they will detect and attack the sub.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to AW1Steve)
Post #: 12
RE: ASW question - 5/5/2016 11:56:50 AM   
guytipton41


Posts: 351
Joined: 2/26/2011
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

I've always wondered ....you have 10 highly rated DD's in a surface warfare group. Does that mean it won't hunt subs?


Hi Folks,

My experience is that 10 Fletchers in a SCTF under the command of ole "31-Knot" running over a sub usually results in one dead sub. I was amazed at how well it worked.

Cheers,
Guy

(in reply to AW1Steve)
Post #: 13
RE: ASW question - 5/5/2016 1:00:32 PM   
AW1Steve


Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: guytipton41


quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

I've always wondered ....you have 10 highly rated DD's in a surface warfare group. Does that mean it won't hunt subs?


Hi Folks,

My experience is that 10 Fletchers in a SCTF under the command of ole "31-Knot" running over a sub usually results in one dead sub. I was amazed at how well it worked.

Cheers,
Guy




My experience has also been this....but the sub always shot 1st.

(in reply to guytipton41)
Post #: 14
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> ASW question 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

0.719