SC vs IJN Sub

SC vs IJN Sub (Full Version)

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

Message

svhrg -> SC vs IJN Sub (8/25/2002 11:20:52 PM)
Ok, as far as I can tell SC's only purpose in the game are as target practice for IJN Subs. I had a convoy of 3 SC's (granted experience level was only 55) hunting 1 IJN sub (same hex). Three days go by and no more SC's - sub sank one SC per day without the SC's even getting off one shot at the sub. What experience level do the SC's need to attain before they can react to a sub? Also, would be nice to have a system that let's you know when a TF is low/critical on fuel. So many times I have my sub or other TFs sitting in the middle of the ocean with no fuel or ammo remaining. I know, retirement allowed would solve this, but I prefer not to use retirement allowed in many circumstances. How are other players dealing with this issue? Also, any word on a future patch that might address this fuel issue and maybe have the TF icon change color or blink when fuel/ammo levels get critical? R

siRkid -> (8/26/2002 5:24:31 AM)
Here is a suggestion I made about 6 months ago. As far as I can tell Matrix does not see the fuel issue as a big problem and there are no plans to change it. 8. If a TF has been assigned “Patrol do not retreat” orders and it is nearing the point where it will not have enough fuel to get back to port, have the TF commander request permission to return to port. The pop-up box would have a granted and denied button. If denied, it should not show up again.

ReDDoN45 -> (8/26/2002 5:32:44 AM)
mix SCs and DDs... helps lot. Never send out only rookies. Mix rookies with veterans and you should get better results. Check ratio between escort and cargo ships... should be reasonable for expected resistance. Try to air cover the whole path of a convoy with ASW. Say you are moving a convoy from Noumea to Guadlacanal. first the plane from Noumea fly ASW than the Espiritu Santo guys take over, then you NEED another base to fly ASW coverand then you are at Lunga. THis helps lot... though don´t expect miracles. First you can avoid spotted sub contacts and second I think you get a combat bonus for ASW of that TF is sub has been previously spotted. At least I´ve got the impression THis is the good thing in this game: When you think and act like a real commander you will get rewarded with reality! ;)

Luskan -> Super ASW Group (8/26/2002 7:17:09 AM)
As the USN, I find the most effective way (aside from having squadrons and squadrons of dauntlesses on ASW at 1000ft) is to have catalinas searching for subs. When they show up, Put every little ship with depth charges into a surface combat group and send them off to war. I started with about 18 sub chasers, 4 DMS destroyers, a dm destroyer (only useful near Noumea) and the odd DD or APD. Set them to do not retire and order them out to the sub sighting. Even if the sub has moved on, they should get there fast enough to tempt the sub into coming back. Return to port to refuel and go straight back out. Sure, the first three months are all sinking SC's, and those I boats often snag a destroyer or two - but after that you cream them. Also, laying a few mines with your DL in a just sighted hex (doesn't need to be a bottle neck or shallow water) and you sometimes get pretty instant results.

ReDDoN45 -> (8/26/2002 8:19:34 AM)
DMS´ are converted Wickes class Destroyes... they are minesweepers and you shouldn´t use them for sub hunting... smae for DMs. WW2 has shown that offenive Destroyer patrols are not effective, so don´t try it in UV. Perhaps it even works a bit in UV, but I doubt that it will in WiTP, so better don´t get used to that way of hunting subs. Best for destroying subs (or the German Luftwaffe) was to build a Magnet for them (U-boats or B-17s) and then lure them in and slaughter them with massive ASW of AVs, CVEs, as well as DDs, DEs and SCs. Hunting for them isn´t very effective except hunter killer groups. Or Sun Tzhu: Lure the enemy on your battlefield - don´t fight on his´. I am not a big fan of those "everywhere proposed 1000 feet ASW". I´ve got quite poor results at that altitude compered with 5000-9000. Imagine how difficult it is spotting a sub when you fly so low and can only cover such a limited air space with your eyes from that alt. Too high isn´t good either... targets too small. The advantege for 1000 ASW is once a sub is detected the chance of a successfull attack is high. On the other hand ASW on 5000-10000 spots far more and can even be used in double role for naval search (esp. for the japs), while 1000 ASW isn´t good. for that. Besides, Divebombers don´t like to attack from 1000. They like to dive on their target, so give them at least 8000. I once sank 3 S-class submarines with Val bombers on 9000 ASW in one day. Important for successfull ASW is good experience. Air units with less than 70 have barely a chance of killing a sub.... except you set them very low (the proposed 1000), but than they spot almost nothing. You are the commander - so decide and command ;)

Luskan -> (8/26/2002 4:41:01 PM)
I thought all divebombers in the game did divebomb from 1000ft, regardless of what their altitude was set? Take your point about spotting subs at 1000 feet though. USN needs to use those DMS in an ASW role for two reasons. 1: there are loads of minesweepers for the USN at the start, but very few japanese mines (unless you try to sweep Rabaul or Shortlands?) whereas there is a distinct lack of DD's and DE's (and aircraft for that) with ASW capability to spare!

ReDDoN45 -> (8/26/2002 6:36:48 PM)
lol of course - as a makeshift solution they are OK - but don´t waste your precious DMs on that duty. I doubt that this tactic will work against a competent IJN player. Divebombers caan only bomb from AT LEAST 8000. This is the minumum. They can´t spot a sub at 1000 then climb up 9 minutes to 8k or 9k and dive then. I really would use Divebombers for higher alts. I´ve tried using aircraft on 1000 about 25 days. Very possr results for my elite G3Ms and H6Ks. One thing which really makes me think is make better use of the range. ASW cuts range to half. planes with short range... even carrier planes suffer dramatially from that. I considered setting them on naval search or naval attack with 100% search, because sometimes my Vals 20% on Naval search attacked plenty of subs. I will still evaluate this, but it might be a better idea for such short ranged a/cs like the F1M2 or the Seagull

Luskan -> (8/26/2002 7:06:16 PM)
If I was a dive bomber pilot, I'd dive bomb from 6 or 7k - but the manual says, on page 82, section 11.11: "Dive bombers and fighter bombers always automatically dive down to 1000ft to release their bombs" Does that mean they're diving to 1000ft, then diving on the target and releasing, or just diving from way up high and letting go of hte bombs at 1000ft before pulling out of the dive etc?

Sonny -> (8/26/2002 8:40:19 PM)
Releasing their bombs at 1000 ft.:)

fvianello -> Tactics apart, UV sub warfare is messed up (8/26/2002 9:12:02 PM)
I've read some stats about the sub war and the facts are (referred to the whole war): - Japan lost 120-130 subs; estimated 70 to ships, 19 to subs, 18 to aircrafts, rest from misc. causes. - Japan subs sunk 180 merchant ships - Japan subs sunk 14 combat ships (2 Aircraft Carriers, 2 Cruisers, and 10 Destroyers) In UV, you'll probably end up with a lot of US DD sunk, almost no subs hit from DD and maybe 5-10 lucky hits from airplanes if you really commit your air in a ASW role. :confused:

Drongo -> (8/26/2002 10:47:48 PM)
Posted by Luskan. [QUOTE]Does that mean they're diving to 1000ft, then diving on the target and releasing, or just diving from way up high and letting go of hte bombs at 1000ft before pulling out of the dive etc?[/QUOTE] Sonny is right about them releasing at 1000ft. If they started their dive from 1000ft, they'd be known as Kamikazes;) .

ReDDoN45 -> (8/26/2002 11:36:23 PM)
Many people end with a lot of DD sunk, becasue the try to make offensive patrols with DDs... NO GOOD IDEA. Let them come to your Convoys... let them sink one MC or two and then kill em with the escorts of 4 SCs and 4 DDs..... 2 MCS for 1 Sub is an excellent ratio for the time frame in UV. ASW isn´t that messed up. Perhaps even attack your convoy an extra surface fleet of DDs and a few AVs/CS/CVEs. Subs aren´t that lethal when you take them serious. The real losses for the Jap sub fleet began in 44, before that they were acceptable (but not low) When you get slaughtered, it´s not allways game´s fault!

doomonyou -> IMHO the sub vs. asw ship thing in this game is total BS (8/27/2002 12:17:50 AM)
Having now extensively played both sides, the penchant that subs have on BOTH sides to attack and kill SWARMING ASW ships is so stupid that it makes me want to cry. If a sub captain, and i don't care who or what country, saw what I send out on DD patrols (either 6 DDs and 6 PCs as the japs or 6 DD and 6 SC's as the Allies) there is NO @#$%#@ war on god's green earth that they would attack that pack. There is even less of a chance that they would succeed because I almost always send out these killer packs to locations from ASW air pickets, so that the packs KNOW that they are subchasing and that hostile subs are KNOWN to be in the area. A dozen DD/AU's's operating in support of each other, being prepared for ASW work against a relatively known location of a hostile sub, would maul the crap out of that sub or chase it away. If the sub captain had the nutz to fire at such an approaching group, he could just save the time and scuttle the ship. No captain would ever on either side even think that risk was worth it. They might take the shot on the Yamamoto or Saratoga, but risk almost certain obliteration to try to torpedo an SC? I don't think so. This is a bunch of crap and ASW in this instance is markedly, almost ridiculously out of whack. I would also guess that to strike an SC with torpedo, when it has men on deck on torpedo watch (since we are chasing a sub that was sighted by passing airplanes just a few hours ago), would be enormously hard since such a small ship would be both fast and manuverable. I'm done. -The grass is always greener over the septic tank.

ReDDoN45 -> (8/27/2002 1:05:26 AM)
japs, were using oxigen propelled torpedoes..... no trail!!!! Yamato is the battleship, named a fter a ruling class in the medieval times in Japan - Yamamoto is CinC COmbined Fleet. DDs are nice preys when moving around with 14 kns with their active sonar on! Jap torps had excellent range with excellent speed. Fire a spread of 6 torps on such a ASW DD (Act. Sonar only works with DD,De, SC, being slower than 13 kns) and it really might hit this guy. I don´t want to defend ASW of this game too much. It really needs tweaking, and the thing about a sub commander not engaging a super DD TF is true. But on the other hand, the sub commander not allways sees the entire TF... especially in night. ASW TFs often operated a bit spread out.... line abreast 3000-6000 yards sometimes He just spots 1 DD moving with cruising speed and fires a spread. I can´t udnerstand all this complaining. In two PBEM games I have quite realistic results. My subs engage weakly escorted Allied MCS traffic easily. Against combat TFs they have severe problems and they sometimes didn´t even manage to shoot. I lost 2 in may agaisnt Fletchers TF 17. With only 1 scoring 1 torp hit on the Yorktown. When TFs are properly escorted and have ASW cover they fight subs good. Just don´t use these offensive patrols. The sub can only attack what´s in a TF... and if there are only DDs and SCs, it fires a spread on them, so don´t wonder when you loose a few of them. I prefer my MCS as targets, they often can sustain one hit and then my escorts retaliate (not allways). There are so many reasons not to use offensive patrols and still players think they are more cunning than those real WW2 strategists, who found out convoy is best. So please stop complaining for loosing ships when you apply looser tactics! What do you expect?

doomonyou -> ummmmm.... (8/27/2002 1:18:05 AM)
I am not saying that a sub couldn't hit a DD, I am saying that a group of DD's and SC's once engaged would wipe the freaking floor with the enemy sub. I have only occasoinally had this happen in the game. The Sub vs. warship and merchie stuff is fine. But ASW doomfleets are engaged and batted about by both sides too easily. It is truly difficult to imagine a spread of torpedoes not bringing a storm of depth charges against the sub. It certainly can't outrun the DD's & SC's & PC's/PCG's. It can't have fired from more than a few thousand yards, so the ASW boys will know the few square miles to check. The sub can try to creep away, but with ten functional ships (-1 for the one that hypothetically got hit and -1 for a ship to help it) can check every single direction. This would lead to a fairly high rate of intercept and death. If large groups of DD's are tasked to clear an area (say around Nomeau or Truk) and they are chasing Air-spotted leads, and if they catch the sub, the sub should be in far more trouble than they currently are. This whole scenario is just one part of the total ASW package of the game, and therefore is not the sole focus, but its is a complete failure in this particular regard.

ReDDoN45 -> (8/27/2002 1:35:13 AM)
not so easy as you might think.... dpends on whether it hits the DD. Often by that way the closest ASW ship is out of action. A skipper would fire on a DD of such a group (if at all) at a high distance (4000-6000 yard) This would ensure that the enemy has a tough time finding him. And if he hits that ship (which propably was the closest) all other ships need some time to get close, udnerstand situation (experience lessens that time) and act. As I said on patrol they cruise quite spread out. Often the sub is than already rrunning deep and out of harm. Engaging a sub below 250 feet is very difficult... you have to take plenty of lead and the DCs must be really close... the sub skipper hears when DCs are released and has time to evade... this can take hours! The Allieds introduced better attacking methods for subs running deep later in the war (44-45) with sonar types which CAN determine depth and very fast sinking DCs like the Mk-9 Teardrop or the hedgehog. Success of ASW depends on who spots whom first. If the sub spots your ASW ship first - dives - attacks from medium to great range than it is quite save and the ASW ship might get hit. ASW ships have a hard time when not knowing exact posit of a ship. YOu might get attacked all the time. I´ve been playing games like Silent Hunter and Destroyer Command and I know how frightening and difficult it is to check a seaspace where a sub might be in. DDs only can "listen" to forward hemisphere and use act. sonar only when driving slower than 13-14kns. THis maks them nice targets. Even zig zag doesn´t help so much when driving around so slow. When ASW ship moving faster it cna´t effectively search for a sub. My experience: A sub with loaded torpedo tubes is a threat for everyone. So ensure that he doesn´t have loaded tubes before you attack him. Present him some targets to fire and concentrate on and then a ASW ship can ambush him with his torps empty and in fully defensive postion. Otherwise it´s allways difficult.Even for 6 DDs, as noone wants to be the bait! BTW when one of my I-subs attacks an US TF with several DDs it generally gets sunk (50% of the cases) in the other cases the DCs miss or they loose contact (because sub had time to go deep). ASW definetely needs tweaking. It should be taken into affect whether a sub was surprised on surface or on periscope dpeth or had time to dive before ASW ships attack.... I am not sure to which ammout this is implemented. But in the end it´s only a game and in all games there a some areas where compromises had to be found between gameplay/calculation and reality

ReDDoN45 -> (8/27/2002 1:41:14 AM)
I think the abilities of the sub skipper have large effect on that in UV. Perhaps I will start checking that more precisely

Sonny -> (8/27/2002 1:55:29 AM)
I know that in the shallows of Noumea and Truk etc. a sub should be dead meat most of the time. And yes, a killer pack probably should drive off or sink a sub. But you gotta cut the subs some slack since there is only end-hex interception allowed. In my mind the fact that a sub torpedoes a ship at Noumea just means that somewhere in those last few hexes of the TFs move the sub got off a shot. Even when the sub sits there turn after turn I imagine him prowling a few hexes around the area searching for targets. Now, if there was a mission for entering a harbor shooting a torp and getting out (like surface combat, bombardment etc.) then I think the situation should be changed. But for me it seems about right.:)

fvianello -> (8/27/2002 4:07:19 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Reddon45 [B]japs, were using oxigen propelled torpedoes..... no trail!!!! Yamato is the battleship, named a fter a ruling class in the medieval times in Japan - Yamamoto is CinC COmbined Fleet. DDs are nice preys when moving around with 14 kns with their active sonar on! Jap torps had excellent range with excellent speed. Fire a spread of 6 torps on such a ASW DD (Act. Sonar only works with DD,De, SC, being slower than 13 kns) and it really might hit this guy. [/B][/QUOTE] Basically, you're telling that a DD chasing a sub is an easy prey for the sub. Ok, let's presume it's true. If DD are that easy to attack and sink, why sub commanders (jap, allied or german) never tried something like: 1- approach the enemy convoy 2 - sink the whole DD escort with torps 3 - emerge to surface and happily destroy the rest of the convoy with the deck gun. I agree with you that offensive patrols is not the right or historical way to use DD, but if the ASW formulas were right this should lead to NO RESULTS, not to MASSIVE DD SINKING from enemy subs. That's ridicolous.

dtx -> Torpedoes too valuable (8/27/2002 8:01:23 PM)
Why not: >1- approach the enemy convoy 2 - sink the whole DD escort with torps 3 - emerge to surface and happily destroy the rest of the convoy with the deck gun. < Torpedoes were generally too valuable a commodity to waste on low value, highly maneuverable targets like DDs. Torps were considered so precious by the US that subs never even got to live fire the live weapons before the war. DDs spread themselves around the ships they were guarding - so a sub couldn't shoot them all at once, even if it wanted to. If a sub was lucky enough to get one, it would suffer retribution from the remaining DDs and might not get a 2nd chance at the convoy. Hence, a commander was much more likely to target the high value, less maneuverable targets. UV teaches a player to use the ASW tactics that were effective in the war - i.e., integrated air & naval units. The combatants never sent out swarms of subkillers after a sub because it was judged a waste of resources. While UV doesn't stop the player from doing this, it's appropriate that it generally shows the tactic to be generally ineffective.

doomonyou -> but you guys are missing the point... (8/27/2002 8:56:03 PM)
the reason that asw killer groups never rolled around like they do in UV is because in the real war they could intercept ships anywhere in the ocean. In UV you can only intercept them in a very few spots because there is no midpoint interception (I still do not know how this failure made it into my beloved UV). But had for some reason either side put together dozen ship ASW patrol under the ASW AIR UMBRELLA of major bases (maybe nobody has noticed that all sub combat in this game more or less occurs within the umbrella of ASW air) and hunted in very specific regions where subs were known to be prowling, I simply cannot imagine that scenario resulting in anything other than A) the sub going deep and quiet and trying to flee the area or b) the sub getting killed while doing a) The idea that a sub captain would fire off his spread at a DD fleet with a PBY or Kate overhead on anti-sub patrol (he would know it was a dd fleet since he would clearly hear more than one active ping at a time most likely, even if he couldn't see them) in hopes of sinking a PC, a DD, or a SC is CRAZY. Even in forty two it would have been a roulette bet to get away from 10 or 11 enraged ASW ships after a torpedo attack. I have had S-boats and I-boats (which both were pretty lame subs for stealth purposes) blow away two DD's over two days and get away...this should be so rare that it would have been a story of litteraly epic proportions. Tom Hanks would star as the famous captain Will Sinkurass, commander of the brave S-boat "Das Boot to the Head".

fvianello -> Re: but you guys are missing the point... (8/27/2002 9:58:49 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by doomonyou [B]The idea that a sub captain would fire off his spread at a DD fleet with a PBY or Kate overhead on anti-sub patrol (he would know it was a dd fleet since he would clearly hear more than one active ping at a time most likely, even if he couldn't see them) in hopes of sinking a PC, a DD, or a SC is CRAZY. [/B][/QUOTE] Well said. I repeat, forget about tactics or strategy and so on. You take 2 DD and 1 catalina vs 1 sub and put them inside a big pool. Possible outcomes are: a) DDs and Air don't spot sub b) DDs attack sub but fail to sink it c) DDs sink sub d) Sub sinks 1 or more DD outcomes a, b, c were common ones. Outcome d was very unlikely, but it's what regularly happens in UV.

Sonny -> Re: Re: but you guys are missing the point... (8/27/2002 10:25:32 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by HanBarca [B] Well said. I repeat, forget about tactics or strategy and so on. You take 2 DD and 1 catalina vs 1 sub and put them inside a big pool. Possible outcomes are: a) DDs and Air don't spot sub b) DDs attack sub but fail to sink it c) DDs sink sub d) Sub sinks 1 or more DD outcomes a, b, c were common ones. Outcome d was very unlikely, but it's what regularly happens in UV. [/B][/QUOTE] e) Catalina sinks sub:)

fvianello -> (8/27/2002 10:34:19 PM)
Oops i forgot that one :o BTW, take a look at this page; it has very detailed combat stats about USA DD (12 DD, no losses to subs, 5-10 subs sunk) [URL=http://www.domeisland.com/desron21/desron21.html]Desron 21[/URL]

ReDDoN45 -> (8/27/2002 10:42:24 PM)
this mid-way interception of subs/ships is really missing! And DTX managed to say in his post what I tried in my novel before. Thanks! BTW I doubt that a sub skipper will attack DDs with air cover overhead. I mentioned night... and spread out TF... that´s the way offensive ASW patrolls were done in WW2. A sub skipper who only sees one DD in a good position either shoots or dives, since UV doesn´t really implement cub commander decisions the sub allways shoots. The point that mid-way interceptions are not implemented is even one more reason to use magnets to attract them, rather than hunting for them. Subs in WW2 (and today) are very dangerous and feared foes, so begin to respect them as enemies. Real Effective ASW tactics began to appear in late 43, so almost out of UV frame. Quite a lot DDs were sunk by Subs in WW2, in most cases because the DD was unaware and moved right into the subs forward hemisphere, there was no better target avialable or the sub´s last hope was to kill the DD. In the end people shouldn´t overstress this whole "micro-ASW execution" point. The results, when asssts used properly are not unhistoric.

ReDDoN45 -> (8/27/2002 10:51:20 PM)
these are late war results Barca! In times, were one sub had to fight 8 DDs/DEs with more ASW training and equiptment than in 42/43, were IJN subs had to fight 2 or 3 DDs with mediocre ASW experience and equiptment. A Question for those who have this excessive DD losses: Which side do you play? Jap sub commanders have a aggressive attitude and allways shoot... often regardless of the odds, of course I don´t have to mention that they prefer warship targets (even with sub doctrine off... at least sometiems) While playing on the Jap side, I didn´t have much problems with loosing DDs to Subs. Of course a few, but that´s not unrealistic as about 20 of Jap DDs were sunk during the war by subs.

fvianello -> (8/27/2002 11:15:45 PM)
Reddon, I'm referring to USA DD losses

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.328125