Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (Full Version)

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



Message

jackyo123 -> Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/24/2009 5:27:51 PM)

I've only gotten as far as late 1942 in my ai (and summer 42 in my pbem games), but have found that japanese historical submarine performance is far different than it was IRL.

To date - my allied forces, in my ai game (Nov 42), have sunk 2 japanese subs (1 to mines, 1 to DD) and damaged a known 14 others. This compares to RL count of 11 japanese submarines sunk in 1942. My ASW forces are aggressive - I've basically got my entire west coast of US and Australia forces running ASW missions; all my local minesweepers and PT boats are also running patrols, and my fighters on the us west coast are all set to naval attack at 100ft. Arcs have been carefully set, and all LRB from pearl and us, nz and oz, are running ASW patrols at 5,6, and 8k feet. So my dispositions are probably considerably higher than in RL.

In my PBEM game, summer 42, I have 3 subs sunk, but my opponent uses his subs very aggressively along my SLOC's and has ventured several times right into my ports.

either way, ASW effectiveness seems a bit low - I think the problem is that depth charges are underpowered, or the code for them is not working correctly. I've taken 3, 4 DC hits and saved my subs easily. Also, I don't think I've managed to force a single japanese sub to the surface.

Compare the 2 or 3 losses to the historical losses of 11 for 1942.

Here are the historical japanese sub losses:
Japanese losses in 1942 (11 sunk):
http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/japanese_submarines.htm

Overall for entire war : (129 sunk)
http://www.ahoy.tk-jk.net/Underwater/30Statistics-SubmarineFle.html



On the allied sub side:

My sub losses have been:

2 sunk (1 from merchant ship gunfire - seems post 1096 the subs fire their torps and then immediately surfact to get into gun duels, and often get damaged), 1 from escort vessel.

14 damaged, mixture of causes, majority from merchant ship gunfire (very ahistorical, but what can you do? ;>)


IRL - US sub losses w/ detailed causes:
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/rep/WDR/WDR58/WDR58-II.html



What are other folks finding? The offensive punch of the US subs seems about right post 1096 - they fire lots of torps, but very few are resulting in combat hits. The japanese subs go after merchies more than they did IRL, which ultimately helps the allied player (I would much rather lose 20 merchies than one of my carriers in 1942) but my ASW should be sinking more of them.






stuman -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/24/2009 6:24:51 PM)

First of all, thank you for not starting this off with a " Subs Suck in the Game " header [:)]

As far as game experience ( against the Allied AI, post patch 2 ) I would say that the Allied subs behave in what I think of as a historical manner, attacks on all types of ships, but with a lot of duds ( I am midway through '42 ). I use my Jap. subs fairly aggressively against Allied shipping, and have decent results ; Allies have lost 250 ships, I have lost 130. ASW is not deadly yet for either side. My ASW seems to be more about running Allied subs off than actually sinking them.

I checked, and about 40 ships have been sunk by Torps, maybe half US torps vs half for the other Allies ( 20 of my total losses have been midget subs, but that is another story. I am a bit hard headed at times [:)] ).

Another 30 of my loses have been PBs, destroyers of all types, SCs, Es etc and 10 of the 30 have been sunk by subs.

So 40 ships sunk by torps, 10 of those were escort type ships. About 6 months total game time, about half of that game time is post patch two. And at a glance I would say that half of the US torp sinkings have been in the month of May, post patch 2. I really do not know if any of this helps [:)]



sfbaytf -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/24/2009 6:39:07 PM)

If IJN sub doctrine is off and your opponent choses to do so you will face a very difficult situation from 41-mid 43 and beyond. US Navy ASW is weak and your inexperienced captains are not persistent in pursuing contacts. Everything is at risk.

British ASW is good and will hunt down subs aggresively.

If you refit your ships-especially ASW type-DD's AM's...they will eventually get better. When you start getting newer DD"s, things will begin to even out by mid- to late 43, even so your ships will still be at risk, I recently had a BB hit that was heavely screened and in air ASW cover range.

I've had numerous occasions where I depth charged IJN subs to the surface and they continue to shoot torpedoes and duel it out with their deck guns....I'm pretty sure my opponent is spending PP's to put good commanders in his subs and if so, don't know if this is why they are doing so.

I would suggest the air ASW cover range be re-examined. Is halving it realistic? I would argue that if that were so the air gap in the mid atlantic would have never been closed.

There are other things you can do to combat the sub threat, but my opponent is probably lurking so I'll have to apply the loose lips sink ships rule.



Canoerebel -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/24/2009 7:06:42 PM)

I've just reached December 1942 in my PBEM game.  I've related my concerns about sub warfare both in my AAR and in a thread called "Nuclear Subs" that's probably fallen down to page two or three now.  The recent Hot Fix seems to have toned down the lethal nature of subs against ASW (at least Allied ASW, I can't speak for the other side), but I still have concerns about the nature and balance of submarine warfare based upon a "year" of experience:

1.  Submarines (at least Japanese submarines) are able to operate too close to major Allied bases with near impunity.  ASW TFs and air patrols are not effective in attacking or suppressing enemy submarines. 

2.  ASW ships are nearly worthless at prosecuting attacks against enemy subs - at least in late '42.  I frequently sight subs and my ASW occasionally attacks, but those attacks seldom result in any hits.  I think ASW ought to be more effective - at least against submarines operating close to major bases where they are sighted.

3.  I think ships are too brittle.  I've lost several hundred ships to subs in my game - no, that's not an exaggeration - and the vast majority went down after a single TT strike.  I know single torpedoes can cripple or sink large ships, but quite often ships proved remarkably durable.  This is especially true with respect to TK and AO.  Those ships were pretty tough to sink, but mine take one TT and they go under.  I even think AKs are too brittle - I think 98% of my AKs hit by a single TT go under, inlcuding those docked and at port (with the commander dying in every case - poor guy is always in the way of the explosion or else can't run down the gangplank or swim to shore).

4.  It ought to be nearly impossible to hit a moving destroyer.  They were almost never hit in the real war for good reason:  they're nimble and fast.  The recent Hot Fix addressed this, but I lost another post-Hot Fix and it was in an ASW TF returning to port.  Not saying DDs should be immune, but I get the sense after twelve months of game play that they are targeted far too often.

If I'm right and if tweaks are made it should benefit both sides in the game - it will tone down submarine effectiveness somewhat, which probably will benefit the Japanese more than the Allies. 



Ametysth -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/24/2009 7:09:20 PM)

Japanese players, AI included, are not using submarines in historical manner, which is I see as a big reason why there isn't too many of them sinking. After all, most IJN subs were lost when taking part in fleet operations or supporting them. This is why real life IJN lost more subs to fleet escorts, carrier aircraft and even to US subs than to convoy escorts.

On the other hand, if AI or IJN human player starts to use their subs like Germans did (which most, including the AI, seem to do) results are the same in Pacific as they were in Atlantic. Unless Allied player devotes huge resourses to convoys, including hunter-killer groups, ASW carriers and patrol planes, he is going to be in world of hurt. Interestingly most players seem to imitate Admiral King; Not wanting to institute convoys they send individual ships out on their own. End result in real life Atlantic were a disaster. Of course when Admiral King lost 2 ships a day in US East Coast during what Germans called "Second happy hunting times." despite all the planes and coastal crafts he sent to seek out the U-boats, he didn't have luxury of complaining about the "coding".



sfbaytf -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/24/2009 7:25:37 PM)

It will be interesting to see how your PBEM game goes when mid 43 rolls around. I agree that in 42 your DD's commanders are NOT aggressive in hunting down subs. They detect, then take off without attacking or after rollling a few depth charges.

By mid 43, I'm finding that the newer DD's and commanders will aggresively hunt down subs and are more persistant. If they are NOT in ASW operational mode, they may not be as aggressive-not too sure about this, but from what I've seen that seems to be the case.

Air ASW isn't very effective in attacking subs. It will detect some subs though and I usually end up sending ASW TFs to hunt them down. I haven't seen many air attacks against subs.

I agree any AO or AK hit is going down with 1 hit as is any ship smaller than a CA. I've lost a BB that took numerous hits and many others that had to spend weeks and months getting repaired. Ditto for the CV's that got pinged. Also lost a CVE to the marading subs.

Convoy or not, hunter killer ASW groups or not. If your IJN opponent uses his subs aggresively, you're going to be facing serious losses in 41 and 42. The US ASW is weak. If you aggresively hunt down subs the losses should begin to trend down in 43, but you're still going to take losses.



sfbaytf -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/24/2009 7:34:46 PM)

Ametysth-have you actually tried this in a PBEM game against an opponent aggresively using subs? I devoted over 50% to ASW in the 41-42 period and it was ineffective. My DD's would not aggresively pursue subs and the air ASW was equally ineffective. I had B-17's on ASW patrol as well as other planes-which had limited range, which was cut in half by the ASW search range rule. That left huge gaps in coverage.

The only effective ASW asset was British DD's. They had aggresive and persistant commanders and more importanly didn't run out of depth charges after a few attacks.

I used escorted convoys. If the subs came across them ships got lost. Carriers that were heavely screened also got pinged
as well as other ships.

Not saying the system is broken, just stating what I experienced.



jackyo123 -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/25/2009 3:29:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I've just reached December 1942 in my PBEM game.  I've related my concerns about sub warfare both in my AAR and in a thread called "Nuclear Subs" that's probably fallen down to page two or three now.  The recent Hot Fix seems to have toned down the lethal nature of subs against ASW (at least Allied ASW, I can't speak for the other side), but I still have concerns about the nature and balance of submarine warfare based upon a "year" of experience:

1.  Submarines (at least Japanese submarines) are able to operate too close to major Allied bases with near impunity.  ASW TFs and air patrols are not effective in attacking or suppressing enemy submarines. 

2.  ASW ships are nearly worthless at prosecuting attacks against enemy subs - at least in late '42.  I frequently sight subs and my ASW occasionally attacks, but those attacks seldom result in any hits.  I think ASW ought to be more effective - at least against submarines operating close to major bases where they are sighted.

3.  I think ships are too brittle.  I've lost several hundred ships to subs in my game - no, that's not an exaggeration - and the vast majority went down after a single TT strike.  I know single torpedoes can cripple or sink large ships, but quite often ships proved remarkably durable.  This is especially true with respect to TK and AO.  Those ships were pretty tough to sink, but mine take one TT and they go under.  I even think AKs are too brittle - I think 98% of my AKs hit by a single TT go under, inlcuding those docked and at port (with the commander dying in every case - poor guy is always in the way of the explosion or else can't run down the gangplank or swim to shore).

4.  It ought to be nearly impossible to hit a moving destroyer.  They were almost never hit in the real war for good reason:  they're nimble and fast.  The recent Hot Fix addressed this, but I lost another post-Hot Fix and it was in an ASW TF returning to port.  Not saying DDs should be immune, but I get the sense after twelve months of game play that they are targeted far too often.

If I'm right and if tweaks are made it should benefit both sides in the game - it will tone down submarine effectiveness somewhat, which probably will benefit the Japanese more than the Allies. 




I completely agree with you about #1; air patrols are weak, though admiteddly my asw units only have about 50 to 55 exp, with asw ratings in the 30's, for the most part. Catalinas set to 3000ft on asw missions with 60+ experience do occassionally hit subs. But they never sink them. In 12 months of play, ive not had a single enemy sub killed by air attack, despite having all my bombers and patrol aircraft running ASW (i dont really need my LRB for offensive operations until late 42, and i vre come to realize that unless its a perfectly clear sky and my forces have experience of at least 65, that my lrb's will almost never hit ships - even stationary ones unloading - that its useless to train them on naval attack. I leave that for the dive bombers).

Re: #2 - worthless is too much of an overstatement; their main problem is that DC's dont do enough damage. Even a few near misses on a DC were usually enough to rattle the sub and force it to the surface, where ramming often took place. In one famous incident, a PT boat rammed, twice, a much larger japanese (s class?) sub in the sopac and was able to 'roll it over' and it sank. The PT boat flushed it to the surface, used its guns when it came up, and rammed it until dead.) I would think a 25% to 35% increase in DC strength would do the trick.

#3 - not sure. Many many merchies went to the bottom after a single torp hit, esp if it was heavily loaded or was carrying combustible war materials. Certainly some of the bigger ships, such as tankers, should be able to absorb a couple of hits - but i think they do. I've had several tankers limp into port with 75/75/75 damage ratingd.

#4 - completely agree. DD's that are actively hunting for subs on asw missions or acting as escorts on transport/ambhib/escort missions should have less than a 1% chance of being hit. They were too nimble.



Admiral Scott -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/25/2009 5:02:02 PM)

I really think the durability rating for subs should be reduced slightly in the next patch.
I'm surprised it hasnt been done already.



witpqs -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/25/2009 5:20:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: stuman

First of all, thank you for not starting this off with a " Subs Suck in the Game " header [:)]



Ditto! [:)]



freeboy -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/25/2009 7:59:37 PM)

ok, subs are AWESOME, they sink ships, Both sides have the ability , with non historical or reliable torps , to hurt the enemy! I hope the pbem foes run out of fat merchies before I do... I actaually have so many merchants it seems they just go on forever! Eventually the micro need to race around chichen without head will wend and an orderly process of advance will emerge from my routing KAOS, enabling a more efficient use of the all too few DD de assets, or , we will just continue to amass a huge list of sunking merchies and run low of transport at the end of the war. I hoep the asw of the Allies greatly improves, and I noticed in the late 42 early 43 guad mini that asw seems more effective against the little Jap sub horror![X(][:-][:-]



spence -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/25/2009 11:03:41 PM)

Quite a few IJN subs were ambushed by USN subs which had been directed to intercept them and provided with the specific position, course, speed and time information that made it more than likely the USN sub would succeed. Doesn't happen in WitP.

One huge and ahistoric advantage enjoyed by the IJN submarines is their use of the GLEN for air search in their vicinity in the game. It was not used in such a fashion but only for scouting missions in the vicinity of major Allied harbors. It was not sturdy enough and submarine maintenance facilities were not adequate enough for near continuous take-offs and landings on the high seas. For one thing corrosion by salt water was inevitably going to be a major problem as the submarine could not make enough fresh water for wash-downs of the aircraft. Subs of all nations barely had enough distilling/storage capacity to provide minimal drinking/cooking water for the crew.


Submarine aircraft carriers was a fashionable idea for a while in many navies but was discarded as not a very practical one by everyone except the Japanese. The game seems to over-indulge the usefulness of this particular fantasy.



Mac Linehan -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/25/2009 11:51:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

ok, subs are AWESOME, they sink ships, Both sides have the ability , with non historical or reliable torps , to hurt the enemy! I hope the pbem foes run out of fat merchies before I do... I actaually have so many merchants it seems they just go on forever! Eventually the micro need to race around chichen without head will wend and an orderly process of advance will emerge from my routing KAOS, enabling a more efficient use of the all too few DD de assets, or , we will just continue to amass a huge list of sunking merchies and run low of transport at the end of the war. I hoep the asw of the Allies greatly improves, and I noticed in the late 42 early 43 guad mini that asw seems more effective against the little Jap sub horror![X(][:-][:-]


As the Imperialist freeboy's Japanese opponent (yes Yankee Boy - this is a freebee) I can attest to the effectiveness of Allied ASW. However, my experiece is limited to the following encounters:

> Non merchant TFs that are escorted, ie an APD with one or two DD's

>Have tried, but have had no success to react to a Carrier TF - probably for the best (see below)

>Surf Combat TF well escorted

I have three Subs that have enough Flotation / Engine / Major damage to cause return to Base. Of the four most recent encounters, my Sub TF with, as best I can determine, low to no detection levels (prior to turn execution) have taken a beating. By beating I mean eight to 15 hits each. Am not sure how many hits are required for sinking, suspect I will eventually find out.

On the other hand, I knew that Alled ASW was good; normal preference is to go after merchant convoys, with a higher expectation of success (as other posters have pointed out). However, with a CV TF hanging around Luna Point, it was well worth the risk.

This is my first real attempt to play; feel that I am not really qualified to comment vs a vs the effectiveness of AE ASW until many more turns (months of play?) have gone by.

Regardless, the more I play and learn the more I marvel at the intricacies of this awesome game.

Mac





Sheytan -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/26/2009 12:14:42 AM)

I actually was very curious about this for some time. Thanks for the info. I had suspected the IJN float planes on subs were just a wee bit more effective then they were in reality.

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

Quite a few IJN subs were ambushed by USN subs which had been directed to intercept them and provided with the specific position, course, speed and time information that made it more than likely the USN sub would succeed. Doesn't happen in WitP.

One huge and ahistoric advantage enjoyed by the IJN submarines is their use of the GLEN for air search in their vicinity in the game. It was not used in such a fashion but only for scouting missions in the vicinity of major Allied harbors. It was not sturdy enough and submarine maintenance facilities were not adequate enough for near continuous take-offs and landings on the high seas. For one thing corrosion by salt water was inevitably going to be a major problem as the submarine could not make enough fresh water for wash-downs of the aircraft. Subs of all nations barely had enough distilling/storage capacity to provide minimal drinking/cooking water for the crew.


Submarine aircraft carriers was a fashionable idea for a while in many navies but was discarded as not a very practical one by everyone except the Japanese. The game seems to over-indulge the usefulness of this particular fantasy.




Boozecamp -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/26/2009 5:31:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral Scott

I really think the durability rating for subs should be reduced slightly in the next patch.
I'm surprised it hasnt been done already.



I concur... my subs seem to be able to absorb a couple direct DC hits with only moderate damage. Bomb hits are similarly weak. Compared to regular old WITP, AE subs are good deal harder to sink.



von Beanie -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/26/2009 6:53:16 AM)

I've got two PBEM games going on, and am playing both sides. Allied ASW isn't ineffective, and can force the Jap subs to keep their distance from major ports if the ASW campaign is executed correctly. Heavily escorted AKL task forces can work wonders, just like fishing with a good lure.

Recently, my biggest concern is that Japanese ASW has somehow become ineffective after the latest patch(es). Right now I have an enemy Allied sub hanging out in Truk lagoon with dedicated air units and 3 ASW task forces hunting him each turn, and they don't seem to even want to attack him. My best strategy seems to involve giving him worthless targets for his dud torpedoes and run him out of ammuniation because the Jap ASW isn't working right. A couple of months ago I thought the effectiveness of Jap ASW in shallow water was just fine, but recently the Allied subs have been surrounding each port just like the Japs have regularly done, and I can't seem to find an effective countermeasure.



witpqs -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/26/2009 4:23:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: von Beanie

I've got two PBEM games going on, and am playing both sides. Allied ASW isn't ineffective, and can force the Jap subs to keep their distance from major ports if the ASW campaign is executed correctly. Heavily escorted AKL task forces can work wonders, just like fishing with a good lure.

Recently, my biggest concern is that Japanese ASW has somehow become ineffective after the latest patch(es). Right now I have an enemy Allied sub hanging out in Truk lagoon with dedicated air units and 3 ASW task forces hunting him each turn, and they don't seem to even want to attack him. My best strategy seems to involve giving him worthless targets for his dud torpedoes and run him out of ammuniation because the Jap ASW isn't working right. A couple of months ago I thought the effectiveness of Jap ASW in shallow water was just fine, but recently the Allied subs have been surrounding each port just like the Japs have regularly done, and I can't seem to find an effective countermeasure.


What date is that CG up to?



von Beanie -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/26/2009 9:18:23 PM)

This Japanese game is on Feb 28, 1942, and my allied game is in the first week of March, 1942. My latest patch update came out the week before Xmas.



jackyo123 -> RE: Japanese / Allied RL and AE Submarine Ops ques (12/29/2009 11:04:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: von Beanie

I've got two PBEM games going on, and am playing both sides. Allied ASW isn't ineffective, and can force the Jap subs to keep their distance from major ports if the ASW campaign is executed correctly. Heavily escorted AKL task forces can work wonders, just like fishing with a good lure.

Recently, my biggest concern is that Japanese ASW has somehow become ineffective after the latest patch(es). Right now I have an enemy Allied sub hanging out in Truk lagoon with dedicated air units and 3 ASW task forces hunting him each turn, and they don't seem to even want to attack him. My best strategy seems to involve giving him worthless targets for his dud torpedoes and run him out of ammuniation because the Jap ASW isn't working right. A couple of months ago I thought the effectiveness of Jap ASW in shallow water was just fine, but recently the Allied subs have been surrounding each port just like the Japs have regularly done, and I can't seem to find an effective countermeasure.


What date is that CG up to?



interesting. i am finding the japanese asw post 1096 hotfix 2 to actually be more ffetive than i can ever recall before.

problem of successful DC attacks not doing enough damage still persists though. ive taken several hits (in one case, 10 hits) but only lost one sub, to a mine.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.6710205