sub wolfpacks

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

sub wolfpacks

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 >> sub wolfpacks

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 2:34:39 PM

ckk

Posts: 1268
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: Pensacola Beach FL
Status: offline

Good idea or not? If good, how should they be created and deployed? Thanks

Post #: 1

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 2:48:48 PM

dr.hal

Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline

No, the game doesn't model that concept well (and neither side used it in the Pacific theater, although the US did try a bit of this in terms of concentration later in the war IIRC). Best deployment is individually imho.

_____________________________

(in reply to ckk)

Post #: 2

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 2:49:20 PM

Oberst_Klink

Posts: 4778
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckk

Good idea or not? If good, how should they be created and deployed? Thanks

A few of us tried, but it doesn't really work; it's better to have different TFs, perhaps on follow orders, IF you want to have lots of u-boats in one hex; but grouping them into one large Wolfpack doesn't work Kaleu!

Klink, Oberst

_____________________________

My Blog & on Twitter.
Visit CS Legion on Twitter & Facebook for updates.

(in reply to ckk)

Post #: 3

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 2:52:27 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

I think there is no consensus in this.

I have seen it argued both ways.

A long time veteran Sir Hans B perhaps has argued the most concise rationale I have seen to date.

A sub wolfpack of 2 subs "appears" to have some chance of greater chance of a follow up strike" in same hex than a singleton sub or multiple singleton subs in the same hex.

I am unsure if the mechanics under the hood exactly support this; but my "gut feeling is that its true" as well.

Just 2 subs.. not 3 or 5 or 10..

I altered my sub patrols to : 2 match units endurance / speed wise and "do NOT" remain on station. Set a patrol zone even if its only 2 hexes as a particularly critical point.

Somewhere between improved USN Torps and my change in tactics - my USN devils are getting lots of hits and especially follow up hits off the coast of Japan and the Philippines.

< Message edited by Macclan5 -- 11/14/2016 2:54:01 PM >

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to ckk)

Post #: 4

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 3:02:50 PM

Bullwinkle58

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Macclan5

I think there is no consensus in this.

Don Bowen, who coded the sub war, spoke on this very early in the game's life. No need for consensus.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 5

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 3:03:06 PM

geofflambert

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

As the IJN I sometimes pair a sub with a floatplane carrying sub in the hopes that one or the other or both can react to a sighting. I do not deliberately put them in the same hex or have one follow the other but have each patrol a small triangle situated across the usual shipping lane. I can't say that strategy works.

(in reply to Macclan5)

Post #: 6

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 3:24:31 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Macclan5

I think there is no consensus in this.

Don Bowen, who coded the sub war, spoke on this very early in the game's life. No need for consensus.

Ahh well then my impression is merely that... an impression.

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 7

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 3:35:55 PM

BBfanboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Macclan5

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Macclan5

I think there is no consensus in this.

Don Bowen, who coded the sub war, spoke on this very early in the game's life. No need for consensus.

Ahh well then my impression is merely that... an impression.

Your impression matches mine - I use subs in pairs and often both subs will attack the same TF. I think this is because the first sub attack (or being attacked) raises the DL of the target and the second sub therefore has a higher probability of making an attack. This does not seem to happen with two single-sub TFs in the same hex.

BTW, if the first sub damages a ship the second sub is almost certain to also attack it. Cripples are targets in this game!

PS - large wolfpacks do not seem to work - three subs have some success but not as much as two, and four or more subs don't seem to be able to get their act together. I did have one group of about seven subs that were transiting to a new base when they bumped into a lone enemy xAK ship. Only one of those subs attacked the ship and it missed.

< Message edited by BBfanboy -- 11/14/2016 3:40:17 PM >

_____________________________

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 Macclan5)

Post #: 8

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 3:46:34 PM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Macclan5

I think there is no consensus in this.

Don Bowen, who coded the sub war, spoke on this very early in the game's life. No need for consensus.

Quite correct Bullwinkle.

There is a very extensive 2011 thread (and several other more recent shorter ones too) on this very issue where I made several lengthy posts (together with appropriate dev references IIRC) and IIRC Don Bowen also chipped in directly.

But heck why bother getting the facts when it is so much easier to just come to the game and expect pre conceived ideas to apply.

Alfred

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 9

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 4:11:14 PM

Bullwinkle58

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Macclan5

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: Macclan5

I think there is no consensus in this.

Don Bowen, who coded the sub war, spoke on this very early in the game's life. No need for consensus.

Ahh well then my impression is merely that... an impression.

Your impression matches mine - I use subs in pairs and often both subs will attack the same TF. I think this is because the first sub attack (or being attacked) raises the DL of the target and the second sub therefore has a higher probability of making an attack. This does not seem to happen with two single-sub TFs in the same hex.

BTW, if the first sub damages a ship the second sub is almost certain to also attack it. Cripples are targets in this game!

PS - large wolfpacks do not seem to work - three subs have some success but not as much as two, and four or more subs don't seem to be able to get their act together. I did have one group of about seven subs that were transiting to a new base when they bumped into a lone enemy xAK ship. Only one of those subs attacked the ship and it missed.

Using subs in pairs in the same TF is sub-optimal. I recommend you find Don's posts. He was quite clear why.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 10

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 4:25:41 PM

BBfanboy

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

I report what my experience has been. I tried the one-sub roving patrol zone method and was not happy with results. I have been happy using them in pairs and in small PZs, so that is my preference. I recommend the OP try both methods for a while.

_____________________________

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 Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 11

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 4:26:54 PM

Bullwinkle58

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

I report what my experience has been. I tried the one-sub roving patrol zone method and was not happy with results. I have been happy using them in pairs and in small PZs, so that is my preference. I recommend the OP try both methods for a while.

Sigh.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3921147

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2889330&mpage=2&key=sub%3F#

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 11/14/2016 4:34:08 PM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 12

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 4:35:29 PM

m10bob

Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

In game wolf packs tend to make detection of the subs easier, and there are no verifiable benefits for the user.
It gives the defending player a greater ability to damage the subs as they will be more "bunched up".

The concept WAS tried during the Midway campaign to some extent, fanning subs out to the west of Midway in an arc, but they were deployed much too late to assist in detection, arriving on station after the Japanese had already gone by.
Even had they deployed sooner, all but the "S" boats were using those defective torpedoes, anyway.

Anybody interested in the U.S. sub war in the Pacific really needs to acquire a copy of Clay Blair's great book(s) on the matter, SILENT VICTORY....IMHO).

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by m10bob -- 11/14/2016 4:37:21 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 13

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 4:39:19 PM

BBfanboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

In game wolf packs tend to make detection of the subs easier, and there are no verifiable benefits for the user.
It gives the defending player a greater ability to damage the subs as they will be more "bunched up".

The concept WAS tried during the Midway campaign to some extent, fanning subs out to the west of Midway in an arc, but they were deployed much too late to assist in detection, arriving on station after the Japanese had already gone by.
Even had they deployed sooner, all but the "S" boats were using those defective torpedoes, anyway.

Anybody interested in the U.S. sub war in the Pacific really needs to acquire a copy of Clay Blair's great book(s) on the matter, SILENT VICTORY....IMHO).

I have read several books on the US sub war. Large wolf packs were definitely not used but pairs of subs sometimes were. Darter and Dace taking down three CAs at the start of the Battle of Leyte Gulf is my best example of how they can work together.

_____________________________

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 m10bob)

Post #: 14

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 4:46:55 PM

ckk

Posts: 1268
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: Pensacola Beach FL
Status: offline

Yep Got it read it Rereading it again which was what prompted my question

Blair does say that sub packs were used later in the war I was just wondering how or if this could be done in the GAME

< Message edited by ckk -- 11/14/2016 7:53:21 PM >

(in reply to m10bob)

Post #: 15

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 6:04:26 PM

Bullwinkle58

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

I have read several books on the US sub war. Large wolf packs were definitely not used but pairs of subs sometimes were. Darter and Dace taking down three CAs at the start of the Battle of Leyte Gulf is my best example of how they can work together.

Two were sometimes used, but three was more normal from mid-44 on. But the tactics were not those of the Germans in that there was no coordination from shore, and the subs only cooperated in the loosest sense, with the SOPA being in tactical charge of the group. Major attention was paid to EMCON. When a TF was located other groups were not vectored onto the track.

The tactic was not adopted because single-sub patrols didn't work. It was more that targets were becoming scarce and USN subs numerous, so choke points could be more effectively closed with three at no cost to the overall campaign.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 11/14/2016 6:05:45 PM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 16

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 7:32:06 PM

Macclan5

Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3921147

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2889330&mpage=2&key=sub%3F#

This is most definitively helpful.

Truly I have read the manual and many many threads and I had not come across this one.

Its amazing what you learn and read and the depth of "tactical detail"... this game is amazing.

Even more so as the mechanics largely mirror the historical reality; especially as few of us run the "simulation on Big Blue at home".

Thank muchly Ser Moose

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 17

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 7:52:17 PM

ckk

Posts: 1268
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: Pensacola Beach FL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

I report what my experience has been. I tried the one-sub roving patrol zone method and was not happy with results. I have been happy using them in pairs and in small PZs, so that is my preference. I recommend the OP try both methods for a while.

Sigh.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3921147

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2889330&mpage=2&key=sub%3F#

Thanks Bullwinkle

That's what I was looking for

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 18

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 7:54:59 PM

Bullwinkle58

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckk

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

I report what my experience has been. I tried the one-sub roving patrol zone method and was not happy with results. I have been happy using them in pairs and in small PZs, so that is my preference. I recommend the OP try both methods for a while.

Sigh.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3921147

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2889330&mpage=2&key=sub%3F#

Thanks Bullwinkle

That's what I was looking for

Really, thank Alfred.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to ckk)

Post #: 19

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 7:58:05 PM

ckk

Posts: 1268
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: Pensacola Beach FL
Status: offline

For Alfred

For you thanks I couldn't find those citations try as I might on Search

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 20

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 8:44:23 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

Rather than have >two subs in one TF ("wolfpack") or two subs in 2 TFs parked in a hex, I would recommend having a patrol schedule whereby one submarine is always at the hex, another tracking out and 'clearing' DLs. Alternate by changing the number of days in the hex from the patrol menu.

This way subs will automatically clear their DLs, yet provide undetected coverage to 'hotspot' hexes.

_____________________________

(in reply to ckk)

Post #: 21

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 11:20:04 PM

Major Shane

Posts: 195
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

I have read several books on the US sub war. Large wolf packs were definitely not used but pairs of subs sometimes were. Darter and Dace taking down three CAs at the start of the Battle of Leyte Gulf is my best example of how they can work together.

Two were sometimes used, but three was more normal from mid-44 on. But the tactics were not those of the Germans in that there was no coordination from shore, and the subs only cooperated in the loosest sense, with the SOPA being in tactical charge of the group. Major attention was paid to EMCON. When a TF was located other groups were not vectored onto the track.

The tactic was not adopted because single-sub patrols didn't work. It was more that targets were becoming scarce and USN subs numerous, so choke points could be more effectively closed with three at no cost to the overall campaign.

I have tried the 3 boat method in my game vs AI Japan. I just wanted to try it to emulate USN historical practice. I'm in NOV 43 but tried it from MAY to SEP 43. My results weren't that different than normal. So I shifted back to single boats focused on choke points or isolating islands I am preparing to invade.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 22

RE: sub wolfpacks - 11/14/2016 11:38:30 PM

geofflambert

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

If we're talking about predating on convoys or surface TFs using the same routes, I keep a log of all sightings, and I mean across more than one PBEM and more than one opponent. As the IJN I use float plane carrying subs to increase the number of sightings and improve the log. Then I place most of my patrol zones along these lanes, away from large bases and their air ASW, not to mention their close surface ASW support. Now, if we're talking patrolling against military TFs looking for a fight, it's just your best bet as to where to hunt them. As the IJN you have practically no intelligence info to help you make that guess. Yet IJN doctrine was to pursue such TFs over freight and troop convoys. I think they did better historically than I ever have on that count.

(in reply to Major Shane)

Post #: 23