RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

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 >> After Action Reports >> RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Page: << < prev 231 232 [233] 234 235 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 3:22:16 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

I know that there are players out there who know everything about everything. We stand in awe of them.

But this discussion illustrates the massive complexity of this game. There are a bunch of very smart people with a ton of AE/WitP/UV experience chiming in here, and all of us are just that little bit uncertain exactly how things work. Some of us are nearly positive we know, but we're not certain we know, because we keep learning that things we knew weren't quite right or that there are better ways to do them.

Thank goodness for the complexity! It keeps us guessing a bit. I think it's probably more fun to be a 95% player than a 100% player who knows everything and has the game reduced to a mathmatical formula. I hereby proudly declare that I am one fo the 90% (I'm not at 95%) by my own reckoning. I love a dash of uncertainty. Sort of. When my carriers aren't at risk, anyhow.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 6961

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 3:22:42 PM

pws1225

Posts: 1166
Joined: 8/9/2010
From: Tate's Hell, Florida
Status: offline

quote:

Thank God gay marriage is not modeled in the game.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 6962

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 3:24:12 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

Gay marriage is modeled in the game. My opponent claims his wife is named Paula. It's a ruse. His wife is actually named Paul. Rue Paul.

(in reply to pws1225)

Post #: 6963

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 3:32:25 PM

Cap Mandrake

Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline

Based on CR's "mouse droppings" I have now revised my prediction and it is not even close to Sakhalin.

I think he is going to land at Wolei, Yap and Beazelbub/Pelielu..then sweep west to Ternate, Manado, Tailud-Eilanden, Mindanao, Jolo, and..
eventually Luzon which begins to make transit south of Formosa dangerous. There are numerous medium sized base with 2-3-4 AF and numerous place buildable for heavies.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 6964

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 3:35:26 PM

Anachro

Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

When the "Good Book" is silent on the matter and nobody can compel Saint Michael to come out of his hermit cave and issue a gospel on the matter.

Don't forget Prophet Alfred.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 6965

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 3:35:43 PM

Cap Mandrake

Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline

Wait a minute...Rue Paul is gay?

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 6966

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 3:54:28 PM

poodlebrain

Posts: 392
Joined: 10/4/2012
From: Comfy Chair in Baton Rouge
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I know that there are players out there who know everything about everything. We stand in awe of them.

But this discussion illustrates the massive complexity of this game. There are a bunch of very smart people with a ton of AE/WitP/UV experience chiming in here, and all of us are just that little bit uncertain exactly how things work. Some of us are nearly positive we know, but we're not certain we know, because we keep learning that things we knew weren't quite right or that there are better ways to do them.

Thank goodness for the complexity! It keeps us guessing a bit. I think it's probably more fun to be a 95% player than a 100% player who knows everything and has the game reduced to a mathmatical formula. I hereby proudly declare that I am one fo the 90% (I'm not at 95%) by my own reckoning. I love a dash of uncertainty. Sort of. When my carriers aren't at risk, anyhow.

Uh oh, now we are discussing the various games within the game. It is natural for players to want to know how to minimize their risks. The uncertainty surrounding aspects of the game mechanics reduces player confidence that his intended actions will occur.

I hate the uncertainty, but I like having that uncertainty as an excuse for all bad outcomes. Losing those ships wasn't my fault. The game mechanics conspired against me.

One of the benefits of these message boards is the sharing of empirical evidence of methods for dealing with the uncertainties. Eliminating catastrophic mistakes that decide the outcome of the game makes for a better gaming experience. Being able to learn from the mistakes of others is the sign of a wise person, and I know I benefit from these types of discussions.

_____________________________

Never trust a man who's ass is wider than his shoulders.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 6967

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 4:16:41 PM

Cap Mandrake

Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

When the "Good Book" is silent on the matter and nobody can compel Saint Michael to come out of his hermit cave and issue a gospel on the matter.

Don't forget Prophet Alfred.

Yes...we may well see a parting of the heavens, a flash of light and hear the booming voice of the
Prophet (PBUH,UAW,BPOE)......"Though shalt not conduct reconnaissance flights beyond a 12 hex radius!"

Multitudes: Tell us why not, oh great Prophet (PBUH,IBEW,UNHCR)! The G3M2 has a range of 18 hexes.

Prophet (PBUH,UAW,BPOE): Look at geometry you retards. That's nearly 500 miles from the center of the search arc. Do you have any idea how broad the 10 degree arc is at that range?

Multitudes: THANK YOU OH GREAT ONE!

(in reply to Anachro)

Post #: 6968

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 4:34:53 PM

JohnDillworth

Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline

I have no other evidence except this works for me. TBF's at 3000 ft 10% search 10% ASW range 1 or 2 hexes and ASW ships work much much better

< Message edited by JohnDillworth -- 6/21/2016 5:15:12 PM >

_____________________________

Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 6969

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 4:49:02 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

11/3/43

Big Tent: The herd moves four hexes to the NW on a setting that avoids contact with enemy subs. But a group of about four supply TFs got left behind in the open and came under attack by Jills from Eniwetok. Five xAK were hit hard, four of them sinking.

The herd is now 59 hexes out of Pearl and 25 from the first beach. Despite the culling by the Jills, the group is drawing tighter and is one or two more days from being in final form. The herd will move three hexes west tomorrow. The furthest back TF is some TKs at seven hexes. They'll catch up in two days. Then the ships will proceed at five hexes per day. So D-Day is projected as 11/9.

As expected, some TFs will be left behind - these were late additions, diverted from other missions. These incldue on AKE, some supply xAKs, and the transport TF originally carrying a base force to Pago Pago. These TFs will halt at Wake, just in case the main mission ultimately diverts to Eniwetok. If not, they'll unload some supply and then retire to Pearl.

It's been a bloody two days, but the real danger commences now as the herd approaches Truk and the Marianas. Will John commit KB? All planning is on the assumption that he could or will, but I actually don't think he will. I think he'll keep them in position to strike at an opportune moment, but will be reluctant to pull the trigger until things are "just right." My job is to (hopefully) keep him just a little bit uncertain until the most dangerous stretch of ocean has been crossed.

USN sub Rasher picked off an xAK near Saipan. Also, John's email indicated that "he thought" he knew the target, but was no longer sure. I think he was guessing "Eniwetok."

No disturbing SigInt today. There is shipping at Lae and Madang. The Marianas are strongly garrisoned with lots of aircraft present. Most of his ships have departed Eniwetok, but there is still one TF present.

Lion Tamer: Unopposed landings at Tanna today. It is possible that IJN CVL TF seen near Tulagia a few days back is close to reaching this theater. I only have a couple of small amphibious TFs present, so the risk isn't great. For now, I'll continue to attend to small amphibious landings against undefended bases and dot hexes. Any CVL drawn way down here to pick off an xAK or xAP or two is a CVL not present for duty where a decisive campaign is underway.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 6970

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 5:26:10 PM

Bullwinkle58

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

Have you done all your ASW upgrades? Your sub troubles in very late 1943 do not match my experiences.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 6971

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 5:34:07 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Commander Cody, Death Star was in the same hex (131,100).

Thanks, Loka, for the suggestions. I had already bumped up CAP to 50%. Next turn, I'll remove the 10% rest. Then I'll divide my fighters into two groups: some at a high percentage with range zero (CAP) only [this will include the Corsairs, as NYGiants suggested several days ago) the rest at 0% CAP with range 6 (these to escort bombers).

For what its worth, the settings during the Great Naval Battle were 50% CAP, no rest %, and range 6 for all fighter squadrons (except those few squadrons with lower ranges).

These settings can definitely work, and in terms of function for a CV battle only (i.e., all your guys in the same hex or maybe even just 1 hex apart) are pretty close to having dedicated units for escort and for CAP. The only difference is fatigue - the pilots will get worn out faster. Perhaps having a completely overfull pilot list would mitigate that a bit, but the extra fatigue from a CAP range higher than 1 or 2 makes me balk in general.

I'd be wary of dropping the altitude too much - torpedo bombers can still come in at 25K or 35K feet and then teleport down to wavetop to drop torpedoes. However, you really only need to worry about LBA there, as I doubt John would risk a KB strike getting split up due to altitude so they will all likely be between 10K and 17K feet (because of dive bombers). A mix of altitudes between 8-20K is my preferred if I'm going to be facing off against CVs. I might drop to 6K if I think TBs might come in at 5.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Wait a minute. Am I to understand that a carrier fighter squadron set to "escort" and let's say 40% CAP will NOT fly escort with the non-CAP planes of the squadron if the opportunity arises?
I don't think that is true. I think the AI assigns them to strike missions if it decides to go after a target. I am 99% sure I have seen a carrier with 1 fighter squadron perform both duties in the same turn.

Neither do I believe that the 40% CAP means that 40% of the squadron is up in the air with the other 60% waiting to scramble. My recollection is that the 40% is the maximum allotment to CAP with the planes cycled back to the AF or the carrier to refuel, rearm.

Lastly, I'm not sure I believe this business about "CAP range". The range setting is for strike/escort missions.

On the other hand, I have read about 2.5% of the manual.

Yes, you should check the documentation on the range setting.

With Range 0, no escorts will be launched. With Range 6, CAP will attempt to respond to any enemy air strikes within 6 hexes of the hex they are providing CAP for (the CV/base in the case of CAP, or the target hex in the case of LRCAP). Any pilots not set to CAP/LRCAP/training/rest will also attempt to escort any strikes within that range setting. This is the prime reason I do not use CAP 50% and Range 6/7/8.

Having dedicated CAP units also allows me to put all of my Corsairs on CAP with the best of the best pilots, while the Hellcats escort and merely have really good pilots.

The best way to spot subs with planes is with ASW, not search (though search will detect them sometimes).

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 6972

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 5:35:39 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Based on CR's "mouse droppings" I have now revised my prediction and it is not even close to Sakhalin.

I think he is going to land at Wolei, Yap and Beazelbub/Pelielu..then sweep west to Ternate, Manado, Tailud-Eilanden, Mindanao, Jolo, and..
eventually Luzon which begins to make transit south of Formosa dangerous. There are numerous medium sized base with 2-3-4 AF and numerous place buildable for heavies.

When he first gave us the distance from Pearl and distance to target, and that an atoll was involved, I updated my personal bet to Ulithi as the atoll, and Babeldaob as one of the main targets. From there, what the main targets are can vary a little bit, but I would guess it's either Mindanao or just south of it, and perhaps a mix of both.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 6973

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 5:37:05 PM

Bullwinkle58

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Wait a minute. Am I to understand that a carrier fighter squadron set to "escort" and let's say 40% CAP will NOT fly escort with the non-CAP planes of the squadron if the opportunity arises?
I don't think that is true. I think the AI assigns them to strike missions if it decides to go after a target. I am 99% sure I have seen a carrier with 1 fighter squadron perform both duties in the same turn.

Neither do I believe that the 40% CAP means that 40% of the squadron is up in the air with the other 60% waiting to scramble. My recollection is that the 40% is the maximum allotment to CAP with the planes cycled back to the AF or the carrier to refuel, rearm.

Lastly, I'm not sure I believe this business about "CAP range". The range setting is for strike/escort missions.

On the other hand, I have read about 2.5% of the manual.

About eight years ago a forumite, whose name I have misplaced, set me straight with one of those light-bulb moments. I was thrashing around on CAP settings and he said, paraphrasing: "There's no CAP mission type. There's only an Escort mission type, and then a lot of percentages. So CAP is 'not-Escort'. It's what's left over."

That said, as Loka said, Range is the critical button. The Range button first looks at the mission type that's ordered. If it's Escort it tries to escort strikes to the Range max. (If your DBs are at Naval Attack, Range=6 and your Hellcats are Escort, Range = 4, the DBs fly alone the last two hexes.) But if you spin in 40% CAP, say, then the code sets aside 40% of the fighters for CAP, but AT THE SAME RANGE AS THE STRIKE ESCORT. Often this is a fatal mistake. CAP at Range 6 or 7 will try to do CAP, but it will be tissue-paper thin, and the altitude will have to match the Strike Escort portion.

Loka's solution is the best one I've seen, provided you have enough fighters to do the job (s). Pure CAP squadron(s), and pure Escort squadrons. Each with their own Ranges, each with their own altitudes. It can get funky when you mix plane models, when you mix CVs with CVLs and CVEs, etc. But it's best to specialize rather than trying to make a fighter unit wear multiple hats.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 6974

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 5:46:57 PM

Cap Mandrake

Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline

Well, that is two votes vs 1. I am persuaded.

I had accidentally swerved into Lokasena's idea by chopping the range down on the best fighters to keep them on cap and not escort but I will try the dedicated escort v. CAP idea.

< Message edited by Cap Mandrake -- 6/21/2016 5:51:36 PM >

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 6975

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 5:49:13 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Have you done all your ASW upgrades? Your sub troubles in very late 1943 do not match my experiences.

All my ASW platforms (DE, PF, SC, AM) are upgraded. And my fleet is mostly upgraded. The carriers are about 2/3rd upgraded, with half the fleet flattops just completed while the other half are due for 10/43.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 6976

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 5:54:17 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

You guys offer lots of helpful information. And you're patient with me. Thanks.

There have been lots of guesses as to targets, ranging from Sikhalin Island to the Philippines to the Solomons. Since the first target is now about 25 hexes away, things are going to become much clearer in the few days.

And then I get to reveal Eldorado. I've built that up to a big thing, but I really shouldn't. Under certain circumstances it would be vital. But under the particular circumstances of this op, I don't think it will be quite as snazzy. I think the target hexes are so vulnerable that the need for Eldorado is dampened just a bit. But it's still fun. :)

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 6977

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 6:34:14 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Have you done all your ASW upgrades? Your sub troubles in very late 1943 do not match my experiences.

All my ASW platforms (DE, PF, SC, AM) are upgraded. And my fleet is mostly upgraded. The carriers are about 2/3rd upgraded, with half the fleet flattops just completed while the other half are due for 10/43.

Are your cruisers escorting your carriers using their float planes for Nav search or ASW?

I always assign mine to ASW.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 6978

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 6:37:27 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

Mine are split between both duties, some doing the one, others doing the other.

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 6979

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 7:18:01 PM

jwolf

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline

quote:

Also, John's email indicated that "he thought" he knew the target, but was no longer sure. I think he was guessing "Eniwetok."

By this time I assume (??) he has seen enough TFs to get a sense of the scale of the operation and that it is much bigger than Eniwetok or any one target.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 6980

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 7:54:30 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

Yes, probably so.

I think I have strategic surprise (I won't know for certain until the main landings take place; but I think so). But I won't have full operational surprise, of course. John'll be watching me all the way to the beaches.

Over the past month it seems that John's been concentrating on the areas he felt were most likely targets:
1. the Marshalls islands, mostly with 6k limits, are way overstacked to the point of bursting. Bigger islands like Ponape and Kusaie are heavily garrisoned.
2. Truk of course, is heavily garrisoned.
3. I know that Lunga is heavily garrisoned, and I suspect that other islands in the Solomons and New Georgia are also.
4. He's especially been attending to the Marianas and Marcus, with heavy concentrations and, in the case of Marcus, overstacking.

But to some extent he's been looking elsewhere. In recent weeks, Iwo and Yap airfields both went to level one. And, as reported yesterdays, there were "heavy signals" at Wolei.

But unless he has a mobile reserve pre-loaded aboard ships position near the targets, I am as certain as I can be that many of them are undefended.

I just hope my fleet remains intact so that I can confirm all of this. Subs, darn them. Subs are my biggest worry.

(in reply to jwolf)

Post #: 6981

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 8:09:30 PM

jwolf

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline

quote:

Subs, darn them. Subs are my biggest worry.

Point taken -- but shouldn't it work the other way, too? I mean, by this time, maybe your subs should be his greatest worry.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 6982

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 8:47:25 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

In the past week, my subs sank three xAK and one TK and damaged one AO. They're working, and I'm satisfied with how I'm using them. And if this op succeeds, the sea lanes available to John's oil and resource TFs will become considerably more limited, with more obvious choke points, so I'll be able to assign patrols more effectively.

(in reply to jwolf)

Post #: 6983

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 9:00:34 PM

crsutton

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Commander Cody, Death Star was in the same hex (131,100).

Thanks, Loka, for the suggestions. I had already bumped up CAP to 50%. Next turn, I'll remove the 10% rest. Then I'll divide my fighters into two groups: some at a high percentage with range zero (CAP) only [this will include the Corsairs, as NYGiants suggested several days ago) the rest at 0% CAP with range 6 (these to escort bombers).

For what its worth, the settings during the Great Naval Battle were 50% CAP, no rest %, and range 6 for all fighter squadrons (except those few squadrons with lower ranges).

I would not set cap to zero. Depending on DL and radar CAP will extend out quite a few hexes and then can protect stragglers or damaged ships that detach and head for home. I always leave fighters on CAP at normal range. Assuming that you have VR squadrons along for spares and considering your abundance of carrier fighters you should look for the opportunity to shoot down any Japanese aircraft that flies near you. Your radar would have probably scrambled more fighters if they were needed. They were not. Don't fret it. %40 Cap is fine but as you close boost it to 50% or %60. But if your ships are all upgraded with the latest air search radar you should be fine.

I can't believe how pitiful your anti sub results have been You should be sinking 3-4 of his subs when you run into a flock of them like that. Considering the ASW assets you now possess with the new MK 9 DC and your DC laden DEs. DW is right about it in his earlier post. He may be a Matrix Trooper but you should listen to what he says. One 18 plane avenger squadron set to 4 hexes and 80% ASW (make sure the pilots have decent skills) will totally reverse your losses. You will get multiple air attacks on his subs with lots of hits reported (most are not) and it will raise the DL of the Japanese subs to the point where many will not attack, and your ASW ships will react to them like dogs to a cheeseburger and smack the snot out of them. You can afford at this point to spare an attack squadron. After all, a couple of torpedo hits on a CV will reduce you by 90 aircraft. Usually, I prefer using a squadron on a CVE for the ASW job Do this and you can thank us later.... "There is no off position on the genius switch." That is why we are here..

Also, many Japanese bomber commanders have very high aggression ratings. This will at times cause them to act (wait for it) in an aggressive manner. Not necessarily in their best interest.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 6984

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 9:32:37 PM

BillBrown

Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline

Keep in mind that in the DBB and derivative scenarios, the MK-9 ASW device does not have any more accuracy that the MK-6.

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 6985

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 9:58:46 PM

BBfanboy

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

Good to hear that your opponent is overstacking, using precious supply that Japan would otherwise have for the Home Islands.

_____________________________

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 Canoerebel)

Post #: 6986

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 10:32:26 PM

JohnDillworth

Posts: 3100
Joined: 3/19/2009
Status: offline

quote:

One 18 plane avenger squadron set to 4 hexes and 80% ASW (make sure the pilots have decent skills) will totally reverse your losses. You will get multiple air attacks on his subs with lots of hits reported (most are not) and it will raise the DL of the Japanese subs to the point where many will not attack, and your ASW ships will react to them like dogs to a cheeseburger and smack the snot out of them

^^^^^What he said^^^^^^ and maybe what I said. You are not SEEING his subs so you can't attack them, only react to them after the fact. Look at real life. That's what the CVE's were for. to escort things and have the Avengers look for subs. You brought along plenty of "killer" but you are not using your "hunter". Total up all your ship losses in the the last 3 operations. What got them? Operation Drumbeat was in early 1942, not late 1943.

_____________________________

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 6987

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 10:37:18 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

I've got some CVE TBFs flying ASW now. I switched them out before I sent John the turn this a.m. But I forgot to check pilot ASW skill levels. I'll do that next turn and see if I can draw enough highly-skilled pilots to allow three or four of the CVE TBF squadrons to do the job.

(in reply to JohnDillworth)

Post #: 6988

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 10:53:16 PM

crsutton

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

Keep in mind that in the DBB and derivative scenarios, the MK-9 ASW device does not have any more accuracy that the MK-6.

Thanks, I was not aware of this. I always thought it was godly....

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to BillBrown)

Post #: 6989

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent - 6/21/2016 10:55:54 PM

crsutton

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I've got some CVE TBFs flying ASW now. I switched them out before I sent John the turn this a.m. But I forgot to check pilot ASW skill levels. I'll do that next turn and see if I can draw enough highly-skilled pilots to allow three or four of the CVE TBF squadrons to do the job.

Most at start carrier avenger pilots and those arriving on fleet carriers come with fairly good ASW skills as well as all other skills. Really, anything in the 45-60 range is good enough. Nobody really knows the best altitude but I just keep them at 5,000k and they work just fine.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 6990

Page: << < prev 231 232 [233] 234 235 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent