Submarines and targets

Submarines and targets (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific

Message

Paul Goodman -> Submarines and targets (6/17/2002 2:22:36 AM)
The U.S. Navy submarine service has a favorite expression. "There are only two kinds of ships, submarines and targets." Clearly, Mr. Grigsby believes this, also. In playing Yamamoto's Prophecy, I (playing U.S. against AI) have aggressively gone after all submarine contacts, typically with TF's of from 4 to 6 destroyers. Sometimes I have had as many as four TF's in a hex after one sub. The results so far (now Dec '42) are rather odd, I think. I have had one light cruiser and 15 destroyers torpedoed, with five destroyers sunk. Against this, only two subs have been sunk. Generally, the submarine is not even detected. Additionally, I have had as many as 100 B-17 and B-24 aircraft on ASW, with no results. A destroyer is very difficult for a submarine to torpedo. Destroyers kill submarines, not vice versa. Japanese submarines, although long-ranged and carrying excellent torpedoes, were not well equipped to deal with destroyers. Their large size made them noisy and they were an excellent sonar target. Furthermore, they could only dive to around two hundred feet. They are VERY vulnerable, much more so than a U-boat. I think it would be fair to say that the results I have seen suggest that the submarine has too much of an advantage, is too hard to detect. Additionally, perhaps task forces consisting of destroyers and subchasers could be designated as ASW TF's and given some advantage in detection, vs. a typical escort function. Paul

Erik Rutins -> Comments... (6/17/2002 2:29:24 AM)
Paul, Thanks for your feedback and test results. Was this with 1.10 or with 1.00? Regards, - Erik

Paul Goodman -> (6/17/2002 5:42:17 AM)
This was all with 1.00 (how fast do you think I can play?) :D Did 1.10 change anything re this subject? By the way, 1.10 is absolutely awesome. Got the subwoofer cranked!!! Paul

Raverdave -> (6/17/2002 7:42:04 AM)
Paul, I agree with you....hunting Jap subs is very costly.....and to add insult to injury, the sneeky little subs don't even waste torps on the SC's. They just surface and shoot them !

bradfordkay -> (6/17/2002 8:12:20 AM)
Well, in v1.00 a lot of the US destroyers did not have depth cahrge racks installed - that has been fixed in v1.10. I do like the idea of creating an ASW task group. I've been doing it with no luck in v1.00 (sub chasers only in a surface combat TF), but haven't yet had enough gameplay to see if there's any improvement.

FAdmiral -> (6/17/2002 8:43:20 AM)
But then put the shoe on the other foot, my American subs seem to shoot at everything and get very few hits. They also got killed every time before the new patch that made the DCs more realistic from the enemy DDs. Now for the jap subs, I declare they never seem to miss anything. And when my DDs or any ship carrying DCs attack them back, no dice. Also when my subs attack on the surface, the AP sometimes shoots back and they never seem to miss either. Of couse, my sub just sits there on the surface & takes the damage. In SH2, I ALWAYS dived when coming under fire while on the surface. My captains just don't seem to be that smart. JIM BERG, SR.

kaleun -> (6/17/2002 8:44:47 AM)
I have had several groups of SCs, DDs and PGs, and combinations thereof chasing several subs on the south coast of Noumea. The results are that I am almost out of SCs. All PGs gone, and have lost 5 DDs. The Japanese navy lost one sub, with several others damaged. My PBYs and Beaforts(set to ASW at 100 ft) occasionally see the subs, but have attacked only once. Their fatigue is going through the roof, and the japanese subs rack up kill after kill. I am now trying to mine the hell out of the area, but the subs tend to stay out of the shallow hexes anyway. :mad:

FAdmiral -> (6/17/2002 8:59:38 AM)
In one scenario, I did mine the heck out the shallow water on both sides of Noumea with my subs & minelaying ships. I had 3 Jap subs finally hit mines. After that they seemed to leave the area and not return. JIM BERG, SR.

Paul Goodman -> (6/17/2002 9:10:34 AM)
Well, with the shoe on the other foot, we all know the U.S. torpedoes were flawed. What I see is that others are having a similar situation vs. the Japanese subs. Yes, the U.S. crews were green, but where did the Japanese subs get all this experience. Torpedoing Chinese junks? I think the game is skewed in favor of the submarine (both Japanese and U.S., as will be seen later). PacWar was the same way. By the way, it is interesting in view of the quality of U.S. weapons in the modern era, the Mk whatever with the magnetic detonator was fired exactly twice in testing prior to Pearl Harbor. One worked, one didn't. Good Enough! It was accepted and off to war we go.

juliet7bravo -> (6/17/2002 9:31:52 AM)
Subs, in general (in UV) have the durability of a hvy CA, are more manueverable than most DD's or patrol boats, and can outgun, outrun, out-manuever, and out-last probably all the patrol boats on the surface. With a durability rating of 33 (6-10 for DD's, 1-2 for PC's/SC's/PG's) anything but numerous major calibre gun hits are nothing but flea bites...especially when a sub can survive and self-repair damage levels in the 90's. I watched an IJN sub with a durability of 33 eat 4 x 500lbs bomb hits on consecutive turns during testing, and survive with sustainable damage until the 4th hit. In you play in "head to head" mode, and watch both sides, it's amazing how many subs will be nested close to major bases with large ASW air patrols who are never spotted...subs in deep water are virtually invisible. IJN subs on "non-historic" doctrine are a horrible (brrrrr) sight to watch. Reccomendations; (1) Each side should have an ASW modifier, ie. the Allies should get a bonus reflecting ASW lessons learned, superior equipment, and superior doctrine based on years of fighting U-boats prior. (2) Scale back the sub durability ratings in general. (3) Each ship crew should have a separate ASW exp. rating. (4) Above a certain damage level subs should lose their "stealth" ability, ie. be unable to submerge, and be more easily spotted/hit.

kaleun -> (6/17/2002 9:54:38 AM)
Hear Hear. In reality many subs would have to return to base to repair battle damage. The small size of the submarine made it difficult, if not impossible for majior repairs to occur. Also damage to "belt armor" (pressure hull?) would definitely impede submergence, unless it was of the permanent type. K ;)

Jamey -> (6/17/2002 10:18:36 AM)
I've seen similar stuff. I am playing as Japanese in a PBEM and the US subs are eating me alive. I am losing numerous minesweepers, PCs, and PGs to sub attacks. The US subs seem to be able to hit my PC and PG craft easily with torpedoes. To me, hitting these small, shallow-draft ships would be a LOT harder. But what is even more strange is the number of times US subs have surfaced and attacked my PCs and PGs with gunfire. Now, in all of my reading of US sub operations, I have never come across this. Even if a sub had a decent chance of sinking one of these ships, they still would not do this. The reason was that they could not take a chance that a hit by the enemy would put a hole in their hull and not allow them to dive. Even if they would win this individual battle, a sub deep in enemy waters that could not dive was a sitting duck! I've seen this in both the original and patched versions.

Yamamoto -> (6/17/2002 10:04:08 PM)
After carriers, my favorite type of ship in a naval game is the submarine. I like seeing my subs sink ships and I like the effort I need to put into avoiding enemy subs. Subs are slow and the best way to defeat them is simply to avoid them. I don�t waste 4-6 DDs in a hunter-killer task force trying to sink subs. Those ships would be much better off escorting my merchant ships. I have had several of my search planes hit enemy subs. It doesn�t happen often, but it does happen. When my subs get hit with even a single depth charge, they usually sink within a day or two. Yamamoto

brisd -> my experiences (6/17/2002 10:16:21 PM)
I started a new campaign scenario 19 as Allies on Saturday with the new patch. I spotted two IJN subs in the islands just a few hexes north of Noumea so I sent two DMS, which are equipped with depth charges, in a TF to patrol that hex. The sub sank both DMS's without a reply in turn, last time I will do that! Some results of note in this new game: when my S-class subs attack, they are often sunk by the ASW forces if present, even in deep water. I have seen IJN PC's kill an S-class for example. I even had an IJN AP fire back at a sub attacking it on the surface and score several 3" gun hits. I have had reports of both Catalinas and Hudson's on ASW ops near Noumea attack subs, including report of one hit. This is all on a setting of HARD for AI, so the results are tilted in its favor. I am very satisfied so far with the new patch! - well, except for the bombardment/retirement allowed screwup! :p

Diealtekoenig -> (6/17/2002 11:15:25 PM)
"The U.S. Navy submarine service has a favorite expression. "There are only two kinds of ships, submarines and targets." Clearly, Mr. Grigsby believes this, also. " Heheheh. In ASW (modern) the statement is "There are no friendly submarines. Some submarines are built by our country and some submarines are built by enemy countries but there are no friendly submarines" Hence ASW zones are divided into surface ASW (surface ships can shoot at any undersea contact) and submarine ASW zones (a US submarine is out there so no US surface ships will shoot at submarine contacts in that zone (any submarines there are the responsibility of the US submarine to handle)

FAdmiral -> (6/18/2002 2:35:35 AM)
When my Gato class sub attacked a Jap Carrier Force just SW of Lunga, it fired 6 torps at a carrier. All missed and my sub sure took a pasting. (42 sys,67flot. damage) Needless to say, I had to return for reapirs. I sure wish we had a tactical drop-to game like SH2 to command our own subs. Just for my pleasure, I set up a Silent Hunter 2 scenario to model the same conditions of that battle. I faired much better, sinking the Shoho and damaging one of the larger carriers with a 2 torp hit. The DD's really came after me with a vengance but I managed to avoid all the DC's dropped on me. I sure wish I could command all my subs and probably the surface ships too. I would need "Destroyer Command" to do the job right. My Motto: Never let the AI do a Humans job, they suck !!!!! JIM BERG, SR.

Paul Goodman -> (6/18/2002 5:35:37 AM)
Juliet7bravo: Well, you sure answered my question of why our august group of beta testers didn't catch so obvious a pro sub bias. They did, you did! And you got shot down, right? Yamamoto: Your strategy of avoidance is the correct one, obviously. Unfortunately, it shouldn't be that way. The real problem is that the subs eventially show up right in the plot path from New Caledonia (screw Noumea, it's New Caledonia) to Guadalcanal. Ditto for Milne Bay (right, screw Gili Gili). To avoid these trouble spots, you must plot to a hex and then to the base, which generally adds a day to the trip, to say nothing of the nuisance. I really think something should be done. Probably should have suspected something funky about the subs right from the start. Paul

Spooky -> (6/18/2002 5:51:45 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Paul Goodman [B]Juliet7bravo: Well, you sure answered my question of why our august group of beta testers didn't catch so obvious a pro sub bias. They did, you did! And you got shot down, right? Yamamoto: Your strategy of avoidance is the correct one, obviously. Unfortunately, it shouldn't be that way. The real problem is that the subs eventially show up right in the plot path from New Caledonia (screw Noumea, it's New Caledonia) to Guadalcanal. Ditto for Milne Bay (right, screw Gili Gili). To avoid these trouble spots, you must plot to a hex and then to the base, which generally adds a day to the trip, to say nothing of the nuisance. I really think something should be done. Probably should have suspected something funky about the subs right from the start. Paul [/B][/QUOTE] What do you mean exactly ? Do you want some kind of way points for the TF moves (in order to skip Sub-infested hex) ?

mjk428 -> Sub bias? (6/18/2002 6:36:14 AM)
I can accept how effective the IJN subs are at killing ships. It's harder for me to accept how ineffective my aircraft are at getting them. I have had well over 100 planes dedicated to ASW around their favorite hunting grounds (alt 1000 ft - exp 60-80) and have NEVER hit one. The best I can do is spot them. I hope that at least intimidates them. Pre-patch I was able to eliminate them with packs of DD's & SC's (10 each). This tactic has only gotten me 2 subs post patch. This may be the result of the AI spreading them around much better instead of sending them all to Noumea. I've lost fewer subs post-patch as well. Don't know if all this is simply the luck of the draw and I realize this may be completely realistic results. Just 1 PBY scratching one would make me believe it's not all been a waste of resources. I've have seen posts saying it's possible but I'd like to see it for myself. mjk428

Paul Goodman -> (6/18/2002 8:19:07 AM)
Spooky: I didn't actually have anything in mind. I would like to go after the sub with ASW TF's and kill it. However, that's a great idea. Certainly that's what they did with Atlantic Convoys. The TF path to a destination would simply avoid any hex in which sub had been detected the previous turn. No need to do waypoints, just build avoidance in the code. That still doesn't solve the problem of the submarine having been intentionally defined as some form of superweapon. Paul

mjk428 -> Sub Avoidance In The Code? (6/18/2002 8:24:59 AM)
I have seen TF's plot around detected subs but only if the destination is selected after the sub is detected. I've seen it twice now. They were AK's coming from Luganville on the way to Noumea and without DD escort. mjk428

juliet7bravo -> (6/18/2002 9:20:18 AM)
I wouldn't call it an intentional attempt to create an "Uber-weapon". They work well enough, both the subs and the ASW routines just need fine tuned a bit. I've worked a fairish amount on games. Often, you get things "good enough", add them to the "rainy day" list, and move on to the next raging fire that needs to be peed on. On one hand you have "uber-subs", on the other you have ineffective useless subs that die in droves, and a very fine line in the middle.

LTC B -> (6/18/2002 1:38:24 PM)
My Jpn subs have been next to useless and quite vulnerable since the patch. First 12 days of Aug '42, I've lost 5 subs sunk and two heavily damaged due to DD depth charges. In exchange, I've damaged a CA and sunk one DD. All in deep water off the Taivu Reef area. US ASW seems more deadly and Jpn torpedoes seem much more inaccurate since the patch.

Didz -> (6/18/2002 4:26:24 PM)
After expereincing the massacre of my surface ASW forces and my submarines in the first few games I started I changed my strategy for Submarine and ASW warfare. My submarines now never wandering into area's that might consist of shallow water and tend to be strung out along IJN supply routes where they clock up a steady though unimpressive tally of AG's and AP's. SS-43 is the only one lost so far in 7 months of play and this only because it wandered under the IJN Super CV TF on its way to patrol. Subs are also useful for discouraging IJN bombardment missions. If you can work out which hex they are assembling and extracting to, then placing 6 or more subs to occupy those hexes tends to stop them. My ASW forces are being used as soup kitchens in Noumea, as sending them out to get sunk merely increases the enemies score. I tried giving them extensive sea training in the hope of imporving their effectiveness but it made no noticeable difference. By comparison the IJN destroyers are lethal and I never attack a TF which I know to be escorted. In general the IJN subs have not been much trouble and I keep a few PYB's and reserve bomber squadrons on ASW patrol around Noumea and Townsville just to keep their heads down. So far I have sunk one IJN sub with an ASW patrol plane.

v.Manstein -> (6/18/2002 7:12:17 PM)
[B]I've seen similar stuff. I am playing as Japanese in a PBEM and the US subs are eating me alive. I am losing numerous minesweepers, PCs, and PGs to sub attacks. The US subs seem to be able to hit my PC and PG craft easily with torpedoes. To me, hitting these small, shallow-draft ships would be a LOT harder. [/B] Nice to hear that you like my sub attacks, Jamey.:D alex

rhohltjr -> ditto that.... (6/18/2002 8:17:40 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Didz [B] My ASW forces are being used as soup kitchens in Noumea, as sending them out to get sunk merely increases the enemies score. [/B][/QUOTE] What he said. Since the 1.10 patch, I at least have been able to spot the enemy submarines. Also since the 1.10 patch I have had to rename my ASW groups as "Torpedo and deck gun ammo catcher" fleets I suppose if the enemy subs sink enough of them it could restrict their ability to navigate? :eek:

kaleun -> (6/20/2002 2:43:49 AM)
:D At lats! Finally! My ASW airplanes bagged I-22 near noumea. The AAR was like this. I-22 and I-21 both patrolling south of Noumea hit a mine apiece. The reckless captain of I-22, attempting to rejoin his honorable ancestors then enters the harbor of Noumea where he is seen by a Dauntless that bombs and hits him. Several other planes see him, and some more attack him, but the pilots are so hamfisted, or drunk that they all miss. Eventually a Devastator, also on ASW sees him and, while throwing a bottle of Bud out the canopy, accidentaly trips the bomb release button, just as he was passing overhead, the bomb enters the open hatch of the conning tower, where the sub captain was sunning himself, and the submarine sinks for no apparent reason. Unfortunately, so did an SC an a DD the same sub hit two days earlier. The third DD limped into harbor with 55SD70FD and 20 Fire damage. :) K

Rex Bellator -> (6/21/2002 5:54:04 AM)
FWIW with patch 1.11 I just created a ASW TF 'Hunter Killer' group of three full size DDs and sent them after a pair of IJN Subs close to Noumea. Over the following 2 days all 3 were hit by their so called prey and limped back into port for due dispatch back to PH. I didn't hit any of the subs, in fact we only fired at them once. It does seem to me that ASW Task Forces should be renamed ABSW, Annihilated By Submarine Warfare. I'm pretty sure that DD's weren't slaughtered in this way, usually the submarine tried to avoid them at all costs. I don't advocate that ASW groups should necessarily be more effective, just less vulnerable. Can we have a penalty for Subs trying to engage ASW vessels?

mogami -> Daylight (6/21/2002 6:16:39 AM)
Hi, I was getting slightly annoyed by subs (both sides) coming into my ports and sinking transports by daylight surface attacks and then my escorts ignoring them. (as well as the asw aircraft) I have not seen them do this lately and in PBEM games am seeing subs (both sides ) sunk by asw air patrol and in one game the USN has sank 3 IJN subs with depth charge attacks (of course 2 DD were hit prior to these-the ASW sweep method seems to be DD's go to hex, sub attacks and hits one others sink sub) both DD made it back to port) The sub thing could just as easy be us all saying subs are too easy to sink and besides they never hit anything. I am learning to sweep probable sub hanngouts before sending transports there.

FirstPappy -> (6/21/2002 7:08:31 AM)
I've read a lot about ASW in this thread and in others. Specifically about the sinking or damage done mostly by subs againsts ASW ships but also vice-versa to a lesser extent. I haven't heard mention of suppression though. By this I mean if I put ASW with transport type ships I may not expect sub-ASW battles to occur but I think I would have some kind of expection to prevent subs from attacking the convoy. This would also be true for sub-hunting missions as well. Maybe the game needs to "tone-down" the chance of ASW/sub battles and instead institute more suppression type results where a concerted ASW effort doesn't result in either side receiving damage but results instead in some kind of suppression for that phase only. Suppression results would still be based upon the experience of the ASW units of course.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.25