RE: freq dist USN sub losses to cause

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: freq dist USN sub losses to cause

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: freq dist USN sub losses to cause

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: freq dist USN sub losses to cause - 7/3/2009 7:59:21 PM

ChezDaJez

Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline

quote:

Oh, and I've probably damaged at least as many, if not twice as many, of his freighters and tankers as I've sunk. I have also sunk one CA, and my subs have torpedoed one CV and one BB, though a single torpedo into each was not enough damage in my book!

Early in the war, his subs were running rampant all over my shipping lanes, but once I had enough destroyers to set up a few ASW TFs, the tide turned on the I-boats. I was extremely aggressive at chasing down sub sightings, and I don't think that he was paying attention to those sightings the way he should have (leaving the subs in the same hex so that a turn or two later they were found by the ASW TF).

His analysis is correct. I did not move my subs as often as I should have and paid the price. Most of my long range boats are on the bottom now. His shipping lanes are safe.

The Japanese are beginning to get improved PCs and they can be death to a US sub that lingers long enough to be found. I have probably damaged or sunk more subs in the last 6 months than in the entire period prior.

Chez

We have both had many shots at captial ships though most have missed IIRC. He did sink the CA Maya with an S-boat in the first week of the war. I've had several shots at RN BBs and missed everytime but I can take out escorts! Unfortunately, IJN subs appear to be a one-shot affair. They take a shot at an escorted force... they get counter-attacked... patrol over.

_____________________________

Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98

(in reply to bradfordkay)

Post #: 31

RE: freq dist USN sub losses to cause - 7/3/2009 8:05:19 PM

ChezDaJez

Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline

quote:

Based on Chez' account his results seem ballpark correct to historical in re USN sub loss rates. The original post here was informational. Obviously I intend for the historical data to be compared to game results, but it sounds like the game results in some games are good.

Our game results are reasonably historical but again, it depends upon how a play the game. If a person exploits the known deficiencies, then the game will produce ahistorical results. Brad and I are trying to stay within historical boundaries and the game has been immensely enjoyable.

Chez

_____________________________

(in reply to mdiehl)

Post #: 32

RE: freq dist USN sub losses to cause - 7/3/2009 8:08:40 PM

bradfordkay

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

"The Japanese are beginning to get improved PCs and they can be death to a US sub that lingers long enough to be found. I have probably damaged or sunk more subs in the last 6 months than in the entire period prior. "

Which falls right into line with the historical data that mdiehl presented. The majority of the US subs were lost from the latter months of '43 through the year 1944.

And it has required me to be even more careful with moving my submarines. I can no longer use the old trick of moving the sub a few hexes away to reduce the detection level before moving it back into the favored position. Those bloody PCs (have I ever told you how much I hate those PCs?) have forced me to be much more creative with my sub offensive...

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to ChezDaJez)

Post #: 33

RE: freq dist USN sub losses to cause - 7/3/2009 9:37:45 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

You had 50 sub attacks in a row fail? lol, that�s like winning the lotto jackpot... at least the probability must be the same. Could it be that it only felt like 50 fails? Usually I get 2 out of 3 attacks achieving at least one torp hit from early 43 on with Allied subs.

i went back through all my AARs - it wasn't QUITE as bad as i remembered, as one ship snuck a torpedo hit (that i didn't recall) after ~29 attacks in a row without a torpedo hit.

i should also note, one USN sub managed to sink a barge with gunfire during this torpedo dry spell...

< Message edited by rtrapasso -- 7/3/2009 9:48:38 PM >

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 34

RE: freq dist USN sub losses to cause - 7/3/2009 10:07:21 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

oops! double post!!

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by rtrapasso -- 7/3/2009 10:08:18 PM >

(in reply to rtrapasso)

Post #: 35

RE: freq dist USN sub losses to cause - 7/3/2009 10:24:43 PM

Barb

Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline

Lack of Anti-capital ship sucesfull attack can be attributed to using more destroyers in screen. How many of you are using 6 DD screen for 1-2 CVs?

_____________________________

(in reply to rtrapasso)

Post #: 36

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: freq dist USN sub losses to cause

Page: << < prev 1 [2]