Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: pauk



Ok.. as I've expected, only Joe gave reasonable and good answer. Andy, you know that i'm right buy you can't just admit that.

Thanks Joe, i see the point. It is pitty that person who started this thread didn't have anything to say about this "glitch", but somehow i'm not suprised by that. He is well known.... (censored).

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

quote:

I'm not aware of any changes to the "to hit" probabilities in AE for mines - but we are adding limits to minefields also from an "ammunition" perspective. So both sides will have mines as a producible device. This will provide additional constraints for mines in AE.

That will be great, then we can set up how many mines there were at war start, should be for torpedoes too but i suppose that is asking to much. And i hope that there will not be hardcode date limit to airplane mines but that be made set into availability device capabilities.

Aerial Torpedoes are dealt with in a different manner that limit their availability.

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

quote:

I'm not aware of any changes to the "to hit" probabilities in AE for mines - but we are adding limits to minefields also from an "ammunition" perspective. So both sides will have mines as a producible device. This will provide additional constraints for mines in AE.

That will be great, then we can set up how many mines there were at war start, should be for torpedoes too but i suppose that is asking to much. And i hope that there will not be hardcode date limit to airplane mines but that be made set into availability device capabilities.

Aerial Torpedoes are dealt with in a different manner that limit their availability.

That is a bit lacking in detail. If they are limited like mines are "limited" we may lose them as effective weapons altogether.
Mines could and should be able to deny a port or coastal landing zone - and are able to defeat superior naval forces. [In 1991 the USN led coalition took significant mine casualties and was unwilling to pay the price to clear them. The USN today has no program to build a minesweeper - its last high tech effort having failed - and in 1991 we learned air minesweeping was also ineffective - and once again there is no program to address the problem.] Mine warfare had important victories in both World Wars - and we are denied the ability to lay a true "mine barrage" - mainly by restricting minelaying - so that most ships with mines cannot drop them - and virtually all aircraft cannot drop them. To that was added making it hard to reload mines.

Are torpedoes to be rendered a mere "harassment" value - and no longer will a Force Z be sunk by them?
Restricting availabilty severely would mean a force of that sort could move without much concern of this weapon.
IRL it was ignorance of the range of the enemy planes that led to this bad deployment - and the chance the numbers involved would not have sunk it approaches zero. [See The Sinking of Force Z] It is easy to "tweek" this to the point a large force of torpedo bombers will not have the numbers really used.

It would be far better to let players and modders control loadouts. It also should be possible to do this as IRL - give them weapon counts - and production rates - so that unreasonable usage above that level becomes impossible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

In essence each CV has a fixed number of torpedoes that are carried...much like the Sortie number

For land based torpedo planes particular Air HQ's can "purchase" torpedoes using supply points. The air unit then only need be within Command range of the Air HQ to carry torpedoes, assuming some other conditions are met as well. If the Air HQ has no torpedoes then the torpedo planes have none to carry...to get more the Air HQ simply clicks Get more and the requisite supply points are removed from the base.

That's the reader's digest version.

Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

In essence each CV has a fixed number of torpedoes that are carried...much like the Sortie number

For land based torpedo planes particular Air HQ's can "purchase" torpedoes using supply points. The air unit then only need be within Command range of the Air HQ to carry torpedoes, assuming some other conditions are met as well. If the Air HQ has no torpedoes then the torpedo planes have none to carry...to get more the Air HQ simply clicks Get more and the requisite supply points are removed from the base.

That's the reader's digest version.

Is this the final versio of what will be in WitP-AE regarding torpedoes?

If yes than this is GREAT and most welcome news - thanks guys for this added realism!


Leo "Apollo11"

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

quote:

I'm not aware of any changes to the "to hit" probabilities in AE for mines - but we are adding limits to minefields also from an "ammunition" perspective. So both sides will have mines as a producible device. This will provide additional constraints for mines in AE.

That will be great, then we can set up how many mines there were at war start, should be for torpedoes too but i suppose that is asking to much. And i hope that there will not be hardcode date limit to airplane mines but that be made set into availability device capabilities.

Aerial Torpedoes are dealt with in a different manner that limit their availability.

That is a bit lacking in detail. If they are limited like mines are "limited" we may lose them as effective weapons altogether.
Mines could and should be able to deny a port or coastal landing zone - and are able to defeat superior naval forces. [In 1991 the USN led coalition took significant mine casualties and was unwilling to pay the price to clear them. The USN today has no program to build a minesweeper - its last high tech effort having failed - and in 1991 we learned air minesweeping was also ineffective - and once again there is no program to address the problem.] Mine warfare had important victories in both World Wars - and we are denied the ability to lay a true "mine barrage" - mainly by restricting minelaying - so that most ships with mines cannot drop them - and virtually all aircraft cannot drop them. To that was added making it hard to reload mines.

Are torpedoes to be rendered a mere "harassment" value - and no longer will a Force Z be sunk by them?
Restricting availabilty severely would mean a force of that sort could move without much concern of this weapon.
IRL it was ignorance of the range of the enemy planes that led to this bad deployment - and the chance the numbers involved would not have sunk it approaches zero. [See The Sinking of Force Z] It is easy to "tweek" this to the point a large force of torpedo bombers will not have the numbers really used.

It would be far better to let players and modders control loadouts. It also should be possible to do this as IRL - give them weapon counts - and production rates - so that unreasonable usage above that level becomes impossible.

In essence each CV has a fixed number of torpedoes that are carried...much like the Sortie number

For land based torpedo planes particular Air HQ's can "purchase" torpedoes using supply points. The air unit then only need be within Command range of the Air HQ to carry torpedoes, assuming some other conditions are met as well. If the Air HQ has no torpedoes then the torpedo planes have none to carry...to get more the Air HQ simply clicks Get more and the requisite supply points are removed from the base.

That's the reader's digest version.

quote:

For land based torpedo planes particular Air HQ's can "purchase" torpedoes using supply points.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

quote:

For land based torpedo planes particular Air HQ's can "purchase" torpedoes using supply points.

This can only work if there is a "torpedo pool" with a modest and finite amount of torps, such that massing all of them (by repeated expenditure of supply points) in one or two bases makes them exceptionally scarce elsewhere. The strategic choice of putting all one's eggs in a single basket really ought to be accompanied by the commensurate strategic risk.

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

quote:

I'm not aware of any changes to the "to hit" probabilities in AE for mines - but we are adding limits to minefields also from an "ammunition" perspective. So both sides will have mines as a producible device. This will provide additional constraints for mines in AE.

That will be great, then we can set up how many mines there were at war start, should be for torpedoes too but i suppose that is asking to much. And i hope that there will not be hardcode date limit to airplane mines but that be made set into availability device capabilities.

Aerial Torpedoes are dealt with in a different manner that limit their availability.

That is a bit lacking in detail. If they are limited like mines are "limited" we may lose them as effective weapons altogether.
Mines could and should be able to deny a port or coastal landing zone - and are able to defeat superior naval forces. [In 1991 the USN led coalition took significant mine casualties and was unwilling to pay the price to clear them. The USN today has no program to build a minesweeper - its last high tech effort having failed - and in 1991 we learned air minesweeping was also ineffective - and once again there is no program to address the problem.] Mine warfare had important victories in both World Wars - and we are denied the ability to lay a true "mine barrage" - mainly by restricting minelaying - so that most ships with mines cannot drop them - and virtually all aircraft cannot drop them. To that was added making it hard to reload mines.

Are torpedoes to be rendered a mere "harassment" value - and no longer will a Force Z be sunk by them?
Restricting availabilty severely would mean a force of that sort could move without much concern of this weapon.
IRL it was ignorance of the range of the enemy planes that led to this bad deployment - and the chance the numbers involved would not have sunk it approaches zero. [See The Sinking of Force Z] It is easy to "tweek" this to the point a large force of torpedo bombers will not have the numbers really used.

It would be far better to let players and modders control loadouts. It also should be possible to do this as IRL - give them weapon counts - and production rates - so that unreasonable usage above that level becomes impossible.

In essence each CV has a fixed number of torpedoes that are carried...much like the Sortie number

For land based torpedo planes particular Air HQ's can "purchase" torpedoes using supply points. The air unit then only need be within Command range of the Air HQ to carry torpedoes, assuming some other conditions are met as well. If the Air HQ has no torpedoes then the torpedo planes have none to carry...to get more the Air HQ simply clicks Get more and the requisite supply points are removed from the base.

That's the reader's digest version.

quote:

Are torpedoes to be rendered a mere "harassment" value - and no longer will a Force Z be sunk by them?
Restricting availabilty severely would mean a force of that sort could move without much concern of this weapon.
IRL it was ignorance of the range of the enemy planes that led to this bad deployment - and the chance the numbers involved would not have sunk it approaches zero. [See The Sinking of Force Z] It is easy to "tweek" this to the point a large force of torpedo bombers will not have the numbers really used.

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

In essence each CV has a fixed number of torpedoes that are carried...much like the Sortie number

For land based torpedo planes particular Air HQ's can "purchase" torpedoes using supply points. The air unit then only need be within Command range of the Air HQ to carry torpedoes, assuming some other conditions are met as well. If the Air HQ has no torpedoes then the torpedo planes have none to carry...to get more the Air HQ simply clicks Get more and the requisite supply points are removed from the base.

That's the reader's digest version.

Is this the final versio of what will be in WitP-AE regarding torpedoes?

If yes than this is GREAT and most welcome news - thanks guys for this added realism!


Leo "Apollo11"

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

quote:

For land based torpedo planes particular Air HQ's can "purchase" torpedoes using supply points.

This can only work if there is a "torpedo pool" with a modest and finite amount of torps, such that massing all of them (by repeated expenditure of supply points) in one or two bases makes them exceptionally scarce elsewhere. The strategic choice of putting all one's eggs in a single basket really ought to be accompanied by the commensurate strategic risk.

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

quote:

does this then mean that the CV torp bombers will use up all their torps against AKs and mini MSWs and when a CA or a BB shows up there are no torps left? Or does it mean that there is also a routine now that checks if torps SHOULD be even used?

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

quote:

does this then mean that the CV torp bombers will use up all their torps against AKs and mini MSWs and when a CA or a BB shows up there are no torps left? Or does it mean that there is also a routine now that checks if torps SHOULD be even used?

At the operational level it would be irresponsible to inject that much control over individual torpedoes. Naturally, there were instances of Strikes being launched against targets that did not warrant torpedo attack, and we have a matrix that attempts to prioritize targets, but it is not a sure thing.

The best way to determine if a torpedo attack is warranted is to heavily search a sector you suspect enemy CVs inhabit and be certain that they are there before you select the “Use Torpedoes” option in you Air units. Else you may have torpedoes going into a Neosho or some other unbelievable target.

As I said earlier this is still in test…

quote:

Add to that the need to be in range and operate from a proper AF (4) to get full participation and figure out all the places where you can manage that and you get a bit more restricted than stock.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Since it seems that spending supply points to use torpedoes is a manual function, how does it work for games with 2 day turns?? I'm playing a PBEM with 2 day turns. Thus, would TB carry torpedoes only for the first day, if selected, and not reload for the second day?? This would not be good for a CV vs. CV battle.

quote:

Well if you run out of torpedoes none will be carried... Cv's only carried so many torps.

For land based HQ's make sure you have an adequate supply on hand to arm your torpedo planes over the course of two days.