RE: pilot training.

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: pilot training.

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

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

Page: << < prev 14 15 [16] 17 18 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: pilot training. - 6/17/2009 1:06:36 PM

EUBanana

Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline

Seeing these submarines hounding surface ships is pretty damn scary.

Not that it's inaccurate mind. But it's still scary.

I remember in WITP I never ever had enough destroyers, looks like compared to AE the troubles have only just begun...

_____________________________

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 451

RE: pilot training. - 6/17/2009 5:40:21 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

Well the Japs have 4 dozen SCs (half have an ASW strength of 4 the other half have 8) and I dont even know how many PBs. Dozens. Not to mention minesweepers have ASW strengths, hell even some Jap CAs have an ASW strength.

_____________________________

(in reply to EUBanana)

Post #: 452

RE: Sub patrols - 6/17/2009 6:29:25 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kull

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

I THINK it has to do with setting the react range, the I-8 attack was certainly react movement. It maybe just pure skipper aggression as to following (as in the case of the 169 boat above). I had them until 2 turns ago with their default "0" setting with nothing happening, so I tried setting this flotilla to 6 to see what happens. Needless to say all my sub patrols are on "6" now.

Looks like you just recreated the "wolfpack". Pretty neat.

Yes, but I suppose this can be dangerous-especially later in the war when the allies can put together some pretty deadly ASW TF. I don't think I would want all of my agressive sub commanders reacting to a hunter killer group. Probably suggesting that setting and tactics will need to be altered as the war progresses.

Could a player send a lone ap in with a hunter killer TF ordered to follow? Classic honey trap..... I see that subs are going to be fun.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Kull)

Post #: 453

RE: Sub patrols - 6/17/2009 6:49:47 PM

EUBanana

Posts: 4552
Joined: 9/30/2003
From: Little England
Status: offline

ASW TFs are limited to 4 ships in AE, so I imagine they won't be instakills at least.

_____________________________

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 454

If you gotta go... - 6/18/2009 6:25:03 AM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

May as well give 'em the finger on your way out:

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to EUBanana)

Post #: 455

RE: If you gotta go... - 6/18/2009 6:40:34 AM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

I think it did hit Admiral's booze locker!

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von B�lov, 1870-

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 456

RE: If you gotta go... - 6/18/2009 8:01:36 AM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

I think it did hit Admiral's booze locker!�

The "Heavy damage" was caused by torp hits on the first turn.

Bettys/Nells still carry torps, but if the pilot isnt trained in the attack, then they arent going to hit much. Pilots with less than 50 experience dont really do a lot. Here is an example of why you need not fear the plane but the pilots instead:

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to Sardaukar)

Post #: 457

RE: If you gotta go... - 6/18/2009 10:14:28 AM

Kereguelen

Posts: 1829
Joined: 5/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

May as well give 'em the finger on your way out:

BB Prince of Wales firing on surfaced sub

BB Prince of Wales, Shell hits 1, heavy damage

YH, please be more careful when you post such stuff. I spilled my coffee!

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 458

RE: Sub patrols - 6/19/2009 5:07:11 AM

byron13

Posts: 1589
Joined: 7/27/2001
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Could a player send a lone ap in with a hunter killer TF ordered to follow? Classic honey trap..... I see that subs are going to be fun.

Or run decoys to clear out an area for a following TF.

I'm a little concerned we've created a monster. I don't know dickey-doo about historical sub ops, but this seems a little too aggressive. To a degree, weren't sub patrol areas assigned to pretty much just one sub to minimize fratricide? Of course, if you set react to zero, you can keep subs in their area, and there's no reason you can't give orders to pursue ships across the entire Pacific in order to get a kill. Still . . .

To what extent did Japanese or American subs get accurate tracking information from aircraft reports? Didn't subs communicate with just Pearl? Would a PBY/Mavis yap out blind over the radio a ship's position, course, and speed in the off-chance that there might be a friendly sub in the area that would hear it? There certainly wasn't coordination between CommSubPac in Pearl or SF and VP-1 at Levu Vana so that VP-1 would know what friendly sub was where and when. My impression is that, generally, subs did their thing and everyone else did their thing, and n'er the twain shall meet. So I'm a little skeptical of aircraft spotting for subs - not that it couldn't be done (I think the Germans tried to an extent, though didn't that still go air to shore to ship?), but was it?

And for a sub to be chasing AP's for a couple of hundred miles would require the sub to run on the surface the entire time with a nifty wake. Does a sub in this mode increase its risk of being attacked by a/c? And, of course, if there is a significant enemy air presence, the sub is going to be forced down enough where it probably couldn't keep pace with its quarry.

I don't know. It just seems that this episode show submarines tracking ships in an exceptionally coordinated and aggressive manner.

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 459

RE: Sub patrols - 6/19/2009 9:37:46 AM

Knavey

Posts: 3052
Joined: 9/12/2002
From: Valrico, Florida
Status: offline

byron,

Didn't the subs coordinate with the CVs that killed the Yamato and company? Seem to recall they were spotted leaving port and a couple of USN subs radioed such. Heading to work right now so can't look it up.

_____________________________

x-Nuc twidget
CVN-71
USN 87-93
"Going slow in the fast direction"

(in reply to byron13)

Post #: 460

RE: Sub patrols - 6/19/2009 1:26:19 PM

Panther Bait

Posts: 654
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline

Also, weren't subs on downed pilot duty in communication with the local forces? I know it's a slightly different thing, but it shows that communications with local forces, including maybe scout planes, is possible.

_____________________________

When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard

(in reply to Knavey)

Post #: 461

RE: Sub patrols - 6/19/2009 1:48:49 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: byron13

I don't know. It just seems that this episode show submarines tracking ships in an exceptionally coordinated and aggressive manner.

Cant say I disagree with you because I dont. Frankly this is the first time I set reaction distances on subs and am seeing the results myself for the first time. I can see this as a can of worms that will lead to many many future threads. And frankly I can understand the argument for both sides. The nice thing about this particular thing is you can always make a house rule preventing it or limiting the range.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panther Bait

Also, weren't subs on downed pilot duty in communication with the local forces? I know it's a slightly different thing, but it shows that communications with local forces, including maybe scout planes, is possible.

I read a book the captain of the Barb wrote (many years ago) and one of the chapters was on pilot recovery duty. The way it worked (in a nutshell to the best of my recollection) was a sub was assigned to a given operational area and when a pilot went down in that area, air-sea rescue would report the location to the sub. At no time did the sub transmit (didnt want to give their location away). They either found the pilot or they didnt. No one knew until the sub returned to port. And many people are surprised to learn that the Japanese also recovered their pilots in this manner. Greg Boyington was picked up by a Jap sub on pilot recovery duty. Thats how he was captured.

< Message edited by Yamato hugger -- 6/19/2009 1:55:12 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to byron13)

Post #: 462

RE: Sub patrols - 6/19/2009 1:54:20 PM

Dili

Posts: 4708
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline

I have seen accounds of several days of tracking.

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 463

RE: Sub patrols - 6/19/2009 2:14:42 PM

Sardaukar

Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline

I cannot wait to try this myself!

Probably lot of people will have house rule like: Sub react range max 1 (or 2).

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von B�lov, 1870-

(in reply to Dili)

Post #: 464

RE: Sub patrols - 6/19/2009 2:24:29 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: byron13

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Could a player send a lone ap in with a hunter killer TF ordered to follow? Classic honey trap..... I see that subs are going to be fun.

Or run decoys to clear out an area for a following TF.

I'm a little concerned we've created a monster. I don't know dickey-doo about historical sub ops, but this seems a little too aggressive. To a degree, weren't sub patrol areas assigned to pretty much just one sub to minimize fratricide? Of course, if you set react to zero, you can keep subs in their area, and there's no reason you can't give orders to pursue ships across the entire Pacific in order to get a kill. Still . . .

To what extent did Japanese or American subs get accurate tracking information from aircraft reports? Didn't subs communicate with just Pearl? Would a PBY/Mavis yap out blind over the radio a ship's position, course, and speed in the off-chance that there might be a friendly sub in the area that would hear it? There certainly wasn't coordination between CommSubPac in Pearl or SF and VP-1 at Levu Vana so that VP-1 would know what friendly sub was where and when. My impression is that, generally, subs did their thing and everyone else did their thing, and n'er the twain shall meet. So I'm a little skeptical of aircraft spotting for subs - not that it couldn't be done (I think the Germans tried to an extent, though didn't that still go air to shore to ship?), but was it?

And for a sub to be chasing AP's for a couple of hundred miles would require the sub to run on the surface the entire time with a nifty wake. Does a sub in this mode increase its risk of being attacked by a/c? And, of course, if there is a significant enemy air presence, the sub is going to be forced down enough where it probably couldn't keep pace with its quarry.

I don't know. It just seems that this episode show submarines tracking ships in an exceptionally coordinated and aggressive manner.

I believe that once American subs got decent radar that they tended to work closer together. They were using loose wolf pack tactics late in the war. Americans were very very good at radio traffic interceptions and interpretation. Using this skill, they really did have an excellent grasp of where Japanese convoys were and frequently rounted subs long distances to intercept specific convoys. I don't see why they would not be routing intercepts from other spotting reports as well but don't know much about this.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to byron13)

Post #: 465

RE: If you gotta go... - 6/19/2009 2:27:25 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

I think it did hit Admiral's booze locker!�

The "Heavy damage" was caused by torp hits on the first turn.

Bettys/Nells still carry torps, but if the pilot isnt trained in the attack, then they arent going to hit much. Pilots with less than 50 experience dont really do a lot. Here is an example of why you need not fear the plane but the pilots instead:

So how would you go about training up that specific group for torpedo bombing? Can training be set to a specific skill in the game?

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 466

RE: If you gotta go... - 6/19/2009 2:38:58 PM

Chad Harrison

Posts: 1395
Joined: 4/2/2003
From: Boise, ID - USA
Status: offline

As for the subs though, this could also help represent the Allies ability to use SigInt to track a specific TF and route subs to it.

I have always thought that subs were way under powered, especially for the Allies.

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 467

RE: If you gotta go... - 6/19/2009 2:42:55 PM

Speedysteve

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

With you there Chad.........

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Chad Harrison)

Post #: 468

RE: If you gotta go... - 6/19/2009 2:46:55 PM

Chad Harrison

Posts: 1395
Joined: 4/2/2003
From: Boise, ID - USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy

With you there Chad.........

Well, except in our game. Isnt our house rule going to be that you only get one sub?

. . . The penguin warned me about your subs. One should be plenty!

(in reply to Speedysteve)

Post #: 469

RE: If you gotta go... - 6/19/2009 2:56:34 PM

Speedysteve

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

Don't know what you're on about....I'm awful with subs

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Chad Harrison)

Post #: 470

RE: If you gotta go... - 6/20/2009 2:02:01 AM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

Well in AE radar actually works, so as for sub effectiveness, that will improve as the war goes on. So as for the subs needing the react movement, I would say that would entirely depend on IF the sub tactics of the time was to report ALL contacts. If this is the case, then it certainly makes sense for higher HQ to route more subs into a possible contact situation. If this is not the case (an I dont believe subs keyed a mic unless it was damn important), then I would say no. No report goes out, then it also makes sense that no one should react to it.

Now frankly, I dont know. I read 1 book once years ago on the Barb, and to my knowledge they didnt report contacts (I would guess they would if it was a major surface unit). But then again, with ultra they knew pretty much were everything was anyway (which isnt modeled in the game of course). As I already said, this will spark many many threads and I can see and understand both sides. I think from a pure game aspect, react should be set to zero. The sub is already patrolling, and that in itself is a huge plus.

_____________________________

(in reply to Speedysteve)

Post #: 471

RE: If you gotta go... - 6/20/2009 2:43:02 AM

CarnageINC

Posts: 2208
Joined: 2/28/2005
From: Rapid City SD
Status: offline

Great stuff, Great stuff!!!

OH boy oh boy oh boy....I can't wait!

_____________________________

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 472

RE: If you gotta go... - 6/20/2009 5:39:25 AM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

Oops, missed the TB question. No, other than getting a random hit on it in "general training", the only way to train in torpedo attacks is to actually do them. So this means once the well trained starting Belly/Nell pilots are dead, you really dont have a lot to fear from them.

< Message edited by Yamato hugger -- 6/20/2009 5:40:12 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to CarnageINC)

Post #: 473

RE: If you gotta go... - 6/21/2009 1:13:34 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

The Fiji landing force was attacked this turn, far too close to their target for him to do anything about:

(Akagi, Kaga, Shokaku, and Zuikaku stand guard while a sub patrols underneath)

Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Yasawa Islands at 130,158

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid spotted at 44 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 28 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 3

Allied aircraft
Vincent I x 4

No Japanese losses

No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
xAK Keisyo Maru

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x Vincent I bombing from 3000 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Akagi-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(3 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 3 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 32810
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 4 minutes

a Japanese CM manuvering ...(Ev 76 / Sp 15)
a Yusen A Transport class xAK manuvering changes...(Ev 76 / Sp 22)
a Ehime Cargo class xAK manuvering changes...(Ev 76 / Sp 11)
a Ansyu-C Cargo class xAK manuvering changes...(Ev 76 / Sp 13)
a Japanese TK manuvering changes...(Ev 76 / Sp 8)

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Yamato hugger -- 6/21/2009 1:16:13 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 474

RE: If you gotta go... - 6/21/2009 1:31:19 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

The New Caledonia force closes on their target. Luganville fell this turn to a SNLF force brought in by fast transports. The Hiryu, Soryu, and 2 CVLs are to the west (the covering force) still moving into position form the Moresby landings. There is also a BB division with them.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 475

RE: If you gotta go... - 6/21/2009 2:38:58 PM

Kull

Posts: 2625
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline

Looks like the JFBs worried about a nerfed "Evil Empire" in AE can put down their placards.....

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 476

Over Expanding? - 6/21/2009 7:47:41 PM

RocketMan

Posts: 718
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Delaware, USA
Status: offline

Yamato hugger,

Will you end up paying a price for such rapid expansion later in the game? In other words, since you are expanding much faster and further than your historical counterparts did, will you have problems supplying all the areas you have conquered or transporting resources back to the home islands or are you not expanding as fast in other areas as your historical counterparts?

I ask because it seems like there should be some trade off that has to be made for this type of aggressive play.

(in reply to Kull)

Post #: 477

RE: Over Expanding? - 6/21/2009 10:51:22 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RocketMan

Yamato hugger,

Will you end up paying a price for such rapid expansion later in the game? In other words, since you are expanding much faster and further than your historical counterparts did, will you have problems supplying all the areas you have conquered or transporting resources back to the home islands or are you not expanding as fast in other areas as your historical counterparts?

I ask because it seems like there should be some trade off that has to be made for this type of aggressive play.

Well I would if I had any plans at all to keep these bases. But I dont. The plan is to take them out to increase his sailing time to Oz and to slow his base buildup in this area. I have no intention of leaving a single troop south or east of Tarawa (excepting for the Solomons of course). In AE he cant see which airfields and ports are occupied unless he recons them. Picture this big black hole out there, and you dont know whats there, where the KB is or anything else. He isnt likely to charge right in without a major force. I will leave a few CL squadrons and recon planes (supported by AVs) to keep him guessing, but no major defensive effort will go into these areas.

Edit: Basically what I am doing is buying time to dig in and expand bases on my main defensive line before he gets a chance to hit it.

< Message edited by Yamato hugger -- 6/21/2009 11:01:02 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to RocketMan)

Post #: 478

RE: Over Expanding? - 6/22/2009 3:36:07 AM

RocketMan

Posts: 718
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Delaware, USA
Status: offline

An interesting strategy. Made possible, as you say, by the new FOW rules which I was not aware of. Thanks for the reply.

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 479

RE: Over Expanding? - 6/22/2009 5:35:38 AM

stuman