RE: PBEM House Rules for AE

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: PBEM House Rules for AE

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: PBEM House Rules for AE

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 6/21/2009 2:17:34 PM

treespider

Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

You also finally found a target rich environment...I would guess I have (or had) somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 unescorted cargo/transport/amphib TF in this region for some time with no ASW to speak of....

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

They are well off their patrol routes. If not react, how did they get there? And they seem to be reacting from the places they reacted to, drawing them out still further. Its hard to track this in a live game because I cant see both sides so frankly I cant really comment on what exactly is going on with them. Here is the start of the current turn, pretty sure these are all react attacks (including the allied subs) except Jolo. Note sub names and the hex numbers. Before I turned on react, I was lucky to have more than 1 attack every other day.

Edit: Note: I-18 made 5 separate attacks today.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 04, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine under attack near Siberoet Island at 41,85

Japanese Ships
SS I-153

Allied Ships
xAKL Parigi, Shell hits 8, heavy fires, heavy damage

SS I-153 is sighted by xAKL Parigi
SS I-153 attacking on the surface

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine under attack near Tambelan Islands at 53,90

Japanese Ships
SS I-18

Allied Ships
xAKL Lee Sang, Shell hits 9, heavy fires, heavy damage

SS I-18 is sighted by xAKL Lee Sang
SS I-18 attacking on the surface

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine under attack near Pontianak at 54,90

Japanese Ships
xAK Iwashiro Maru, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
SS KXI

Japanese ground losses:
10 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

SS KXI is sighted by xAK Iwashiro Maru
SS KXI launches 2 torpedoes

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine under attack near Muntok at 50,89

Japanese Ships
SS I-18

Allied Ships
xAKL Prominent, Shell hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage

SS I-18 is sighted by xAKL Prominent
SS I-18 attacking on the surface
SS I-18 low on gun ammo, Araki N. breaks off surface engagement and submerges

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Jolo at 74,90

Japanese Ships
DD Hokaze
DD Yakaze
DD Okikaze
DD Minekaze

Allied Ships
SS S-37

S-37 bottoming out ....
DD Hokaze fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Yakaze fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Okikaze fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Minekaze fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Yakaze fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Yakaze fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Yakaze fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine under attack near Muntok at 50,89

Japanese Ships
SS I-18

Allied Ships
xAKL Prominent, Torpedo hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage

SS I-18 is sighted by xAKL Prominent
SS I-18 launches 2 torpedoes

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine under attack near Siberoet Island at 42,86

Japanese Ships
SS I-153

Allied Ships
xAP President Madison, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage

SS I-153 is sighted by xAP President Madison
SS I-153 launches 8 torpedoes
Submarine under attack near Billiton at 52,92

Japanese Ships
SS I-9

Allied Ships
xAKL Sibolga

SS I-9 is sighted by xAKL Sibolga
SS I-9 attacking on the surface
Kanda B. decides to submerge SS I-9 due to damage

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine under attack near Toboali at 51,93

Japanese Ships
SS I-18

Allied Ships
xAKL Sibolga, Shell hits 1, on fire

SS I-18 is sighted by xAKL Sibolga
SS I-18 attacking on the surface
SS I-18 low on gun ammo, Araki N. breaks off surface engagement and submerges
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine under attack near Toboali at 51,93

Japanese Ships
SS I-18

Allied Ships
xAKL Sibolga, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

SS I-18 is sighted by xAKL Sibolga
SS I-18 launches 6 torpedoes

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 31

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 6/21/2009 2:33:10 PM

Kull

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

You can see how far she is off her patrol route and her current ammo status (I-18):

I would say she is returning to port to replenish and passed through a target rich environment.

That should be easy to check - has the sub's destination changed? As you test this further back in the lab, try setting the ammo loads to ludicrously high levels (400 torps per sub) to see just how far "off-patrol" a sub will go based on the reaction-after-a-reaction algorithm. If she's supposed to be patrolling around Singapore and winds up near Darwin......

(in reply to treespider)

Post #: 32

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 6/21/2009 2:51:33 PM

Yamato hugger

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider

I would say she is returning to port to replenish and passed through a target rich environment.

Well, you certainly COULD say that, but you would be wrong. I-9 is on her way home to reload. Note the notation on the top:

(The text in red that you cant read says: retruning to port to replenish)

Edit: I-9 hit a mine in the straight between Java and Sumatra on the way to her patrol area, after which she patrolled off Java sinking 2 TKs and an AP and is now headed home because she is out of torps so the damage isnt the cause of her returning.

It is possible she is on her way TO her patrol area after replenishing. Frankly until this turn I hadnt even noticed her. Regardless, I think 5 attacks in 1 day in 3 different hexes is excessive and deserves a house rule.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Yamato hugger -- 6/21/2009 3:19:54 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to treespider)

Post #: 33

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 6/21/2009 4:05:59 PM

Kull

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

Regardless, I think 5 attacks in 1 day in 3 different hexes is excessive and deserves a house rule.

I agree. Six hexes is far too much, unless the sub/ship is being vectored in through information gained from other sources. And even then, for a submarine to locate a small moving target 240 miles away requires the kind of luck that is clearly absent from the algorithm. Maybe a 1-hex reaction zone, and even that would iffy. For what it's worth, here's some information on the visibility at sea:

Source: http://www.sailnet.com/forums/cruising-articles/20525-sea-level-visibility.html

Thanks for getting in touch with your question about visibility. The short answer is that a person of average height can see almost three miles at sea level, actually 2.8 miles to be exact. However, that answer assumes that the person's eyes are at six feet above sea level and the conditions are near perfect.

For a more thorough, you might want to look at what John Rousmaniere has written in his very useful tome, The Annapolis Book of Seamanship, but I'll summarize that here. In his chapter on navigation aids, he explains two ranges of visibility. One he terms the "nominal range of visibility," and the other the "geographic range of visibility." The former, says Rousmaniere, relates to the visibility of the light from a lighthouse, for instance. A light from a lighthouse may be bright enough to have a nominal range of visibility that measures 13 miles, but its geographic range of visibility�the distance at which you can actually see the lighthouse�would be much smaller. You can find a standard table of distances listed in Rousmaniere's book on page 214, with references to the height off the water required to see those distances.

The kind of visibility that you're asking about�geographical visibility�refers to the distance at which any object can be seen. This distance is limited by the curvature of the earth, and it's greatly influenced by height. Of course atmospheric conditions will also influence this distance, but for the purposes of this explanation let's just assume they are perfectly clear: no clouds, no haze, no smog. Let's say same the same hypothetical lighthouse is 50 feet tall. According to Rousmaniere's table, it would only be visible for 8.1 miles. Now, if you were standing on deck aboard a medium-sized sailboat and you were of average height, that would put your eyes about 10 feet off the water. From that vantage point, you should be able see 3.6 nautical miles, but you could see the light house at a distance of 11.7 n.m. (According to Rousmaniere's table, the 50-foot-high lighthouse is visible for 8.1 n.m. Combine that with your geographic range of visibility at 10 feet above sea level [3.6 n.m.] and you get a distance of 11.7 n.m.)

So whoever told you that you should be able to see the horizon from the shore 13 miles away was mistaken. If you could climb a 130-foot tower, then yes, you could see 13.1 miles out to sea. Or if the object at sea was 125 feet off the water, then you should be able to see it from a shoreline 13 miles away (125 feet added to your own five-or-so feet of height). I hope that this helps you understand the concepts at work here. If it doesn't, I'd recommend you get a copy of Rousmaniere's book and study that section more closely. Or just get the book anyway because It's a great resource for sailors.

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 34

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 6/21/2009 6:24:18 PM

Ramjet

Posts: 143
Joined: 2/19/2001
From: Charleston, SC. USA
Status: offline

For those of us that have been to sea, you can see the mast and superstructure up to 20 miles away depending on your height advantage. For subs, that was not too great. But could a sub crew sight a ship 13 miles away? Quite possible espically if you life depended on it!

As for the house rules; if this is all anyone can come up with, then the development team has exceeded my wildest expectations!

_____________________________

(in reply to Kull)

Post #: 35

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 6/21/2009 6:38:50 PM

Don Bowen

Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

1. Task Forces will only react to detected enemy TFs. Most likely the detection is by some means other than the reacting TF (such as air recon).

2. TFs will always react from their current position, including on the way to a patrol zone or from a point on the way to a reaction or on the way back.

3. TFs on patrol will return to their patrol zones after reaction (unless damaged, short on ammo/fuel)

4. TFs may switch targets in the middle of a reaction if a closer/better target is detected.

5. If TFs switch targets during reaction, they may go after the original target once the switcheroo is taken care of.

6. There is no limit to the number of TFs that a single TF can react to and/or engage - just fuel, ammo, and damage considerations.

(in reply to Ramjet)

Post #: 36

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 6/21/2009 8:10:23 PM

BeastieDog

Posts: 95
Joined: 12/22/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

1. Task Forces will only react to detected enemy TFs. Most likely the detection is by some means other than the reacting TF (such as air recon).

An effective tactic would then have one sub TF with a Glen set to zero react to spot with other sub TFs set at max react.

_____________________________

Dog

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 37

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 6/21/2009 10:08:14 PM

TMFoss

Posts: 26
Joined: 10/17/2008
Status: offline

The formula for visible ranges to the horizon is distance is miles = the square root of 1.5 times the height in feet. So, a six foot tall man standing at sea level would theoretically be able to see 2.89 miles to the horizon. If the observed object is above the horizon, then you add the height of both objects to get the range. Due to atmospheric refraction, the actual distances can be up to 20% higher. Of course, this is assuming very clear weather. So, and I am just going to throw some very numbers here, a sub commander on the surface with eye level at 15 feet above sea level looking at a ship with a superstructure 40 feet above sea level should be able to see it at a range of a little over 9 miles- maybe as much a 10.5 with atmospheric refraction.

(in reply to BeastieDog)

Post #: 38

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 6/21/2009 10:45:49 PM

Yamato hugger

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

Well thats not always true with subs. The Barb for example used to raise its periscope and observe a target while they maneuvered to get in front of it thus staying over the targets horizon. Makes sense that they would probably use that method (periodically if nothing else) to spot as well, so that would increase the observation range a lot.

_____________________________

(in reply to TMFoss)

Post #: 39

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 6/21/2009 11:24:22 PM

EUBanana

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
6. There is no limit to the number of TFs that a single TF can react to and/or engage - just fuel, ammo, and damage considerations.

What about ops points?

_____________________________

(in reply to Don Bowen)

Post #: 40

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 6/22/2009 12:57:11 AM

Local Yokel

Posts: 1494
Joined: 2/4/2007
From: Somerset, U.K.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger

Well thats not always true with subs. The Barb for example used to raise its periscope and observe a target while they maneuvered to get in front of it thus staying over the targets horizon. Makes sense that they would probably use that method (periodically if nothing else) to spot as well, so that would increase the observation range a lot.

I think this was referred to as 'high periscope watch'. IIRC, aboard O'Kane's Tang they welded small platforms to the periscope shears on which lookouts could stand, thereby giving a few additional feet of altitude to enhance the spotting range.

_____________________________

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 41

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 6/22/2009 5:51:57 AM

Don Bowen

Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
6. There is no limit to the number of TFs that a single TF can react to and/or engage - just fuel, ammo, and damage considerations.

What about ops points?

No, you get new ops points every day.

You will propably use up movement points in one day prior to using ops points.

< Message edited by Don Bowen -- 6/22/2009 5:52:22 AM >

(in reply to EUBanana)

Post #: 42

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 6/22/2009 8:39:36 AM

JeffroK

Posts: 6391
Joined: 1/26/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TMFoss

The formula for visible ranges to the horizon is distance is miles = the square root of 1.5 times the height in feet.� So, a six foot tall man standing at sea level would theoretically be able to see 2.89 miles to the horizon.� If the observed object is above the horizon, then you add the height of both objects to get the range.� Due to atmospheric refraction, the actual distances can be up to 20% higher.� Of course, this is assuming very clear weather.� So, and I am just going to throw some very numbers here, a sub commander on the surface with eye level at 15 feet above sea level looking at a ship with a superstructure 40 feet above sea level should be able to see it at a range of a little over 9 miles- maybe as much a 10.5 with atmospheric refraction.

Add to this the ability to track on the pall of black smoke coming out of the usually clapped out Merchantman.

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to TMFoss)

Post #: 43

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 6/22/2009 12:08:37 PM

Yamato hugger

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

Another thing that maybe deserving of a "house rule":

http://www.valoratsea.com/wolfpacks.htm

(From "HELLCATS" At the bottom)
By the early part of 1945, the normal Pacific hunting grounds for U.S. submarines had all but dried up - due to the greatest extent to their own effectiveness against enemy shipping. There was however one area of enemy waters that had remained basically untouched throughout the war and in which Japanese merchant shipping transited unmolested: The Sea of Japan. The biggest and most dangerous challenge was just getting to it. Access to the "Emperor's lake" was limited to just a few entrances, all of which were heavily mined by the Japanese. It was not until the introduction of the FM sonar did American submarines venture into these locations.

The FM sonar was an electronic weapon used to detect Japanese mines. Originally developed late in the war for navy mine sweepers, they were seen by VADM Chales A. Lockwood (ComSubPac) as being just what the doctor ordered to enable American submarines to negotiate the Tshushima Straits, which was considered to be the safest route due to its' depth, into the Sea of Japan.

The term "Hellcats" is a title of distinction given to those boats which participated in the carefully planned Operation Barney by braving the mine infested entrances in an effort to penetrate the Sea of Japan. The term is derived from the nickname applied by the US Navy to IJN mines - "Hell Pots". When the FM sonar picked up a contact there was, in addition to a visual "blip" on the screen, an audible bell-like tone which was referred to as "Hells Bells".

Passing through minefields by subs is almost a given, there being little to no threat. Mines in AE are very scarce and mining non-base hexes is nearly foolhardy because of the lack of mines in the game. Therefore I would suggest that allied subs be prohibited from the sea of Japan until 1945 because of it.

Edit: Actually upon reflection I would amend that to include any coastal hex of the Japanese home islands as well as it is likely there were minefields there as well.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Yamato hugger -- 6/22/2009 1:11:51 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to JeffroK)

Post #: 44

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/14/2009 3:07:06 AM

Knavey

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

Bump since the games will be starting soon!

_____________________________

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

(in reply to BeastieDog)

Post #: 45

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/14/2009 3:11:00 AM

treespider

Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

Speaking of which ...who wants to be my first non-test opponent?

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Knavey)

Post #: 46

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/14/2009 3:16:38 AM

UniformYankee

Posts: 84
Joined: 7/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger
Actually upon reflection I would amend that to include any coastal hex of the Japanese home islands as well as it is likely there were minefields there as well.

Are subs as weak in AE as they are in WITP? I've mostly seen subs sent in the Japanese rear areas just be targets - at least in PBEM.

(in reply to Yamato hugger)

Post #: 47

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/14/2009 3:46:15 AM

treespider

Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: UniformYankee

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yamato hugger
Actually upon reflection I would amend that to include any coastal hex of the Japanese home islands as well as it is likely there were minefields there as well.

Are subs as weak in AE as they are in WITP? I've mostly seen subs sent in the Japanese rear areas just be targets - at least in PBEM.

Well considering that 80% of the torps that US subs fire are duds early in the war...(as they were IRL).

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to UniformYankee)

Post #: 48

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/14/2009 4:50:21 AM

Jim D Burns

Posts: 4013
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider
Well considering that 80% of the torps that US subs fire are duds early in the war...(as they were IRL).

Speaking of IRL.

Only 52 US subs were lost in WWII. 2 of those were in the Atlantic, and 2 were operational losses. That leaves 48 lost in action in the Pacific, 4 of which were grounded on reefs/sandbars. So Japan managed to sink 44 US subs through force of arms, which is about 1 a month for the entire war.

12 of those were lost as a result of Japanese air involvement, but of those 12, 5 had surface vessels credited with helping in their sinking's. So for the entire war just 7 US subs were lost to Japanese air attack.

http://www.valoratsea.com/losses1.htm

So the question is, are they still highly vulnerable to air attacks in AE? WitP saw far too many subs on both sides lost to air attacks.

Jim

_____________________________

(in reply to treespider)

Post #: 49

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/14/2009 9:42:55 AM

Knavey

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

I think one of the differences between RL and WITP is the fact that the Japanese player uses his assets more effectively. My opponent uses the convoy system, escort ASW groups, and plenty of hunter killer groups specifically devoted to getting my subs. None of these were utilized by the Japanese until it was way too late for them to be effective. In my game, if I do not move a submarine and it is spotted, I can expect his ASW groups to pounce.

You have to keep that in mind when you compare the game to RL. Torpedo duds were a defect in the torpedo that is modeled into the game. Bad ASW strategy is modeled into the game also...most Japanese players just choose to ignore it. IJN ASW assets are used as they should have been to be effective much as the US player uses his assets more effectively also.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Jim D Burns)

Post #: 50

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/14/2009 10:28:11 AM

Przemcio231

Posts: 1901
Joined: 10/11/2005
From: Warsaw,Poland,EU:)
Status: offline

Treespider i can be your 1st opponent

As long as you play as Japs

Question: And what about limiting the nr of PT boats at a base??? i remeber in vanilla WITP you could have like 40 of those in different
TF and make a base immune to Jap naval bombardment

< Message edited by Przemcio231 -- 7/14/2009 11:04:06 AM >

_____________________________

Pinky: Hey Brain what are we goeing to do this evening?
Brain: The Usual Pinky we will try to take over the World;)

(in reply to Knavey)

Post #: 51

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/14/2009 7:11:02 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TMFoss

The formula for visible ranges to the horizon is distance is miles = the square root of 1.5 times the height in feet.� So, a six foot tall man standing at sea level would theoretically be able to see 2.89 miles to the horizon.� If the observed object is above the horizon, then you add the height of both objects to get the range.� Due to atmospheric refraction, the actual distances can be up to 20% higher.� Of course, this is assuming very clear weather.� So, and I am just going to throw some very numbers here, a sub commander on the surface with eye level at 15 feet above sea level looking at a ship with a superstructure 40 feet above sea level should be able to see it at a range of a little over 9 miles- maybe as much a 10.5 with atmospheric refraction.

You forgot smoke.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to TMFoss)

Post #: 52

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/14/2009 10:14:10 PM

AttuWatcher

Posts: 489
Joined: 6/25/2009
From: Hex 181, 36
Status: offline

When I was on a boat the farthest you could spot anything was about 14 miles give or take .5, even smoke. All that's really left to consider is the height of your vessel where you are standing. Once you can no longer see over the curve of the earth (all dependent on your height above it, get in a space shuttle and you can see it all!) that's it. Other than some atmospheric differences there should be a theoretical maximum sight range for each vsl based on it's height above sea level at the point where a lookout would stand.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 53

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/14/2009 10:56:22 PM

treespider

Posts: 9796
Joined: 1/30/2005
From: Edgewater, MD
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

So the question is, are they still highly vulnerable to air attacks in AE? WitP saw far too many subs on both sides lost to air attacks.

Jim

My impression is No they are not still highly vunerable....reasoning is IIRC...Aircraft now have to be be set on ASW to spot subs...and each pilot has a separate ASW skill ....which is IIRC different than the NavSearch skill.

In my tests against Yammy he had several subs lurking around Java that I occasionally (not never) spotted in spite of having half the Dutch Air Force on ASW Patrol.

_____________________________

Here's a link to:
Treespider's Grand Campaign of DBB

"It is not the critic who counts, .... The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena..." T. Roosevelt, Paris, 1910

(in reply to Jim D Burns)

Post #: 54

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/14/2009 10:59:00 PM

bsq

Posts: 517
Joined: 1/5/2007
Status: offline

The actual formula (in nautical miles) is 1.24*(SqRoot(Observer)+SqRoot(Observed Object) - that's what we were taught and my job then depended on that being right...

Therefore a submarine running at dusk or dawn on the surface with the observer in the tower at say 25ft above sea level observing the top of a merchantman which is say 64ft above sea level can see this out to 16.1nm in ideal conditions.

Submarines without radar or sonar tend not to find things using either search or attack scopes, they use their low profile to give them the edge and the hours between dusk and dawn to search for targets. Running submerged (and therefore using periscopes) makes them as slow as their targets (so how do they close) and with far less endurance (sure they could snorkel if fitted with one, but that's mighty uncomfortable at any speed as every time the snorkel gets washed, the diesels use the 'cabin' air makes your ears pop and fills the cabin with fumes - ask a submariner - I did when we still had diesel boats).

So at 16 knots surface running during the 12 hours of darkness, a submarine could (in theory) travel 192 nm and with visible area of just shy of 815 square nautical miles at any given moment. So 5 attacks in 3 hexes is eminently possible in 12 hours (let alone a full day), so why does that require a house rule?

(in reply to AttuWatcher)

Post #: 55

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/15/2009 5:58:41 AM

Jim D Burns

Posts: 4013
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Salida, CA.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: treespider
My impression is No they are not still highly vunerable....reasoning is IIRC...Aircraft now have to be be set on ASW to spot subs...and each pilot has a separate ASW skill ....which is IIRC different than the NavSearch skill.

In my tests against Yammy he had several subs lurking around Java that I occasionally (not never) spotted in spite of having half the Dutch Air Force on ASW Patrol.

Thanks for the answer Treespider, this is absolutely awesome news.

Jim

_____________________________

(in reply to treespider)

Post #: 56

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/15/2009 12:56:49 PM

Halsey

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline

Back to the thread topic.

I only see the need for one houserule now.

1. Restricted LCU's need to pay PP's to convert to an active HQ to deploy outside their initial area.

Boundaries are the one major thing that hasn't been coded into the expansion.
A lot of recoding would've been needed.

This'll only be needed in a PBEM game.
As the AI will throw everything at you regardless of restriction, and you'll probably have to respond back the same way to balance it.

_____________________________

(in reply to Jim D Burns)

Post #: 57

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/15/2009 2:08:39 PM

Andrew Brown

Posts: 5007
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: Hex 82,170
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Halsey

Back to the thread topic.

I only see the need for one houserule now.

1. Restricted LCU's need to pay PP's to convert to an active HQ to deploy outside their initial area.

Boundaries are the one major thing that hasn't been coded into the expansion.
A lot of recoding would've been needed.

This'll only be needed in a PBEM game.
As the AI will throw everything at you regardless of restriction, and you'll probably have to respond back the same way to balance it.

It may have already been mentioned, but adding more uses of national boundaries, including tying them to restricted commands, is on the (rather large) AE patch "wish list" so it may be added to the game later on.

Andrew

(in reply to Halsey)

Post #: 58

RE: PBEM House Rules for AE - 7/15/2009 11:36:06 PM

Halsey

Posts: 5069
Joined: 2/7/2004
Status: offline

Sounds good to me.

_____________________________

(in reply to Andrew Brown)

Post #: 59