Why Does it Seem? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

Titanwarrior89 -> Why Does it Seem? (12/17/2009 11:57:46 PM)

I am playing the allies(pbem). So why is it that every torpedo fired by my subs thats HITs anything "big"-such as a CA,large Ao, Ak or DD torpedo does not explode. But let it be a PB or something similiar - its a hit and it explodes. Please don't give me that FOG crap.

I hope some jap iron is going to the bottom besides these little Pbs and the such. But its Aug 42 and very little is changing. The allied subs are a joke, you might as well leave them in port instead of taking the losses.

I am sure my Japanese counter part has his own complaints with something being off. So what gives?



khyberbill -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 12:06:25 AM)

Until 1/43 the US sub torpedo dud rate is very high. Reduces in 1/43 and again in 9/43.



Shark7 -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 12:09:32 AM)

Being one who is on the receiving end of said torpedos...trust me, they do damage to the big ships too.



Gary D -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 12:21:17 AM)

I do not keep track of actual percentages but the allied torps felt fine to me pre patch. Not far along enough post patch to say one way or the other.

Some days I see hit hit hit hit, other days miss dud miss dud.

Being an airedale though, I would be perfectly happy if the Devs issued rubber torpedos to both sides! And tied string of tin cans full of marbles to the back of the sneaky sob's.

All the best,



Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 12:33:11 AM)

I understand that the dud rate is very high(to high I think) but what bothers me is -that in my game my torpedoes blow on the PBs but against anything else its a dud..... Why is it always the smaller vessels that you get a exploding torpedo. If its the FOW then why not show a Ak or DD once in a while on the replay. This has happened at least dozen plus times. I don't watch the replay if its not a pb or something similiar. I just look at the stats sheet. If its anything large than a PB, I already no the results.



Terminus -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 12:38:59 AM)

There is no "bias" of any sort, other than the high dud rate of the Mk 14 torpedo. Whether you hit the Yamato or the smallest auxiliary minesweeper is completely without importance.



Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 12:45:26 AM)

Is it possiable that you hit a Ak but shows a pb during the replay-due to the fow? I am asking a question, because I am not sure.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

There is no "bias" of any sort, other than the high dud rate of the Mk 14 torpedo. Whether you hit the Yamato or the smallest auxiliary minesweeper is completely without importance.




Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 12:46:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89

Is it possiable that you hit a Ak but shows a pb during the replay-due to the fow? I am asking a question, because I am not sure. Is there replay bias?
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

There is no "bias" of any sort, other than the high dud rate of the Mk 14 torpedo. Whether you hit the Yamato or the smallest auxiliary minesweeper is completely without importance.






Terminus -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 12:53:34 AM)

There's no "bias" of any sort. FoW can tell you all sorts of things, though, including mistaking an AK for a PB.



Nemo121 -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 1:12:45 AM)

Short answer: The game isn treating both sides equally.


Long answer: Your perception is a result of an egocentric cognitive bias which is common to all people and which, incorrectly, overemphasises one's own experience as a basis for generalisation.



stuman -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 1:38:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Short answer: The game isn treating both sides equally.


Long answer: Your perception is a result of an egocentric cognitive bias which is common to all people and which, incorrectly, overemphasises one's own experience as a basis for generalisation.


That is a lot of big words.

And I think the game is biased against me. It is constantly blowing up my ships, shooting down my planes, sinking my subs and trashing my troops. All of the time, without letup.



Nemo121 -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 2:04:26 AM)

*chuckle* Yeah, what he said [:D]



bradfordkay -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 3:45:51 AM)

Murphy's Law rules my life.

I recall Chez mentioning a similar complaint in our CHS game. In that game which ended in late Aug '44, we had two IJN CAs sunk by sub, one IJN CL sunk, five DDs,  one IJN BB and one IJN CV hit by sub torpedoes. I lost one CVE, six DDs and three DEs to subs. I don't recall any other capital ships of mine hit by subs.

What I am trying to get at is that in the eyes of the beholder, it never looks as good as you want it to. We had plenty of opportunities to attack larger vessels but the attacks failed. C'est la guerre. I don't think that there is a bias in the game against sub attacks on capital ships, but it sure feels like it when you watch the attacks fail!



Jim D Burns -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 4:08:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89

Is it possiable that you hit a Ak but shows a pb during the replay-due to the fow? I am asking a question, because I am not sure.



You’re in Aug 42, so a lot of the early fighting has been resolved as far as FoW is concerned and the actual ships sunk should now be in the ships sunk list. Sort by weapon type that sunk them and you'll get a good picture of how well the Mk 14 is doing against AKs in your game. Just be aware the last 3 months (I think its 3) can be total crap reporting due to FoW, so ignore those ships until Nov 42 to confirm them.

Jim



noguaranteeofsanity -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 6:19:34 AM)

I have runs of bad luck with the US subs, where every torpedo will fail and then just when you are wondering why you are even watching the combat animations and still paying attention, one will actually work and sink something important, like the Kaga, despite previously failing against every damn destroyer or whatever else they have come across. I think its basically just the luck of the dice and i dont think there is any bias.

Of course, if you want to avoid this, you dont have torpedo problems with the Dutch subs.



Mike Scholl -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 7:32:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: noguaranteeofsanity

I have runs of bad luck with the US subs, where every torpedo will fail and then just when you are wondering why you are even watching the combat animations and still paying attention, one will actually work and sink something important, like the Kaga, despite previously failing against every damn destroyer or whatever else they have come across. I think its basically just the luck of the dice and i dont think there is any bias.

Of course, if you want to avoid this, you dont have torpedo problems with the Dutch subs. Nor the British or the American S-Boats if the programming is accurate. I've found it best to use the American Fleet Boats for scouting and harrasment and leave the actual interdiction to the subs with working torpedoes.




cantona2 -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 8:47:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: khyberbill

Until 1/43 the US sub torpedo dud rate is very high. Reduces in 1/43 and again in 9/43.


Yes but i agree with the OP. It has happened very often in WitP as well. Plenty of hits and orange on Ak's and such but very little hit and orange on military ships. Ceratinly DD's get a lot of dud hits and everytime I have had a CV in my sights there has always been a dud hit.



vinnie71 -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 9:46:56 AM)

Use the large US subs to carry supplies to isolated garrisons and send out the S class boats who do not suffer the same penalties. Their dud rate is much lower...



Dixie -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 10:32:46 AM)

I've not sunk, or even damaged, any IJN ships larger than a destroyer in my game.  Mostly because the majority of targets are the transport ships.

It feels like a conspiracy, but that's because you want to sink those warships more than the transports so the duds are more obvious.



HansBolter -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 11:17:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cantona2


quote:

ORIGINAL: khyberbill

Until 1/43 the US sub torpedo dud rate is very high. Reduces in 1/43 and again in 9/43.


everytime I have had a CV in my sights there has always been a dud hit.



Exactly HOW high? My personal experience, which I am certain I will be reminded by the hair splitters represents an insufficient number of iterations to be an accurate representation, but nonetheless STILL represents my experience, has seen 90%+ dud rates for the Allies while the Japanese sub commanders, unrestricted by historical Japanese Sub Doctrine (conveniently omitted from AE by those same devs who constantly claim there is no Japanese bias) slaughter the Allied transports.

Until I see the devs replace the toggle for Japanese Sub Doctrine in patch 3 , I will not believe their claims that there is no bias nor will I use the setting for Allied dud torpodoes, which my personal experience shows to be excessive.

This is what you get when you turn off the dud rate:



[image]local://upfiles/21458/39C4B27ADD3B4215A92AEC76D595AC9C.jpg[/image]


p.s. Turning off the dud rate does not mean no duds at all. It drops the rate to arround 5%. I still get duds with both submarine and air launched torpodoes.



Brigs -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 11:31:24 AM)

quote:

Exactly HOW high?


For the first eighteen months of the war, the dud rate for US torpedos was just over 70 %.






castor troy -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 12:37:06 PM)

what you shouldn´t forget is that while the dud rate of the torps is 90% this doesn´t mean you need 10 attacks to score one exploding torp. In fact you need far fewer. My guess would be 4 and the next one makes boom. Why? Because the subs don´t only fire one torp but 2, 4 or many times 6 in a salvo.



noguaranteeofsanity -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 1:13:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: cantona2


quote:

ORIGINAL: khyberbill

Until 1/43 the US sub torpedo dud rate is very high. Reduces in 1/43 and again in 9/43.


everytime I have had a CV in my sights there has always been a dud hit.



Exactly HOW high? My personal experience, which I am certain I will be reminded by the hair splitters represents an insufficient number of iterations to be an accurate representation, but nonetheless STILL represents my experience, has seen 90%+ dud rates for the Allies while the Japanese sub commanders, unrestricted by historical Japanese Sub Doctrine (conveniently omitted from AE by those same devs who constantly claim there is no Japanese bias) slaughter the Allied transports.

Until I see the devs replace the toggle for Japanese Sub Doctrine in patch 3 , I will not believe their claims that there is no bias nor will I use the setting for Allied dud torpodoes, which my personal experience shows to be excessive.

This is what you get when you turn off the dud rate:



p.s. Turning off the dud rate does not mean no duds at all. It drops the rate to arround 5%. I still get duds with both submarine and air launched torpodoes.


I would agree the dud rate is probably around 90 percent, just from guesstimates and observation, at the very least it would have to be 75 percent. Which is fairly accurate from what i have read about their historical dud rate.

Anyway, with those odds, it means you have approximately a 1 in 10 chance of the torpedo working IF it hits the target, with the chance of two torpedos working, then being 1 in 100 and so on. So, it is almost impossible to have one torpedo work, let alone have it occur repeatedly and you are almost certain to have many misses with only a rare success. Basically it means a lot of unlucky streaks and 'bad luck' for the US fleet subs.

Anyway my point is, it isnt bias, its just the luck of the draw. Its the same old complaint people have had forever with games of chance and why casinos make so much money.

My dutch subs got Kaga in the Java sea when the KB turned up in early 42, despite missing everything else. It just shows one off results, dont really indicate anything and its basically random luck.



cantona2 -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 1:15:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: cantona2


quote:

ORIGINAL: khyberbill

Until 1/43 the US sub torpedo dud rate is very high. Reduces in 1/43 and again in 9/43.


everytime I have had a CV in my sights there has always been a dud hit.




This is what you get when you turn off the dud rate:



[image]local://upfiles/21458/39C4B27ADD3B4215A92AEC76D595AC9C.jpg[/image]


p.s. Turning off the dud rate does not mean no duds at all. It drops the rate to arround 5%. I still get duds with both submarine and air launched torpodoes.


I still think that the dud rate should be in as it was in RL. Its just very frustating to score hit after hit on PB and AM classes but very little orange hits on more meaningful targets.



castor troy -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 1:22:32 PM)

even with the dud rates on, IMO the submarine force (especially the Allied with those huge numbers) will be able to wreck more havoc in AE than in real life.



Sardaukar -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 1:26:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: noguaranteeofsanity

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: cantona2


quote:

ORIGINAL: khyberbill

Until 1/43 the US sub torpedo dud rate is very high. Reduces in 1/43 and again in 9/43.


everytime I have had a CV in my sights there has always been a dud hit.



Exactly HOW high? My personal experience, which I am certain I will be reminded by the hair splitters represents an insufficient number of iterations to be an accurate representation, but nonetheless STILL represents my experience, has seen 90%+ dud rates for the Allies while the Japanese sub commanders, unrestricted by historical Japanese Sub Doctrine (conveniently omitted from AE by those same devs who constantly claim there is no Japanese bias) slaughter the Allied transports.

Until I see the devs replace the toggle for Japanese Sub Doctrine in patch 3 , I will not believe their claims that there is no bias nor will I use the setting for Allied dud torpodoes, which my personal experience shows to be excessive.

This is what you get when you turn off the dud rate:



p.s. Turning off the dud rate does not mean no duds at all. It drops the rate to arround 5%. I still get duds with both submarine and air launched torpodoes.


I would agree the dud rate is probably around 90 percent, just from guesstimates and observation, at the very least it would have to be 75 percent. Which is fairly accurate from what i have read about their historical dud rate.

Anyway, with those odds, it means you have approximately a 1 in 10 chance of the torpedo working IF it hits the target, with the chance of two torpedos working, then being 1 in 100 and so on. So, it is almost impossible to have one torpedo work, let alone have it occur repeatedly and you are almost certain to have many misses with only a rare success. Basically it means a lot of unlucky streaks and 'bad luck' for the US fleet subs.

Anyway my point is, it isnt bias, its just the luck of the draw. Its the same old complaint people have had forever with games of chance and why casinos make so much money.

My dutch subs got Kaga in the Java sea when the KB turned up in early 42, despite missing everything else. It just shows one off results, dont really indicate anything and its basically random luck.



You don't have to guess the dud rate, it can all be seen in editor (with adjustments seen in manual). IIRC, for Mk 14 it is 80% before 1/1/43, 60% after that and it drops to normal 10% in September 1943.



Nomad -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 1:26:57 PM)

There is one solution to this, open the editor and change things the way you want and play away.



xj900uk -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 1:37:56 PM)

I appear to have had at least one fish exploded when it hit the bow-wave of it's intended target - anyone else encounter this result (quite possibly in RL, I agree)
Also in the south PI had one of my S-class subs shoot at a DD and somehow manage to hit a BB.  Fortunately at least one fish exploded sending up a very impressive-looking water-spout...



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 1:45:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Offworlder

Use the large US subs to carry supplies to isolated garrisons and send out the S class boats who do not suffer the same penalties. Their dud rate is much lower...

In my opinion this is a poor strategy and reflects some AE players' aversion to banging up their shiny new toys. Even with the dud rate, fleet boats sink MANY merchants in 1942 if used aggressively. I probably sank roughly 70-100 at the cost of about seven losses. Those Japanese AKs represent hundreds of thousands of HI points that won't be produced in 1943-1946, Japanese garrisons that won't be resupplied, resources that will rot in the DEI. Ignoring VPs, I'd almost trade a sub for a large AK in 1942, and I certainly would for two AKs. Strangle the Japanese merchant marine and you win the war. It's that simple. It's what the USN actually did in RL. Stop babying your subs. Set reaction ranges on 6, give them aggressive COs, large patrol zones, and let them hunt. You'll lose some, but war is hell.

Steel Boats, Iron Men![:)]



Sardaukar -> RE: Why Does it Seem? (12/18/2009 1:50:23 PM)

What Bullwinkle58 said. Even with dud rate of 80%, it is not that rare for USN fleet boats to sink several ships in week, sometimes with rate 1/day if all subs are utilized.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.28125