Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

ASW Air is FUBAR

 
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 >> ASW Air is FUBAR Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/16/2010 11:54:24 PM   
DeriKuk


Posts: 359
Joined: 8/2/2005
From: Alberta
Status: offline 		I apologize for starting a new thread. This is really a continuation of http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2300995&mpage=1&key=ASW%2CAir� . . . but I'd get no respoinse there now.

I also realize that there have been good intentions to fix the problem of too-powerful ASW Air attacks, but I suspect that, instead of being generally nerfed for all parties, it is now badly warped. It is indeed FUBAR i.m.o.

The game is Grand Campaign, PBEM, as the Allies. It is an ongoing game, so I'm not going to post screen shots. The date is approaching May 1943. A sample of Allied air groups includes:

  • Experience: 58; 72; 56; 58; 62
  • Morale: 99; 93; 99; 97; 98
  • ASW Skill: <50; 59; 61; 70; <50


All these groups have been set to 60% ASW and 40% rest. The planes involved are Wellington GRs, Hudson III (LR)s, and PV-1 Venturas. Two of these types have ASV-II radars. (ASD-1 radar only appears in September 1943).

I've flown at varying altitudes: 100, 1000 . . . 4000.

I'm aware that ASW operates at half range.

Many Japanese subs have been spotted within that range. My infantry can sometimes stand on the beach and throw rocks at them!

I have had PBYs on Naval Search missions take shots [and HIT!] subs.

This far into the game, I have yet to register a single attack by Allied aircraft on ASW missions against Japanese subs. I've sunk some subs with surface units and other subs, but no ASW-Air hits or attempted hits. My opponent has also noted this.

In the meanwhile the Allied subs are having the tar beaten out of them at every opportunity by JAPANESE ARMY LEVEL BOMBER - Sally and Helen! No, not IJN planes like Betty, Nell, Mavis or Emily . . . but by IJA level bomber without a sniff of radar. My opponent has also noted this.

Of course, I expect you to be in denial - especially a certain Danish gentleman.

In the meanwhile we'll just soldier on with a broken game.
Post #: 1
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/16/2010 11:59:08 PM   
DeriKuk


Posts: 359
Joined: 8/2/2005
From: Alberta
Status: offline 		Oh, I should also mention that I've assigned the most aggressive leaders I could find to the ASW units.

Perhaps I'm allergic to the statistical mean?

(in reply to DeriKuk)
Post #: 2
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 12:10:58 AM   
khyberbill


Posts: 1941
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline 		I don't start to see my planes hit subs (or at least a report of same) until after skill level for ASW is in the 70's. I always have at least some of the squad being trained and have not set any to REST. For killing subs I use airplanes to find them and surface ships to sink them. As a disclaimer, I am not from Denmark but I do like a danish now and then.

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to DeriKuk)
Post #: 3
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 12:15:04 AM   
John Lansford

 

Posts: 2662
Joined: 4/29/2002
Status: offline 		The most valuable effect aerial ASW has on subs is it increases their detection level and helps keep them from making effective attacks.  I've found that enemy subs within my ASW search areas tend to make very few attacks, and fewer of those are effective.

(in reply to khyberbill)
Post #: 4
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 12:24:47 AM   
CV2

 

Posts: 168
Joined: 11/4/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

The most valuable effect aerial ASW has on subs is it increases their detection level and helps keep them from making effective attacks.  I've found that enemy subs within my ASW search areas tend to make very few attacks, and fewer of those are effective.


Correct. This is what ASW air is for. Also higher detection level makes them much easier for your surface ASW to locate and sink. Spotted subs have almost zero chance to hit anything. I have a game where the allied player has somewhere around 50 boats in the Aleutians and I drove 6 carriers right through them, back and forth several times simply because I have 2 Kate squadrons on ASW patrol. He got 1 minor hit on 1 carrier.

(in reply to John Lansford)
Post #: 5
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 12:44:36 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		Quick question... If you want to actually hit subs ( and assuming that there's no bias vs or against IJA bombers or whatever ) are you better using naval search or ASW... Also, which altitude?

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to CV2)
Post #: 6
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 12:54:29 AM   
CV2

 

Posts: 168
Joined: 11/4/2010
Status: offline 		ASW and lower is better. If you are planning on hitting subs with airplanes however, there is a flaw in your plan...

< Message edited by CV2 -- 12/17/2010 12:55:03 AM >

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 7
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 1:02:50 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		I finished my GC campaign and noted there were few sinkings of jap subs by my aircraft. What I can tell you is there were tons of sinkings by my ASW TF's that had air support.

_____________________________


(in reply to CV2)
Post #: 8
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 1:11:54 AM   
Arnhem44


Posts: 578
Joined: 11/23/2004
From: Singapore
Status: offline 		Following data is from my GC with Cannonfodder, we're into Jan '43.

US sub losses




Attachment (1)

(in reply to CV2)
Post #: 9
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 1:12:31 AM   
Arnhem44


Posts: 578
Joined: 11/23/2004
From: Singapore
Status: offline 		IJN sub kill claims




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Arnhem44)
Post #: 10
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 1:13:19 AM   
CV2

 

Posts: 168
Joined: 11/4/2010
Status: offline 		Im guessing that you dont move your subs. You park them in 1 hex and there they stay until they die, am I correct?

(in reply to Arnhem44)
Post #: 11
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 1:24:57 AM   
Arnhem44


Posts: 578
Joined: 11/23/2004
From: Singapore
Status: offline 		I've learnt to avoid any base where Roel chooses to fly significant numbers of ASW aircraft from, any sub caught within a 6 hex radius of said base has a good chance of dying from a 250kg bomb hit.

As noted in my AAR of our GC I at first thought I was being too aggressive with my subs by putting them up close to the HI trying to intercept inbound resource convoys, the first few months of the GC were ok, I wasn't sinking much but I wasn't losing any subs either, that changed sometime from mid '42 as you can see from my sub losses. Roel had dedicated a couple of mediums to ASW training and then unleashed them with devastating results.

In contrast, and in fairness, the only dedicated ASW assets I have to date have been about a dozen squadrons, split about evenly between USN FPs and ANZAC mediums so I don't expect to have the same sucess against I-boats.

What I do have an issue with is the fact that I-boats can trawl their coats one hex off PH in '43 and not be driven off much less damaged or sunk. I've just had this happen as an even half dozen I-boats tried to sink a wounded BB inbound to PH.

So I agree with the OP, there seems to be something a little out of whack here.

A screenshot of a typical ASW squadron pilot roster.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Arnhem44)
Post #: 12
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 1:26:18 AM   
Arnhem44


Posts: 578
Joined: 11/23/2004
From: Singapore
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CV2

Im guessing that you dont move your subs. You park them in 1 hex and there they stay until they die, am I correct?


I used to do that in the earlier stages of '42 when I parked them off the HI but the latest losses were a line of pickets I had set on short loops so while I might be slow on the uptake I still get there eventually.

(in reply to CV2)
Post #: 13
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 1:32:52 AM   
ADB123

 

Posts: 1559
Joined: 8/18/2009
Status: offline 		In my pbems, both as Allied and as Japan, I've set plenty of LBA on ASW, and I get continuous reports of enemy subs being spotted, and enemy subs being hit. The more planes that I have on ASW, the more the reports.

The most effective ASW planes for me have been Dive Bombers, followed by Floatplanes (as the Allies), followed by 2Es. Flying boats tend to be good at spotting subs, but not as good at hitting them with bombs.

I was having problems until I found out about the error in the Search Arc routine, but once I got rid of the search arcs things picked up immediately.

So as far as I can tell, Airborne ASW is working well for me.

As far as my subs go, I NEVER leave them in once spot. They are always on the move. I've had very few damaged by enemy Airborne ASW.

(in reply to DeriKuk)
Post #: 14
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 1:41:30 AM   
CV2

 

Posts: 168
Joined: 11/4/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Arnhem


quote:

ORIGINAL: CV2

Im guessing that you dont move your subs. You park them in 1 hex and there they stay until they die, am I correct?


I used to do that in the earlier stages of '42 when I parked them off the HI but the latest losses were a line of pickets I had set on short loops so while I might be slow on the uptake I still get there eventually.


If you dont periodically move your subs out of air search range, of course they are goi9ng to be sunk. The way it works in a nutshell is this: 1) sub is spotted. Type and numbers of aircraft determine what increase in DL. if the sub doesnt move, DL drops 1 (or is it 2?). If the sub moves, DL is cut in half. Next turn, same thing. Number and type of aircraft increase DL and moving a sub will reduce it in half. But to get to zero DL, a sub needs to spend 2 or 3 days out of air search range. I plot my subs in a triangle pattern with 1 point way out of range at least a full days move away.

(in reply to Arnhem44)
Post #: 15
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 1:43:59 AM   
DeriKuk


Posts: 359
Joined: 8/2/2005
From: Alberta
Status: offline
quote:

Im guessing that you dont move your subs. You park them in 1 hex and there they stay until they die, am I correct?


Most of the hits on Allied subs occur when they move through choke points. That's where those deadly IJA Sally and Helen level bomber are murdering them. Guess what? Moving through a choke point involves movement. Keeping subs stationery in a safe place means they use less fuel - meaning they have to move through the Sally and Helen-lined choke-points less often. In the big picture, parking in one hex is safer. I move a sub as soon as it's spotted.

As it stands, it's the Alied subs are being hunted. They are not doing any effective hunting. The IJA level bombers are simply too deadly. The Allies should get some of those.

I have a unit filled with "expert selected" AWS pilots ( 70 skill), aggressive leader, good experience. It finds the subs. It sees them . . . and then drops a note apology for scaring them.

It's silly programming fudges like this that turns the game to silly crap. It makes players turn to gamey tactics or layers of house rules. It's safer leaving the Allied subs at home. I wish I could exchange them for more of those lovely DDs, DEs and SCs. Those, at least, work.


< Message edited by hjalmar99 -- 12/17/2010 1:45:36 AM >

(in reply to Arnhem44)
Post #: 16
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 2:04:36 AM   
Patbgaming

 

Posts: 103
Joined: 2/28/2010
From: Houston, Texas
Status: offline 		My Air ASW is working pretty good. I had a few training squadrons getting ASW skill up to put in these. Your skill needs to be 70+ for your pilots to attack subs with any kind of regularity. Below that they will spot them but very very rarely will they attack. This is at least what I have noticed. I used the request verteran button to pull 70 skill pilots into my ASW air groups

I fly my ASW groups at 1000. Not sure if that helps but I thought if I was at lower altitude, then the sub might not spot me coming from 30 miles away and disappear before I get to his location.

I also use ASW Task Forces to attack any subs near my bases once the air spots them. That seems to work the very best for killing subs.

(in reply to DeriKuk)
Post #: 17
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 2:22:49 AM   
Bullwinkle58


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

ORIGINAL: hjalmar99

Most of the hits on Allied subs occur when they move through choke points. That's where those deadly IJA Sally and Helen level bomber are murdering them. Guess what? Moving through a choke point involves movement. Keeping subs stationery in a safe place means they use less fuel - meaning they have to move through the Sally and Helen-lined choke-points less often. In the big picture, parking in one hex is safer. I move a sub as soon as it's spotted.


It seems to me you're wanting the game to conform to the bad tactics you're employing. If they get sunk in choke points, send fewer to choke points. In 1942 and much of 1943, historically, you should have minimal numbers of subs off the HI, and few in the PI yet, or DEI. Focus on island bases and get the re-supply convoys, Send some to Colombo through CT, and use them to patrol Sumatra and Java. Use Perth as well.

And you can't sit them still. D/L is all important in the game's logic. It's not bad progrmaming, it's fine. Accept it and adjust to it. US subs did not loll about waiting on the surface. U-Boats in the Atlantic did; USN boats hunted. Design good patrol areas and keep them moving. Use cruise speed if you want, but are you sure a boat staying in the same hex on cruise uses less fuel than one moving to a new hex on cruise?

I play the AI, so criticize that if you like, but I run into massive air ASW near the HI, and less farther out. (Historical? Yes.) I keep my boats moving, and use oddly shaped patrol zones. If I send them inside 1 hex of a base I never loiter them and I send them away for a cooling-off period after that one day. My game is at March 26, 1943. This is my Allied loss screen:







Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 12/17/2010 2:40:14 AM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to DeriKuk)
Post #: 18
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 2:26:08 AM   
CapAndGown


Posts: 3206
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline 		I am not sure, but I think a LowN skill will help along with a high ASW skill. 1000 feet seems to be the best altitude for hitting and spotting. ASW seems like it is 100 to 1000 times more likely to spot a sub than Nav Search.

(in reply to Patbgaming)
Post #: 19
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 2:30:26 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		I can't prove it, but once you get planes with good radar, putting them at 4k still "seem"s to spot the subs and has spotted surface ships for me


_____________________________


(in reply to CapAndGown)
Post #: 20
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 4:20:01 AM   
DeriKuk


Posts: 359
Joined: 8/2/2005
From: Alberta
Status: offline
quote:

It seems to me you're wanting the game to conform to the bad tactics you're employing. If they get sunk in choke points, send fewer to choke points. In 1942 and much of 1943, historically, you should have minimal numbers of subs off the HI, and few in the PI yet, or DEI. Focus on island bases and get the re-supply convoys, Send some to Colombo through CT, and use them to patrol Sumatra and Java. Use Perth as well.


FYI, the deployment you describe here is very close to what I have. The issue is not the performance of my subs. It's their vulnerability to radarless IJA level bombers when operating in enemy territory, while my ASW Air units are practically feckless.

I don't think you read my previous posting correctly. I do not park my subs in choke points. They have to pass through choke points to get to their hunting areas. Now I realize that I can never attain your tactical genius, but to quote my opponent:

quote:

"I don’t think it has mattered whether you are moving your subs or not. The planes either spotted them or not. Maybe the detection level lingers from the previous turn if you do not move them, but from what I can see, you are very diligent about keeping them moving."


I'm not complaining about the attacks or damage taken either way. My gripe is with the clear discrepancy between the ineffectiveness of radar-equipped Allied ASW groups with hand-picked crews, and the real effectiveness of radarless IJA bombers - that likely also have excellent crews. My observations do not come from one or two instances, but from many game-months of playing. I held off raising the issue before; tried all sorts of tactical variations, trained and hand-picked aircrews. Much - if not all - the advice proffered here has been examined.

My suspicion falls on a kludge that some "genius" (Could it be the same one who mucked up the search arcs?) stuck in the code to "balance" the game to some friend's liking, making tactics - good or bad - illogical and meaningless.

The underlying game design is too valuable to "fix for balance".

Now that I've raised the issue, I bet you a Murphy, my AWS air crews are going to discover that they can actually shoot at subs. We can hope.

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 21
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 4:27:51 AM   
CV2

 

Posts: 168
Joined: 11/4/2010
Status: offline 		Well its hard to know from a list of sunk ships what your tactics are. If you leave a damaged sub on station, it is easier to spot, easier to hit, and the hit will cause more damage. I see a list like that and I can tell just from experience on how I use my subs and ASW forces that you have to be leaving your subs in more or less 1 spot until they die.

(in reply to DeriKuk)
Post #: 22
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 5:06:57 AM   
michaelm75au


Posts: 13500
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

My suspicion falls on a kludge that some "genius" (Could it be the same one who mucked up the search arcs?) stuck in the code to "balance" the game to some friend's liking, making tactics - good or bad - illogical and meaningless.


I actually resent that, but I am not going to get into a discussion/argument about it.


_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to CV2)
Post #: 23
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 5:09:34 AM   
TheElf


Posts: 3870
Joined: 5/14/2003
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

quote:

My suspicion falls on a kludge that some "genius" (Could it be the same one who mucked up the search arcs?) stuck in the code to "balance" the game to some friend's liking, making tactics - good or bad - illogical and meaningless.


I actually resent that, but I am not going to get into a discussion/argument about it.



So do I....

_____________________________

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES



(in reply to michaelm75au)
Post #: 24
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 5:18:09 AM   
Nomad


Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: West Yellowstone, Montana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

quote:

My suspicion falls on a kludge that some "genius" (Could it be the same one who mucked up the search arcs?) stuck in the code to "balance" the game to some friend's liking, making tactics - good or bad - illogical and meaningless.


I actually resent that, but I am not going to get into a discussion/argument about it.



So do I....


I do too.

_____________________________


(in reply to TheElf)
Post #: 25
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 6:25:36 AM   
minnowguy

 

Posts: 85
Joined: 7/12/2005
From: St Louis
Status: offline 		First, insulting the devs isn't going to help.  Nobody is making code changes on a whim.  Clearly there are aspects of the game engine that are less than perfect but overall it is a wonderful game and I, at least, have spent hundreds of enjoyable hours playing it. 

Second, given how many subs the allies have, it is difficult for me to get too worked up about Japanese airborne ASW being too effective.  Yeah, historically ASW (in all its forms) was not a Japanese strong point, but the current model, while not "historical", is at least plausible and it is a long way from a game-ruining problem.  The same logic applies to the relatively high effectiveness of the Japanese subs: not historical, but not implausible given some minor doctrine changes and not nearly significant enough to ruing the game for me.

I haven't seen the game engine code, but after years of playing the game and reading this forum I think I have a pretty good idea what it looks like.  [Note: I've been writing/fixing/swearing-at software for 30 years now.]  Working with less-than-ideally structured legacy code can be insanely frustrating.  If they had to do it all over again, I suspect (and hope) that the devs would implement the engine along with a solid suite of integration tests that would prevent annoying little systemic bugs like the ones that crop up occasionally (radar, search arcs, attack bombers, etc).  Unfortunately, adding comprehensive test coverage to a complex existing application is just insanely difficult and expensive.

I'm consistently amazed that the relatively small AE dev team managed to add so many great features to the older WITP code base without making the game completely unstable and unplayable.  I think many people don't realize just how difficult this is.  Kudos to the development team -- keep up the good work.

Now, about those search arcs ....   :)

(in reply to Nomad)
Post #: 26
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 7:44:36 AM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hjalmar99
This far into the game, I have yet to register a single attack by Allied aircraft on ASW missions against Japanese subs. I've sunk some subs with surface units and other subs, but no ASW-Air hits or attempted hits. My opponent has also noted this.

In the meanwhile the Allied subs are having the tar beaten out of them at every opportunity by JAPANESE ARMY LEVEL BOMBER - Sally and Helen! No, not IJN planes like Betty, Nell, Mavis or Emily . . . but by IJA level bomber without a sniff of radar. My opponent has also noted this.

Of course, I expect you to be in denial - especially a certain Danish gentleman.

In the meanwhile we'll just soldier on with a broken game.



Hm interesting. So you experience both situations, effective and ineffective ASW in your PBEM, and your conclusion is there is an issue with the coding for ASW?

To me it looks rather like one player was able to create an effective ASW and the other one wasn´t.

And, btw, you create a situation where "being in denial" is a kind of weird position.
Airborne ASW is not working! ASW is working! I deny!!


_____________________________


(in reply to DeriKuk)
Post #: 27
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 7:58:24 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hjalmar99

I apologize for starting a new thread. This is really a continuation of http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2300995&mpage=1&key=ASW%2CAir? . . . but I'd get no respoinse there now.

I also realize that there have been good intentions to fix the problem of too-powerful ASW Air attacks, but I suspect that, instead of being generally nerfed for all parties, it is now badly warped. It is indeed FUBAR i.m.o.

The game is Grand Campaign, PBEM, as the Allies. It is an ongoing game, so I'm not going to post screen shots. The date is approaching May 1943. A sample of Allied air groups includes:

  • Experience: 58; 72; 56; 58; 62
  • Morale: 99; 93; 99; 97; 98
  • ASW Skill: <50; 59; 61; 70; <50


All these groups have been set to 60% ASW and 40% rest. The planes involved are Wellington GRs, Hudson III (LR)s, and PV-1 Venturas. Two of these types have ASV-II radars. (ASD-1 radar only appears in September 1943).

I've flown at varying altitudes: 100, 1000 . . . 4000.

I'm aware that ASW operates at half range.

Many Japanese subs have been spotted within that range. My infantry can sometimes stand on the beach and throw rocks at them!

I have had PBYs on Naval Search missions take shots [and HIT!] subs.

This far into the game, I have yet to register a single attack by Allied aircraft on ASW missions against Japanese subs. I've sunk some subs with surface units and other subs, but no ASW-Air hits or attempted hits. My opponent has also noted this.

In the meanwhile the Allied subs are having the tar beaten out of them at every opportunity by JAPANESE ARMY LEVEL BOMBER - Sally and Helen! No, not IJN planes like Betty, Nell, Mavis or Emily . . . but by IJA level bomber without a sniff of radar. My opponent has also noted this.

Of course, I expect you to be in denial - especially a certain Danish gentleman.

In the meanwhile we'll just soldier on with a broken game.



I can see only one useful group and that´s the one that has got 70 skill. And to hit a sub you probably also need the bombing skill, in your case lownav. IMO air ASW works pretty well, one of the things I found not to be too good or too bad. While the IJ hasn´t hit a single sub of mine with air ASW in all of 42, they got better and better with the game now being in 1/44 and air ASW to reckon with.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 12/17/2010 8:05:05 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to DeriKuk)
Post #: 28
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 8:08:05 AM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline 		I see it the same way.

Might add that the people who lose hundreds of subs usually do so because they send them into heavily patroled ASW zones
and expect them to be effective and safe. A logic I still don´t quite understand.


_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 29
RE: ASW Air is FUBAR - 12/17/2010 8:40:33 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		LoBaron,

Don't forget many people won't let logic get in the way of a good piece of blame-placing. Logically it may be their play at fault but preferentially they'll blame the game etc...

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> ASW Air is FUBAR Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.891