ASW: Will anything be done in AE to reduce the lethality of Japanese naval search and ASW AC?

[racndoc]

In RL, the Silent Service accounted for the destruction of 80% of all Japanese merchant and combat ship tonnage. Against a competent Japanese player in WitP, the Allies are lucky if their subs can sink as much tonnage as they lose themselves. Japanese land and naval bombers, patrol and float AC seem to be using "smart" bombs when they encounter Allied subs. The first problem is that subs in general seem to be treated as "surface" ships in regards to naval search and ASW AC...they are always spotted during the day when they should be submerged in the war zones. Secondly, most of the Japanese AC use AP bombs that have a devastating effect on thin skinned subs.


Even an incompetent sub commander that sailed on the surface during daylight and ignored his air search radar would still crash dive when spotted by enemy AC and would be virtually impossible to hit with AP bombs. If nothing else, at least naval search and ASW AC should be carrying depth charges if they were truly going to attack subs in this game. In my current game of WitP Ive lost 38 Allied subs in 16 months....29 to AP bombs and have probably another 100 or so subs that were hit but were fortunate enough to get back to port. I dont even put subs on "patrol" missions...they are all hit while en route to performing the supposedly less detectable transport and mining missions.

Id rather see subs left out of the game than watch how WitP currently models the Silent Service.....the Silent Service did to Japan what Germany dreamed of but failed to accomplish in 2 world wars.

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: AdmSpruance

In RL, the Silent Service accounted for the destruction of 80% of all Japanese merchant and combat ship tonnage. Against a competent Japanese player in WitP, the Allies are lucky if their subs can sink as much tonnage as they lose themselves. Japanese land and naval bombers, patrol and float AC seem to be using "smart" bombs when they encounter Allied subs. The first problem is that subs in general seem to be treated as "surface" ships in regards to naval search and ASW AC...they are always spotted during the day when they should be submerged in the war zones. Secondly, most of the Japanese AC use AP bombs that have a devastating effect on thin skinned subs.


Even an incompetent sub commander that sailed on the surface during daylight and ignored his air search radar would still crash dive when spotted by enemy AC and would be virtually impossible to hit with AP bombs. If nothing else, at least naval search and ASW AC should be carrying depth charges if they were truly going to attack subs in this game. In my current game of WitP Ive lost 38 Allied subs in 16 months....29 to AP bombs and have probably another 100 or so subs that were hit but were fortunate enough to get back to port. I dont even put subs on "patrol" missions...they are all hit while en route to performing the supposedly less detectable transport and mining missions.

Id rather see subs left out of the game than watch how WitP currently models the Silent Service.....the Silent Service did to Japan what Germany dreamed of but failed to accomplish in 2 world wars.

In current WitP the Air ASW is at least 10x better than in "RealLife (TM)" - you can search my extensive tests few years ago that graphically show that... [:D]

What WitP-AE people told us is that this significantly changed in WitP-AE and I am keeping my fingers crossed! [:)]


BTW, with hindsight the WitP or WitP-AE throw historic WWII into garbage with first turn - this is game after all and not historic documentary! [;)]

Also every competent Japanese player would immediately start using guarded convoys, add strong ASW TFs and place significant portion of his air force on Air Search and Air ASW so comparison with historic WWII is impossible...


Leo "Apollo11"

[tigercub]

well said Appollo....

[rockmedic109]

I have not noticed excessive bomb hits on subs in the current version {playing AI}.  My subs play in areas that are heavily patrolled and I suffer few hits. 
 
A couple of versions back, there was a major increase in the number of air attacks and hits on subs and was corrected in a subsequent patch.
 
Could your opponent be using ultra high EXP pilots in ASW efforts?  Would this create enough of a change to create as many hits aas you are seeing?

[racndoc]

Apollo 11...

First of all I appreciate you commenting on your previous experiences and your prior testing. Like you, I am keeping my fingers crossed that this will be fixed in AE. However, when I read JWilkerson's AAR about how he runs his convoys under land based naval search and ASW until the Allied player gets frustrated and actually GIVES UP ON TRYING TO ATTACK JAP OIL/RESOURCE CONVOYS ....and realizing that he is one of the programmers...that I wonder if the game developers are MORE concerned about play balance than historicity.

And just to clarify my position in respect to your comments:

1)I dont care about Japan guarding their convoys....Bravo...Bravo...
2)I dont care about strong Jap ASW TFs.....any sub I lose to guarded convoys or ASW TFs just demonstrates to me that the game engine is working.

My ONLY complaint is that Jap naval search and ASW AC ALWAYS spot Allied subs and drop incredibly lethal AP bombs on them....there are certain areas of the ocean such as the Malacca Straits that are a death sentence for Allied subs. Japanese land and naval bombers on naval search and ASW should be required to load depth charges as ordnance so that hits would not be as lethal as AP bombs....which are almost impossible to deliver on subs.

AND......strange as it may seem, subs should NOT be treated as surface units for naval search and ASW as they mostly submerged during daylight in war zones.

And if you want to get into Allied fanboy territory Allied subs' air search radar should help enable them to avoid Japanese naval search and ASW AC.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: AdmSpruance

In RL, the Silent Service accounted for the destruction of 80% of all Japanese merchant and combat ship tonnage. Against a competent Japanese player in WitP, the Allies are lucky if their subs can sink as much tonnage as they lose themselves. Japanese land and naval bombers, patrol and float AC seem to be using "smart" bombs when they encounter Allied subs. The first problem is that subs in general seem to be treated as "surface" ships in regards to naval search and ASW AC...they are always spotted during the day when they should be submerged in the war zones. Secondly, most of the Japanese AC use AP bombs that have a devastating effect on thin skinned subs.


Even an incompetent sub commander that sailed on the surface during daylight and ignored his air search radar would still crash dive when spotted by enemy AC and would be virtually impossible to hit with AP bombs. If nothing else, at least naval search and ASW AC should be carrying depth charges if they were truly going to attack subs in this game. In my current game of WitP Ive lost 38 Allied subs in 16 months....29 to AP bombs and have probably another 100 or so subs that were hit but were fortunate enough to get back to port. I dont even put subs on "patrol" missions...they are all hit while en route to performing the supposedly less detectable transport and mining missions.

Id rather see subs left out of the game than watch how WitP currently models the Silent Service.....the Silent Service did to Japan what Germany dreamed of but failed to accomplish in 2 world wars.

In current WitP the Air ASW is at least 10x better than in "RealLife (TM)" - you can search my extensive tests few years ago that graphically show that... [:D]

What WitP-AE people told us is that this significantly changed in WitP-AE and I am keeping my fingers crossed! [:)]


BTW, with hindsight the WitP or WitP-AE throw historic WWII into garbage with first turn - this is game after all and not historic documentary! [;)]

Also every competent Japanese player would immediately start using guarded convoys, add strong ASW TFs and place significant portion of his air force on Air Search and Air ASW so comparison with historic WWII is impossible...


Leo "Apollo11"

Which really warrants the question: How much of the ASW effectiveness is the game model, and how much is simply the fact that the Japanese player knows what he must do from the start?

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: AdmSpruance

First of all I appreciate you commenting on your previous experiences and your prior testing. Like you, I am keeping my fingers crossed that this will be fixed in AE. However, when I read JWilkerson's AAR about how he runs his convoys under land based naval search and ASW until the Allied player gets frustrated and actually GIVES UP ON TRYING TO ATTACK JAP OIL/RESOURCE CONVOYS ....and realizing that he is one of the programmers...that I wonder if the game developers are MORE concerned about play balance than historicity.

And just to clarify my position in respect to your comments:

1)I dont care about Japan guarding their convoys....Bravo...Bravo...
2)I dont care about strong Jap ASW TFs.....any sub I lose to guarded convoys or ASW TFs just demonstrates to me that the game engine is working.

My ONLY complaint is that Jap naval search and ASW AC ALWAYS spot Allied subs and drop incredibly lethal AP bombs on them....there are certain areas of the ocean such as the Malacca Straits that are a death sentence for Allied subs. Japanese land and naval bombers on naval search and ASW should be required to load depth charges as ordnance so that hits would not be as lethal as AP bombs....which are almost impossible to deliver on subs.

AND......strange as it may seem, subs should NOT be treated as surface units for naval search and ASW as they mostly submerged during daylight in war zones.

And if you want to get into Allied fanboy territory Allied subs' air search radar should help enable them to avoid Japanese naval search and ASW AC.

I paid special attention to many areas that particuralry interest me in WitP-AE and I got answers (among other stuff) from WitP-AE developers that:

#1
There are search arcs IIRC! [:)] [&o][&o][&o]

#2
That Air ASW and Air Naval Search was rewritten and thus that Air ASW and Air Naval Search discovery of ships and/or submarines was severly toned down IIRC! [:)] [&o][&o][&o]


I sincerely hope that this is all as it is "advertised" and will keep all my fingers crossed! [:D]


Leo "Apollo11"

[romanovich]

U.S. submariners had a well-documented habit of going after their targets on the surface and engaging them with their guns. U.S. submarines tend to have heavier surface combat equipment for that reason. Other nations didn't do that to that extent. So it's possible that some of these subs get caught if the Japanese develop effective countermeasures, which historically they didn't.
 
Also, surface losses mattered immensely in submarine warfare. The German U-Boot success rate diminished considerably once the Allies were able to close the "air gap" in the mid-Atlantic. German submarines were either caught on the surface and were sunk by airborne Allied units, or were forced to stay submerged and because of the resulting speed limitations became rather ineffective. This sounds quite similar to what the Allied players above describe as happening to them. It seems more of a function of better "learned" ASW abilities by the Jap player than an unbalanced game.
 
Playability in my mind matters. The U.S. players have a huge advantage anyway; if the Jap player can't model getting better in conducting warfare than their historical counterparts, then why play the game?
 
Maybe the U.S. players that feel their subs get sunk all the time for "no reason" can just set the AI to "easy" so they don't have to deal with a determined and improved opponent...

[pad152]

WITP has several issues with ASW, first is the super-uber spotting, it's hard to hide a sub 300 miles away, the new fog of war model in AE will hopefully address this. Second, with the new serviceability rating for aircraft, there should be a lot less aircraft flying every single day. Third the new sub patrol model will keep subs moving and not sitting in the same place for weeks on end, this should also make finding and attacking subs a lot harder.

[Jorm]

ORIGINAL: AdmSpruance

. The first problem is that subs in general seem to be treated as "surface" ships in regards to naval search and ASW AC...they are always spotted during the day when they should be submerged in the war zones. Secondly, most of the Japanese AC use AP bombs that have a devastating effect on thin skinned subs.

I dont know much about WWII US sub patrol doctorine, did they actually patrol submereged during the day ? Id be interested in hearing more about this if any one has any info.

I know the brits patrolled submerged during daylight in the Med, not sure about the germans or italians.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: romanovich

U.S. submariners had a well-documented habit of going after their targets on the surface and engaging them with their guns. U.S. submarines tend to have heavier surface combat equipment for that reason. Other nations didn't do that to that extent. So it's possible that some of these subs get caught if the Japanese develop effective countermeasures, which historically they didn't.

Also, surface losses mattered immensely in submarine warfare. The German U-Boot success rate diminished considerably once the Allies were able to close the "air gap" in the mid-Atlantic. German submarines were either caught on the surface and were sunk by airborne Allied units, or were forced to stay submerged and because of the resulting speed limitations became rather ineffective. This sounds quite similar to what the Allied players above describe as happening to them. It seems more of a function of better "learned" ASW abilities by the Jap player than an unbalanced game.

Playability in my mind matters. The U.S. players have a huge advantage anyway; if the Jap player can't model getting better in conducting warfare than their historical counterparts, then why play the game?

Maybe the U.S. players that feel their subs get sunk all the time for "no reason" can just set the AI to "easy" so they don't have to deal with a determined and improved opponent...

no matter how good or bad the Allied player handles his subs, that doesn´t matter, if the Japanese player does well, he can sink every sub spotted within the SRA and for every AK lost a sub will be lost also, makes it a clear Japanese victory. The use of 500 80+ exp Helens or Sallies will do that alone...

[hosho]

ORIGINAL: castor troy


no matter how good or bad the Allied player handles his subs, that doesn´t matter, if the Japanese player does well, he can sink every sub spotted within the SRA and for every AK lost a sub will be lost also, makes it a clear Japanese victory. The use of 500 80+ exp Helens or Sallies will do that alone...

Do you think that using 500 hellens or sallies to hunt subs is an advantage or disadvantage to the japanese player? If I am willing to sacrifice the 500 bombers flying asw sholdn`t I be rewarded? Ok I agree that they are a fair bit too effective but I also think that you are overreacting a bit. I `ve had situations when AI makes a landing on an island with some 30 ak-s and a carrier group supporting it and my jap patrol aircrafts did`t see a thing.
My point is: ok make it much less effective but don`t make it useless.

Do you want to play a "historical game" with the certain outcome? = BORING

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Jorm

ORIGINAL: AdmSpruance

. The first problem is that subs in general seem to be treated as "surface" ships in regards to naval search and ASW AC...they are always spotted during the day when they should be submerged in the war zones. Secondly, most of the Japanese AC use AP bombs that have a devastating effect on thin skinned subs.

I dont know much about WWII US sub patrol doctorine, did they actually patrol submereged during the day ? Id be interested in hearing more about this if any one has any info.

I know the brits patrolled submerged during daylight in the Med, not sure about the germans or italians.

Yes.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: romanovich

U.S. submariners had a well-documented habit of going after their targets on the surface and engaging them with their guns. U.S. submarines tend to have heavier surface combat equipment for that reason. Other nations didn't do that to that extent. So it's possible that some of these subs get caught if the Japanese develop effective countermeasures, which historically they didn't.

Also, surface losses mattered immensely in submarine warfare. The German U-Boot success rate diminished considerably once the Allies were able to close the "air gap" in the mid-Atlantic. German submarines were either caught on the surface and were sunk by airborne Allied units, or were forced to stay submerged and because of the resulting speed limitations became rather ineffective. This sounds quite similar to what the Allied players above describe as happening to them. It seems more of a function of better "learned" ASW abilities by the Jap player than an unbalanced game.

Playability in my mind matters. The U.S. players have a huge advantage anyway; if the Jap player can't model getting better in conducting warfare than their historical counterparts, then why play the game?

Maybe the U.S. players that feel their subs get sunk all the time for "no reason" can just set the AI to "easy" so they don't have to deal with a determined and improved opponent...

no matter how good or bad the Allied player handles his subs, that doesn´t matter, if the Japanese player does well, he can sink every sub spotted within the SRA and for every AK lost a sub will be lost also, makes it a clear Japanese victory. The use of 500 80+ exp Helens or Sallies will do that alone...

It goes the other way, too. I've been losing 2-3 subs a month as the Japanese following standard submarine doctrine.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: hosho

ORIGINAL: castor troy


no matter how good or bad the Allied player handles his subs, that doesn´t matter, if the Japanese player does well, he can sink every sub spotted within the SRA and for every AK lost a sub will be lost also, makes it a clear Japanese victory. The use of 500 80+ exp Helens or Sallies will do that alone...

Do you think that using 500 hellens or sallies to hunt subs is an advantage or disadvantage to the japanese player? If I am willing to sacrifice the 500 bombers flying asw sholdn`t I be rewarded? Ok I agree that they are a fair bit too effective but I also think that you are overreacting a bit. I `ve had situations when AI makes a landing on an island with some 30 ak-s and a carrier group supporting it and my jap patrol aircrafts did`t see a thing.
My point is: ok make it much less effective but don`t make it useless.

Do you want to play a "historical game" with the certain outcome? = BORING

hmm, I would say advantage. It might be a disadvantage to have those bombers not available for other attacks BUT the advantage to have them on ASW is far greater as those 500 bombers will be enough to save your oil and ressource flow. Without those bombers most of the Allied PBEM players would achieve the same effects as were done in real life. With those 500 bombers, this is impossible. No Allied PBEM player (not even Speedy [:D]) would achieve this against me.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: romanovich

U.S. submariners had a well-documented habit of going after their targets on the surface and engaging them with their guns. U.S. submarines tend to have heavier surface combat equipment for that reason. Other nations didn't do that to that extent. So it's possible that some of these subs get caught if the Japanese develop effective countermeasures, which historically they didn't.

Also, surface losses mattered immensely in submarine warfare. The German U-Boot success rate diminished considerably once the Allies were able to close the "air gap" in the mid-Atlantic. German submarines were either caught on the surface and were sunk by airborne Allied units, or were forced to stay submerged and because of the resulting speed limitations became rather ineffective. This sounds quite similar to what the Allied players above describe as happening to them. It seems more of a function of better "learned" ASW abilities by the Jap player than an unbalanced game.

Playability in my mind matters. The U.S. players have a huge advantage anyway; if the Jap player can't model getting better in conducting warfare than their historical counterparts, then why play the game?

Maybe the U.S. players that feel their subs get sunk all the time for "no reason" can just set the AI to "easy" so they don't have to deal with a determined and improved opponent...

no matter how good or bad the Allied player handles his subs, that doesn´t matter, if the Japanese player does well, he can sink every sub spotted within the SRA and for every AK lost a sub will be lost also, makes it a clear Japanese victory. The use of 500 80+ exp Helens or Sallies will do that alone...

It goes the other way, too. I've been losing 2-3 subs a month as the Japanese following standard submarine doctrine.

of course it goes the other way too. The other way goes even better because A) there are far more Allied bombers and B) they mostly carry more bombs than a Helen or Sally. So if the Allied bomber crews would have the same exp of 80+ they would be even deadlier. But the Japanese player normally doesn´t have some 50 subs in a wide area covered by 500 bombers - the SRA is this place where you have normally a number between 30 and 50 subs from mid 43 on (at least I do as the Allied player) but there are also those 500 bombers covering this whole area where the most Japanese shipping is also. So while it is not the biggest problem that there are 500 bombers in the whole SRA it gets a problem if the Japanese player spots a couple of subs somewhere and then transferes in 200-300 bombers to one base or a couple of bases very close together. Then those couple of subs get hit within the following couple of days, no matter if they move or not. When this Wolfpack is finished, the bombers are spread out again. This is why I only use max one sentai of bombers at a base for ASW trying to have the bases separated by at least 8 hexes. And even then can I make my shipping lanes nearly secure. Convoy system and 6 ship ASW TFs do the rest. I had a lot of Japanese PBEMs going and no matter what the Allied commander tried to do (yes all the tips given at forum...) it never worked against this combo of bombers, convoys and ASW TFs.

[hosho]

ORIGINAL: castor troy



Without those bombers most of the Allied PBEM players would achieve the same effects as were done in real life.

I am not so sure about this. Even with the effecivness reduced considerably reduced you could still put your 500 bombers plus all the float plane garbage (short range float planes) and just keep spotting them the whole day. If they crashdive when spoted that must make the crews just a bit tired= reduce the effectivness they had in real life). Plus you bring in more escort ships to your convoys and voila ( in theory atleast [:D] ).

Plus if one could get the option to draw the course ourselves for any tf, one would try to pick his routes "where the water is shallow and your planes and moquitos are in sufficient numbers."

Granted you couldn`t destroy so many of them but they wouldn`t achieve so much sucess as in real life and you would get your resources [;)]

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: hosho

ORIGINAL: castor troy



Without those bombers most of the Allied PBEM players would achieve the same effects as were done in real life.

I am not so sure about this. Even with the effecivness reduced considerably reduced you could still put your 500 bombers plus all the float plane garbage (short range float planes) and just keep spotting them the whole day. If they crashdive when spoted that must make the crews just a bit tired= reduce the effectivness they had in real life). Plus you bring in more escort ships to your convoys and voila ( in theory atleast [:D] ).

Plus if one could get the option to draw the course ourselves for any tf, one would try to pick his routes "where the water is shallow and your planes and moquitos are in sufficient numbers."

Granted you couldn`t destroy so many of them but they wouldn`t achieve so much sucess as in real life and you would get your resources [;)]

That´s why I´ve said WITHOUT those bombers, not with "their effectiveness reduced". [&:]

[John Lansford]

I take it, then, that the AI does not put 500 land bombers on ASW patrol?  Because I've got nearly my entire sub fleet off the coast of Japan and NW of Truk, and have yet to lose a sub to air attack even though it's early 1944.  Now, I've seen dedicated ASW TF's hunting my subs, but that's fine to me; every once in a while they actually hit a sub but most of the time they're just burning up fuel oil, while my subs torpedo 2-5 ships every turn.  Late in December they torpedoed and sank Fuso as she tried to reach the Home Islands, in fact.

[Mangotree]

During the first year or so after Pearl Harbor ,usa Subs would run on Surface longer and closer to Enemy terriorty. Reason being battery speed,endurance were not as good as later years. I think later around 43 and on USA subs close to enemy territory or heavy recon would submerge from morning to dusk anywhere from 10-15hrs , run at night surface recharge and repeat. If Ae models the Subs better at surface at night submerged at night , maybe air recon wouldnt be as bad? Also every sub depending on captain/skipper would run his boat differnet. Also planes could spot them if they were running at periscope depth submerged. I forget how many books ive read but how many subs shot down planes before the had a chance to submerge? I dont really see that happening in Witp. Anyone care to comment?