Air Search ARCS not working as designed

[TulliusDetritus]

Well, other players and me have noticed that the search planes find TFs, submarines OUTSIDE of their assigned search arc AND beyond 4 hexes: 5, 6, 7... 9 hexes, etc.

We know the 4 hexes rule: a search plane will explore EVERY hex within 4 hexes.

Screenshot #1: a submarine is detected

[TulliusDetritus]

There is only one PBY-5A in the area. In Pago Pago. Look where it should be exploring. Also note (per above picture) that the sub is 7 hexes away Pago Pago...

Screenshot #2

[khyberbill]

If you dont see a red icon after detection then it probably was not there, just FOW.

[TulliusDetritus]

I thought about the FOW. But fog of war OUTSIDE of the search arc? [X(] I can understand a false report within the area which has to be explored.

And above all, I hope the FOW argument is not used as a Swiss knife. Maybe something is NOT working [:)]

[fflaguna]

I am waiting to see what happens with this.

[packerpete]

I am puzzled also but will throw out a couple guesses along the FOW lines.

1. A simple pilot reporting error.
2. A morse keying error.
3. A garbled radio transmission.
4. A cryptograffic coding error.
5. The sighting is something other than a sub.

The question then becomes were is the sub/contact really at, and what is its real composition?[&:]

[Klahn]

ORIGINAL: khyberbill

If you dont see a red icon after detection then it probably was not there, just FOW.

I'm also quite confused about this issue. What actually determines whether a red icon is placed for a detection or not? Is it possible for a contact to be real, but for no red icon to be placed? Is it possible for red icons to be placed when there is literally nothing at all there? I can understand where friendly ships might be mistaken for enemy or vice-versa, but was reporting a 6-ship enemy taskforce when absolutely nothing was there a daily occurence in the real war?

I can understand the difficulty and false-alarms when looking for submarines. Whales, schools of fish, sunken objects, flotsam, and the like could certainly be mistaken for a sub. But I've seen false reports of task forces of 10 ships or more happen routinely in this game. I'm finding it hard to believe that this is realistic.

[Alfred]

Section 10 of the manual deals with detection levels. People should note the difference between DL (detection level) and MDL (maximum detection level), particularly the fact that when DL increases, the MDL increases to the same level but when DL decreases, the MDL decreases only by 1.

Icons for enemy units only appear once they have an MDL of 1. However due to the slower rate of decrease for MDL, the level of accuracy quickly declines.

Alfred

[Klahn]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Section 10 of the manual deals with detection levels. People should note the difference between DL (detection level) and MDL (maximum detection level), particularly the fact that when DL increases, the MDL increases to the same level but when DL decreases, the MDL decreases only by 1.

Icons for enemy units only appear once they have an MDL of 1. However due to the slower rate of decrease for MDL, the level of accuracy quickly declines.

Alfred

2 questions then. Is it possible for enemy ships to be sighted by a patrol but not have their MDL increased? (A sighting with a DL of 0 if you will.) Is it possible for a non-existent enemy TF to gain an MDL?

[Dili]

It might be a typo in report [:)]

[39battalion]

I have noticed the same issue reported by TulliusDetritus.

Just to add another twist to this mystery the enemy TFs detected and displayed on the map outside my search arcs, and more than 4 hexes from bases with naval search aircraft, are located within the naval search arcs displayed on the map in Tracker. Hmmm... so the search arcs in Tracker seem to be more accurate than those displayed on the main game map.

I don't know what is going on here, but it does seem strange ......

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: Ryvan

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Section 10 of the manual deals with detection levels. People should note the difference between DL (detection level) and MDL (maximum detection level), particularly the fact that when DL increases, the MDL increases to the same level but when DL decreases, the MDL decreases only by 1.

Icons for enemy units only appear once they have an MDL of 1. However due to the slower rate of decrease for MDL, the level of accuracy quickly declines.

Alfred

2 questions then. Is it possible for enemy ships to be sighted by a patrol but not have their MDL increased? (A sighting with a DL of 0 if you will.) Is it possible for a non-existent enemy TF to gain an MDL?

Section 10.1.1.1 of the manual details the different ways of increasing the DL of a TF. Due to the different ways of gaining a DL (eg coast watchers, subs, enemy CV TF simply launching an airstrike etc) how great the increase is can vary very significantly. Also most players do not appear to pay sufficient attention to the fact that different types of aircraft will increase the DL by 1 or 2 or 4, instead just treating all aircraft spotting of TFs as being of equal value.

Remember the DL is reset to zero after each 12 hour phase but the MDL declines at a much slower rate, which IMHO appears to explain why you have framed the latest two questions. So no, a sighting does not give you a DL of 0, but you lose your DL every 12 hours. If the quality of your sighting was poor, then the quality of your MDL will also be poor = unreliable.

Alfred

[Nomad]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: Ryvan

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Section 10 of the manual deals with detection levels. People should note the difference between DL (detection level) and MDL (maximum detection level), particularly the fact that when DL increases, the MDL increases to the same level but when DL decreases, the MDL decreases only by 1.

Icons for enemy units only appear once they have an MDL of 1. However due to the slower rate of decrease for MDL, the level of accuracy quickly declines.

Alfred

2 questions then. Is it possible for enemy ships to be sighted by a patrol but not have their MDL increased? (A sighting with a DL of 0 if you will.) Is it possible for a non-existent enemy TF to gain an MDL?

Section 10.1.1.1 of the manual details the different ways of increasing the DL of a TF. Due to the different ways of gaining a DL (eg coast watchers, subs, enemy CV TF simply launching an airstrike etc) how great the increase is can vary very significantly. Also most players do not appear to pay sufficient attention to the fact that different types of aircraft will increase the DL by 1 or 2 or 4, instead just treating all aircraft spotting of TFs as being of equal value.

Remember the DL is reset to zero after each 12 hour phase but the MDL declines at a much slower rate, which IMHO appears to explain why you have framed the latest two questions. So no, a sighting does not give you a DL of 0, but you lose your DL every 12 hours. If the quality of your sighting was poor, then the quality of your MDL will also be poor = unreliable.

Alfred

This will only be a factor if the TF is in a base hex and a recon mission takes place at that base.

[Klahn]

I think I understand how DL and MDL work, but I'm still not putting together what the purpose of false reports is. If all correct reports result in a red icon being placed on the map, and false reports do not generate an icon, what is the purpose of showing us false reports? We automatically know that they're false.

[Captain Cruft]

Detection levels are outside the scope of this problem. The point is, a sighting was reported outside the designated search arc. The plane(s) should not have been in that hex at all.

It's quite clear to me that there is a bug here. Sort of like the arc gets mirrored "behind" as well as forward.

[Klahn]

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

Detection levels are outside the scope of this problem. The point is, a sighting was reported outside the designated search arc. The plane(s) should not have been in that hex at all.

It's quite clear to me that there is a bug here. Sort of like the arc gets mirrored "behind" as well as forward.

You're right. I've kinda hijacked this. I'll start a new thread.