DD for surface combat

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I think DDs are dead meat once they get hit in surface combat. That means different things to me depending on who you are playing:

Allies: Send 'em into the fray. You got lots more.

Japanese: Be very careful when you expose your DDs to surface combat. If you have a huge advantage, well, maybe you can risk them. For the most part, however, you need to avoid losing DDs (and all other warships) unnecessarily. You never have enough and probably won't ever have more than you start with on 7 Dec 41.

I agree with conserving Jap DDs (if you're a Jap player). I would use CLs with a little DD support if I were planning a surface battle. A Jap CL is little better than a big DD anyway and since they don't have ASW capability you won't miss them later in the game.

[Fishbed]

ORIGINAL: cavalry

The Shimakaze looks about the best Japanese DD ( but all though its fast it agility is not as high as others ) did Japan only build one ?

M

Yes... Ho man what a girl!!! [&o]
I hope AE has plans to include the few ones that were planned and/or laid down and never completed (if any...)

[tsimmonds]

IIRC, 15 more unnamed units were planned but none of these were ever actually ordered. Matsu became the standard mobilization design instead, as its construction was cheaper, easier, simpler, faster, and could be undertaken by more shipyards; plus she was a more capable ASW platform and general escort.

Actually, you will most likely be much happier with large numbers of Matsus beginning to arrive in late 1943 than you would be with a few more Shimakazes in the same time frame.

[marky]

Radar helps too [:D]

i did quite a bit of damage to the Swift Exprewss one dark knight(hehehe) in IronBottom Sound cuz they detected him first, plus i had W.A. Lee in command [:D]

[marky]

ORIGINAL: cavalry

I always thought the jap DD were better most of the time because of the night training and torps ?

most people dont like to admit it but its true, for a time they were VASTLY better

some of their lookouts were spotting us at 20000 YARDS

and in the pitch dark of the Sound too

plus theres Tanaka and Tassafaronga IIRC

IIRC he lost only 1 destroyer and crippled 3 allied cruisers, and while most of his ships were loaded down with supplies

[marky]

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

IIRC, 15 more unnamed units were planned but none of these were ever actually ordered. Matsu became the standard mobilization design instead, as its construction was cheaper, easier, simpler, faster, and could be undertaken by more shipyards; plus she was a more capable ASW platform and general escort.

Actually, you will most likely be much happier with large numbers of Matsus beginning to arrive in late 1943 than you would be with a few more Shimakazes in the same time frame.

indeed i agree

but by then it was way too late to stop the bleeding of the shipping lanes

why the Imperial Navy didnt look at the Battle of the Atlantic and draw the conclusion that itd be their merchants againts our boats and prepare an ASW plan is beyond me

[marky]

but then really the best way for japan to win the warm, indeed the only way, was to prolong it and make us get tired of it, and they nearly succeeded, partially so, since it helped us to decide to drop the bomb, so ironically their strategy of make it bloody backfired


but what they shoulda done was to have a massaive ASW program, or at least as much as they could manage

http://www.combinedfleet.com/matsu_c.htm

http://www.combinedfleet.com/shimak_c.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_d ... _Shimakaze

the obvious choice for that would be the matsu as irrelevant said, cuz they couldnt keep up with us in warship numbers, but they mightve been able to build a decent ASW fleet of Matsus, again as Irrelevant said, and that wouldve helped to drag the war on

[marky]

ORIGINAL: cavalry

Well I see lots of hits with these weapons ?
I know there is a type of attack called long lance as well - that usually misses

the long lances were probably the best torpedoes in the world

they were big, fast, had a huge warhead, and rarely failed


many USN commanders believed they were under submarine attack when in fact it was the long lances that did the deed

[marky]

ORIGINAL: Fishbed

ORIGINAL: cavalry

The Shimakaze looks about the best Japanese DD ( but all though its fast it agility is not as high as others ) did Japan only build one ?

M

Yes... Ho man what a girl!!! [&o]
I hope AE has plans to include the few ones that were planned and/or laid down and never completed (if any...)

nice destroyer indeed, but complicated, much like the Tiger tanks, and look where that ended up [:D]

[marky]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

ORIGINAL: Terminus

No destroyer has enough armour for it to have great effect on surface combat, and Long Lances are vastly overrated. Lots of guns, and lots of speed.

In my admittedly limited experience, I have never seen more than a couple Long Lance hits in combat. They are not the scourge of the seas. The IJN 18in aerial torpedo on the other hand.....

they can get pretty bad in surface engagements

and yes aerials are deadly, im dealin with them in my game with swift right now(AAR section)

but a massing of AA and fighters easily defeat them [:D]

[marky]

also, destroyers helped win the naval battle of Guadalcanal on november 13th

[Monter_Trismegistos]

Hmmm.... Seems that marky returns to my ignore list...

[DuckofTindalos]

He was off it?

[bradfordkay]

" In my admittedly limited experience, I have never seen more than a couple Long Lance hits in combat. "

I experienced a night of combat off Canton Island where the Long Lance torpedoes were decisive in the end...

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 12/16/42

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Canton Island at 100,100

Japanese Ships
BB Haruna, Shell hits 5, on fire
BB Hyuga, Shell hits 1, on fire
CA Chikuma
CA Nachi, Shell hits 5
CA Aoba, Shell hits 1
DD Teruzuki, Shell hits 13, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Makinami
DD Takanami, Shell hits 22, and is sunk
DD Oshio
DD Yamagumo, Shell hits 3, on fire

Allied Ships
BB South Dakota, Shell hits 3, on fire
BB Indiana, Shell hits 7, on fire
DD DeHaven
DD Lansdowne, Shell hits 16, on fire, heavy damage
DD Lardner, Shell hits 17, and is sunk
DD Edwards, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Canton Island at 100,100

Japanese Ships
BB Haruna, Shell hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
BB Hyuga, Shell hits 1, on fire
CA Chikuma, Shell hits 3
CA Nachi, Shell hits 1
CA Aoba, Shell hits 7, on fire
DD Makinami
DD Oshio, Shell hits 2
DD Yamagumo, Shell hits 5, and is sunk

Allied Ships
BB South Dakota, Shell hits 8, on fire
BB Indiana, Shell hits 15, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DD DeHaven, Shell hits 12, on fire, heavy damage
DD Lansdowne, Shell hits 3, and is sunk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Canton Island at 100,100

Japanese Ships
CA Tone
CA Kinugasa
CA Furutaka
CL Nagara
DD Akebono
DD Uzuki
DD Minazuki
DD Yuzuki

Allied Ships
PT PT-59
PT PT-60
PT PT-61

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Canton Island at 100,100

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
OS2U-3 Kingfisher: 3 destroyed

Japanese Ships
CA Tone, Shell hits 1, on fire
CA Kinugasa
CA Furutaka
CL Nagara, Shell hits 2
DD Akebono
DD Uzuki
DD Minazuki
DD Yuzuki

Allied Ships
BB South Dakota, Shell hits 21, Torpedo hits 4, and is sunk
BB Indiana, Shell hits 5, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
DD DeHaven, Shell hits 2, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk

[Shark7]

I concur. Most of the surface combats I've had were decided by torpedos. In fact, if I were to post my sink list, you would see that only 3-4 were sunk by guns, roughly 1/3 by Type 93s, and the rest by Type 91s.

[niceguy2005]

I find the Long Lance results to be hit and miss (pardon the pun).  I have had a few battles in which they played a large role....like the sinking of the Boise I mentioned before  I have had many more battles where they played no role.  As an allied player I have lost more than a few ships to BB gun fire.  Of course I probably lose more to those d@#! Bettys. [:@]

[Cavalry Corp]

Tone and Chikuma in surface TF ? These are the eyes for the carriers ?

[bradfordkay]

Ask Chez about that one... I was on the receiving end of those LLs. When my aircraft saw the Haruna and Hyuga coming in I thought that sending SDak and Indiana to intercept was a good idea. More fool me, eh?

BTW; Tone took some hits from LBA the next day. The scheduled bombardment of Canton Island was pre-empted by all this surface combat so the aircraft there took some measure of revenge, sinking the Haruna and plastering the Hyuga and Tone with 500lbers.

[marky]

indeed. also depends on the commander of tjhe IJN force as well. (use Tanaka)

[marky]

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

Hmmm.... Seems that marky returns to my ignore list...

can people like you not do that? all i did was inject my two cents, and no one else that did got any grief

crap liek that is getting REALLY old...