RE: Allied ASW (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

dereck -> RE: Allied ASW (11/23/2004 5:35:18 AM)

quote:

Understand that the term 'docking' does not mean that a ship actually pulls up to a dock and ties up. Sometimes it just means they anchor in the immediate area. If you anchored within the harbor, they you 'docked.' You sure were not underway.


Hate to tell you but ships don't have to be "docked" to a wharf to get fuel or supplies transfered to them. Even if you're anchored offshore you can have suplies and fuel brought to you. Also ships regularly dock besides each other where one ship docks to the port, the next ship to the ship docked to the port and so on.

I still say that before "enhancements" are made that the bugs that exist in the game should be fixed first. This issue isn't a bug so in my opinion should take a back seat to real bugs such as the leader bug. Work on the known bugs without introducing any new "enhancement" code into the scenario and get a stable and bullet-proof game.



mlees -> RE: Allied ASW (11/23/2004 5:46:03 PM)

I'm playing Allied vs IJN AI (set on easy, don't like ta lose!) with 1.3 patch, and it's currently mid April '42.

Have sunk roughly 20 subs, with 90% being in the Townsville/Cairns area. Have lost roughly 8 or so subs to the nips (with another 20 or so in port with 10-30 SYS damage), and 12 or so ASW platforms to nip subs in the Coral Sea.

I don't see any subs taking more than 5 DC hits. Allied DC's seem to do more damage. IMO, I don't see any screaming need to fix the combat calculator, but maybe the AI should be tweaked to stop sending boats to my Townsville blackhole.

In regards to the unhistorical overuse of ships/subs/planes, and the overnight replenishment of ships in any size port, this affects both sides evenly, so again no desk pounding patch demands from me.

Humble opinion time, I'm only one man with one vote...

If two players agree that its too gamey to have 90% of your combat assets DOING something (or the size of allied ASW groups, etc...), let 'em set up house rules. The developers of this game only have so much time to devote fixing or tweaking the game, (and eventually, they WILL move on to other projects) and I'm not sure this area is one that needs to be on the top of the priority list.



dereck -> RE: Allied ASW (11/23/2004 5:54:17 PM)

quote:

If two players agree that its too gamey to have 90% of your combat assets DOING something (or the size of allied ASW groups, etc...), let 'em set up house rules. The developers of this game only have so much time to devote fixing or tweaking the game, (and eventually, they WILL move on to other projects) and I'm not sure this area is one that needs to be on the top of the priority list.


From reading the forums it seems to me that instead of making up wish lists of "enhancements" - even I have a few things I'd love to see - they should concentrate of fixing what appears to be two major game-stopping bugs:

1. The Leader Bug
2. The Conquered City Bug

Those two items are game stoppers. Everything else which I've opened my big mouth on and got into trouble with are NOT. You may not like someone putting 25 DDs in an ASW task force but it is honestly not going to stop you from playing the game. Something like the Leader and Conquered City bug, however, could.



mlees -> RE: Allied ASW (11/23/2004 6:15:52 PM)

I guess I shoulda stated, I only use 6 ship ASW groups myself. I assumed/figured using 25 ship groups sucked too much fuel from port when they came back.

Now that I think on that, I guess that's why I don't see too much lopsided results. Still, this doesn't seem like a biggie for me.

My subs aren't uber either. Any TF with more than a couple of escorts prevent me from scoring hits. Last night, the ENTIRE IJN carrier strength, in three TF's, sailed through that strait between Australia and PNG (sorry, my US high school education fails me), west to east, pulverizing my air strength in the coral sea. (My CV's were getting their 4/42 updates taken care of in Pearl.) I placed a sub in each hex in the restriced waters aound the Gili-Gili base and the cape just to the SE (9 total). Three subs made contact, two were damaged 10-20 SYS points for no hits, and one put a torp into the Chokai. That's it. You could have hopped from Gili-Gili to Normanby Island on Jap hulls without getting your feet wet, but my side lauched only one attack.

It seems that subs always target the largest targets in the TF, regardless of how well protected it is. I would be OK with the idea of my skippers attacking DD's half the time, too. Sigh. Not worth asking for a patch on this, either.

The bugs you mentioned ARE worrisome. (I haven't seen the city bug yet, but I'm still in a fighting retreat mode.) I still see the leader bug, too, although admittedly, I don't spend PP's on leaders yet. I'm pulling LCU's out of DEI instead.



testarossa -> RE: Allied ASW (11/23/2004 9:46:12 PM)

Leader bug is present and highly frustrating. Haven't encountered city bug yet.

I don't use my subs untill 1/1/1943 for patrols only minelaying. The reason - around 80% of your torps in 1942 are duds. This is the main reason why US subs don't score hits. If you have sub doctrine on - they don't even try to attack. Another good thing about minelaying - your crews and commanders will get some exp.-will help a lot in 1943 when you start total blockade of Japan islands.



mlees -> RE: Allied ASW (11/23/2004 11:16:32 PM)

I haven't messed with minelaying subs much. The port restrictions make it tough to do much minelaying until Australian ports are built up! It's a long way back to Syndey/Pearl. (I believe the mission must start from a size 9+ port, right?) Without any "at start" MLE's in the allied inventory, you have to wait 'till mid June before I get any converted ones, so no advanced minelaying bases.

I'll have to look into this tactic, though, thanks!



dereck -> RE: Allied ASW (11/24/2004 2:47:17 AM)

quote:

I don't use my subs untill 1/1/1943 for patrols only minelaying. The reason - around 80% of your torps in 1942 are duds.


The sad part about the US submarine torpedo problems during World War II was that historically they never really did solve the problem. There were torpedo problems up to the day the war ended.[:(]



denisonh -> RE: Allied ASW (11/24/2004 3:56:09 AM)

Duds yes, but every ship you damage or sink while the Japanese are expanding are worth it.

Mk 14s have been the cause of 15 ship sinkings and numerous other damaged, in addition to a lot of duds through June 42 in my ongoing PBEM.

Not to mention that sightings have provided key intelligence on enemy ship movements, particularly in restricted waters.

Minelaying with fleet boats is a waste IMO. MInes are toned down from UV and only a nuisance.
You need a whole lot more than a few fleet boats can lay to be effective.

quote:

ORIGINAL: testarossa

Leader bug is present and highly frustrating. Haven't encountered city bug yet.

I don't use my subs untill 1/1/1943 for patrols only minelaying. The reason - around 80% of your torps in 1942 are duds. This is the main reason why US subs don't score hits. If you have sub doctrine on - they don't even try to attack. Another good thing about minelaying - your crews and commanders will get some exp.-will help a lot in 1943 when you start total blockade of Japan islands.



dereck -> RE: Allied ASW (11/24/2004 4:24:14 AM)

quote:

Duds yes, but every ship you damage or sink while the Japanese are expanding are worth it.


True. Any extra burdon on Japanese shipyards to repair damage from a ship damaged by a sub attack is worth it. Submarines are a long term attrition weapon so their damage builds up.

Even a ship not sunk but forced into repair is a ship not being used.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.59375