Shattered Vow

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

ORIGINAL: veji1
So basically before a certain date (43 ?) it might be better to escort everything but not attack subs specifically with asw TFs ???

That's the step I'm implementing right now, but it's too early to tell whether escorts will work.

Here's how my strategy against enemy subs has evolved over the game:

1. At first, I used many one-ship convoys (I did the same in WitP and found this very efficient as losses were relatively light).
2. I began taking heavy losses at big forward bases like Pago Pago, Noumea, Syndey, Colombo, and Melbourne, so I stopped sending ships there and began concentrating on bases more to the rear or that seemed kind of remote and unvisited by unfriendlies: Tahiti, Adelaide, Perth and Bombay. At the same time, I began to use ASW TFs heavily. At first this worked well - I was still taking moderate losses but was also inflicting moderate losses on Japanese subs. This was the situation from early 1942 to mid '42.
3. As Japanese subs began reaching even the most rear bases, they suddendly became much more lethal. Every sub was claiming two to five ships right around major bases. I stood down all merchant ships (that's a huge task and takes quite awhile) so that I could concentrate on ASW activity.
4. I had multiple ASW TFs operating out of big bases plus ASW air patrols. Some bases (Pearl, Seattle, SF, LA, Tahiti, Pago Pago, Noumea, Syndey, Colombo/Trincomalee, and Bombay in particular) had up to five or six ASW TFs. Sometime around mid-summer of '42, I noticed that I was taking heavy ASW losses. This started with DDs out of Pearl, then DDs out of SF, then all kinds of ships everywhere. At first I ascribed this to random chance and bad luck, but it didn't abate and got worse.
5. So recently I've disbanded all my ASW into port. My transports, meanwhile, have mostly made it to port now and I've begun running multi-ship convoys with escorts. Don't know if this will work yet. I doubt it will until this issue is addressed.

One observation: It was rather harmful for the developers to tweak ASW/Sub interraction without clearly notifying those of us that were in the midst of PBEM games. Because I had gone to alot of effort to reconfigure my tactics, they were somewhat working, and then everything changed without warning so that my tactics were not only rendered ineffective, but dangerous.

In fact, I think this change cost me BB Pennsylvania. I had waited until August '42 to send this ship from Pearl Harbor to the West Coast. She has 0 SYS damage and moderately heavy FLT damage (high 50s, I believe). She was escorted by four DDs. Fairly close to SF she encountered two Japanese subs that followed for several turns and sank her with three TTs. As she neared the WEst Coast I sent additional ASW forward to try to come to her aid. None of the ASW did a thing. Had I realized things had been tweaked to make subs uber, I woudn't have sent the BB out of Pearl.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
Swenslim
Posts: 437
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:34 pm
Location: Odessa, Ukraine

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Swenslim »

Confirm . Subs become very efficient against unprotected convoys after patch 2. ASW TF become much less effective after patch (in 1942 at least).
Recomend you to train some LBA as ASW untill they have 55-60 asw skill, they nicely detect subs so they dont attack anyone.
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Chickenboy »

NO USSHENRICO OR CRIMGUY, please.

.
.
.
.




Canoerebel,

I consider myself fortunate that my 2x PBEMs are not as chronologically advanced as your game. This may have to do, in part, with the fact that I'm just not seeing these ASW / sub issues. I also haven't applied patch II yet, so that's another variable to potentially explain differences.

I cannot explain the inefficiency of your ASW, nor the 'uber' sub effects on your ASW. In my game, it feels right, but yours looks and sounds 'off'. You've got a very good point there.

I'm not going to tell you not to whine in your AAR. Heck, that's one of the great reasons for going through the effort of having an AAR! But, with all that said, I think keeping your convoys unescorted through much of the early game may have been a mistake. I know, water under the bridge and all, but in so doing you were inviting major deep Japanese interdiction efforts. All Miller had to do was correctly guess where to send his long-range subs and he won a bonanza when he encountered unescorted transports. Unescorted merchants deserved to get greased by subs, IMO.

It's not that hard to guess what bases the Allied player is using as major transport hubs and route plan interdiction accordingly. In my PBEM versus USSHenrico (late January 1942), my sigint (yes, IJ sigint) has paid dividends. A sudden burst of 'heavy volume of radio traffic' from some backwater base frequently means a large merchant convoy has just put in to port. I sent a few AMCs from Kwajalein to investigate such an occurence at Tahiti and lo! They set an AO afire (it probably sank) before being beaten back by an escorting DD.

It looks like my opponent is running convoys due South out of the Panama canal area to the Tahiti region. Sigint has identified convoys that could only have come from there. Linear extension with a Southern waypoint (where the convoy turns West) would put it into Tahiti. I've clustered a few subs along this route for the next convoy coming through. A Glen equipped sub spotting for other 'reacting' subs in a regional wolfpak can be quite effective.

Have you loaded up a 'transport' TF with a couple of crummy xAKLs and about 20 ASW units and gone trolling for subs? Pump up the transport ASW rating to 50 or so and see what happens with his detected subs when the attack one of your merchants. I wonder if the artificial cap on 4 ship ASW hunter-killer groups in the game is underestimating the efficacy of such units IRL.
Image
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

Chickenboy, that's a good idea.  I'll try creating some "decoy" transport convoys with lots of escorts.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Chickenboy »

Canoerebel: I hope it's a good idea, as I suggested it to you in a PM several weeks ago. [;)]

I have a suspicion that this will attract the most aggressive IJN sub captains too-like a moth to a flame. Kind of a submarine ju-jitsu. I haven't tried this in a PBEM, but would be most interested in hearing how it turns out.

Have you received any non-VR CVEs yet? I wonder how effective they will be in their classic role of ASW and convoy protection.
Image
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Canoerebel: I hope it's a good idea, as I suggested it to you in a PM several weeks ago. [;)]

I have a suspicion that this will attract the most aggressive IJN sub captains too-like a moth to a flame. Kind of a submarine ju-jitsu. I haven't tried this in a PBEM, but would be most interested in hearing how it turns out.

Have you received any non-VR CVEs yet? I wonder how effective they will be in their classic role of ASW and convoy protection.

I have about five CVEs now - all of them posted at Seattle. Three are non-VR, I believe. I used Long Island for convoy protection at first, but I stood her down as she was slated for the Paramushiro invasion. To be honest, I'd be afraid to put the CVEs at sea until the ASW/sub issues are resolved. They are so brittle and Allied ASW-air is so ineffective that I'm afraid CVEs would be nothing more than potential victims at the moment.

P.S. I had gotten your PM, but at the time I was still trying to get my transports home. Most of them are home now, but I'm still working on getting ASW assets into ports where the transports are located.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

11/10/42 to 11/15/42
 
CenPac:  SigInt on the 11th indicated that 1st Engineers are prepping for Midway.  On the 15th, the PBY squadron sighted a TF of Japanese ships well to the SW of the island.  This feels very much like the real thing.  I've expected this, so I have overloaded the island with about 7,500 troops (the limit is 6,000; and yes, being over the limit really increases supply usage).  The garrison is 200 AV behind four forts with a Marine CD unit.  The port is mined.  I don't think I could do much more.  Several subs showed up on the 14th - I-172 got two AKs near French Frigage and RO-33 got an AK at Midway.  A DM heading to Midway left Pearl on the 14th, but I'll have to see her progress when I open the next turn file.  I may have to recall her. 
 
SWPac:  The Allies are about to engage in a critical yet relatively low risk operation to occupy Merauke on New Guinea's south coast.  This base has big potential and is right in the heart of the Japanese breadbasket.  I feel very fortunate that Miller hasn't taken it already, but I assume he'll react like a stirred up hornet's nest when he realizes what's going on and the threat the base poses.  I have two Aussie brigades combat loading at Townsville.  LRCAP will be provided by fighters from Cooktown, Coen, Portland Roads, and Horn Island.  Under the cover of the this operation, I'm sending additional supplies and troops to Horn Island.  There are alot of Jap aircraft at Port Moresby and I assume at Lae, or potentially at Lae anyhow, so things could get messy quick.  But if I can seize and hold Merauke it's as good as a succeeding at a major invasion.
 
China:  Miller doesn't appear to be advancing out of Sian.  This is the AE version of the mercy rule in softball.
 
Subwoes:  I-159 got an ASW AM near Sydney.  Two Japanese subs are a hex west of San Francisco.  Six or seven ASW TFs and ASW air patrols aren't do a thing about it.  I do have a small transport TF with six ASW ships embedded heading to SF from LA.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

A quick update as I've just sent the 16th/17th turn file back to Miller...
 
CenPac:  Here come the Japanese.  Two big TFs including carriers position just 200 miles SW of Midway.  I've recalled the DM, ordering it to lay mines at French Frigate and then head back to Pearl.  I'm also pulling out my AS, though it's going to have to run the gauntlett.
 
SWPac:  Several Allied amphibious TFs will depart Townsville and stop in Cairns, where I have about 105 fighters to provide CAP.  I'll have to be very careful to keep this ships under a CAP umbrella, so from Cairns they'll likely go to Cooktown, then to Portland Roads, then to Horn Island.  At that pace it'll take me ten days to get anywhere, and time is important, so I may try to jump from Cairns to Portland Roads.  One thing I can promise:  the Japanese aren't going to like this move.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

A quick update as I've just sent the 16th/17th turn file back to Miller...

CenPac:  I'm also pulling out my AS, though it's going to have to run the gauntlett.

You might be able to waypoint way to the NE, then around the long way to PH. Better slow than losing her.
The Moose
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

11/16/42 and 11/17/42
 
Midway:  The KB and invasion fleet parked one hex from Midway while Japanese strike aircraft pounded the island.  This clever move allowed Miller to correctly guestimate the strength on the island (he said 150 AV in his email; it was 195 but dropped to 175 after the massive air attacks).  He says he didn't bring enough and is mulling over his options.  I hope he leaves.  I did route the AS to flee northeastward, but a sub put a TT into her and I'll bet more subs are lurking.  I'd say the odds of her making it to Pearl are one in three at best.
 
West Coast:  Japanese subs are parked just off the West Coast.  They attack my ASW, but they refuse to assault the little transport TFs I've set up to conceal a bunch of ASW escorts.
 
SWPac:  The transports arrived at Cairns in good shape.  As best I can tell Miller isn't aware of what I'm up to (yet).  Next stop is Portland Roads.  I've set up CAP there and LRCAP from Coen and Cooktown.  Things should heat up rapidly.
 
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

11/18/42 to 11/19/42
 
Invasion Non-Completus:  Both Miller and I are suffering from invasion non-completus (mine dating from the decision to cancel the strike on the Kuriles three weeks ago).  He turned his Midway invasion force around.  I don't think he'll give up though.  I suspect he'll return with more troops.  In the meantime, he'll have plenty of subs in the area.  I need to get supplies to Midway and that's going to be a real challenge.
 
SWPac:  The Allied transports arrived at Portland Roads and depart for Horn Island tomorrow.  Still no appearance by Japanese LBA from Port Moresby.  I'm wondering if there's been a failure of Japanese patrols to pick up the activity, which would be too good to be true.  By tomorrow, troops and supplies will be unloading at Horn Island.  In about four days, troops and supplies will be unloading at Merauke.  In the meantime, I'm beginning to air transport 3rd Marine Regiment and an Aussie base force to Merauke from Coen.  I am very encouraged by these developments.  Establishing a major presence on New Guinea is a big step in the right direction.
 
Subwoes:  I-7 finished off the damaged AS fleeing Midway.  I-29 got two docked AKs at Bombay and I-162 got a docked AK at Pago Pago (the ridiculous daytime sinkings of docked Allied ships in huge ports has been occurring regularly for several months now; ASW is totally ineffective).  Meanwhile, my two "Trojan Horse" transport TFs (AKs with mutliple ASW escorts) keep steaming back and forth from SF to LA and the two Japanese subs in the area ignore them.
 
China:  Miller is leaving about 7 units at Sian.  I don't know where the rest of that stack is headed, but I'm guessing he could try a move on Chengtu or reinforce his army at Changsha.  I'm moving some units to reinforce Chengtu, which has a decent garrison of 2,000 AV anyhow.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

To Good to be True!

Post by Canoerebel »

11/18/42 to 11/25/42

To Good to be True: I'm hoping Miller takes this for a comment on the hot fix affect on nuclear artillery, which has been very gratifying, but this actually describes the situation at Merauke, New Guinea, as described below.

Artillery Death Stars: The hot fix appears to have resolved this issue based upon early returns at Changsha. I've posted detailed results in another thread, but the two bombardments following the fix resulted in 25% casualties compared to before the fix. The past two days Miller didn't even bombard. I will keep my fingers crossed and hope this will have fixed the situation in China without swinging things out of whack the other way.

Nuclear Subs: Too early to know if the hot fix has addressed this issue - it will take me a month or more to get a good feel, but the very preliminary returns are positive - no ASW ships sunk since we installed the patch.

Stategic Thinking: This game requires player to think and plan WAY ahead of time in order to have the time needed to organize offensives and position suppies, fuel, and support personnel. It's autumn '42 but I've been thinking for many weeks about spring '43 and further. At this point, my plan is to push the Japanese hard in SWPac in hopes of drawing Miller's full attention (read: the KB) that way, and then to hit the Kuriles (no, I haven't given up on that idea, yet). If (big if) this plan is put into effect, the Allies would then be committed for most of the rest of the war to a two-prong advance in NoPac and SWPac. I'm also considering focusing on Timor, Ambon, Celebes, Borneo, Vietnam and China rather than on the Philippines.

SWPac: The Allies are making tremendous headway at both Horn Island and Merauke. No patrol aircraft have been sighted, so I wonder if I've been enjoying a gap in Japanese coverage. Sooner or later, Miller will notice what's going on. Merauke is important because it has big-base potential and helps secure the perimeter from Darwin all the way to Cairns. I have 280 AV ashore and part of the Rabaul Detachment Base Force. As stated in previous posts, I consider this operation to be as important as a successful opposed invasion, and thus far at nearly no cost.

CenPac: I think there's a 50% chance Miller will return to Midway. I"m sending some supplies that way, and a CVE left Seattle to ferry an F4F-4 squadron there.

India/Burma: RAF and USAAF B-24s from Diamond Harbor and Calcutta hit the airfield at Rangoon, destroying 30 bombers (mainly Sallys) on the ground.

Sync Bug: Appears to be alive and well. The last combat replay showed BB Mississippi at Luganville taking seven torpedoes from a Nell/Betty raid from Lunga. Made me sick. Opened the file and BB Mississippi was unscractched. Whew! This TF was protecting some transports unloading at Vanua Lava; I've ordered all ships to retire to Noumea. That apparition gave me much heart burn.

Sub wars: RO-68 got an AKL at Efate; I-29 got three AKs docked at Bombay; I-27 missed an SC near Tahiti but got an AK; I-20 got an AK near Perth.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
racndoc
Posts: 2528
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Newport Coast, California

RE: To Good to be True!

Post by racndoc »

Canoerebel....

Try defensive mining of all your important ports....my opponent has lost 10 or 11 subs to mines in my ports and he doesnt stick his nose in any more...then u dont have to worry about in port ASW issues.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: To Good to be True!

Post by Canoerebel »

Mines are certainly scarce and precious in AE - not nearly enough to go around; but I have mined my major ports.  A handful of Japanese subs have fallen victim to minefields, including one recently at Nouma.  Miller has also lost subs to mines at Pago Pago, Pearl Harbor, and I think another port or two.

P.S. But it is also frustrating that Japanese subs still seem to be able to operate against docked ships at big, mined bases. RO-33 just got a docked AK at Midway, which is mined. This kind of thing has been going on at mined bases for many months of game time. How do you thwart subs when mines, ASW TFs, and ASW air patrols don't work?
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: To Good to be True!

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Mines are certainly scarce and precious in AE - not nearly enough to go around; but I have mined my major ports.  A handful of Japanese subs have fallen victim to minefields, including one recently at Nouma.  Miller has also lost subs to mines at Pago Pago, Pearl Harbor, and I think another port or two.

P.S. But it is also frustrating that Japanese subs still seem to be able to operate against docked ships at big, mined bases. RO-33 just got a docked AK at Midway, which is mined. This kind of thing has been going on at mined bases for many months of game time. How do you thwart subs when mines, ASW TFs, and ASW air patrols don't work?
May just be your bad luck. How many mines ya got there at Midway? There's 'mined' and there's MINED.

I put about 200 into Miri, along with a supportive ACM to thwart one of my opponent's snoopy allied subs working northern Borneo. A very gratifying 'crashing' sound greeted one of my recent combat replays, with a combat report confirming that the snoopy little bugger had run into one while poking his nose into the harbor. Won't be doing that again anytime soon...
Image
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9902
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: To Good to be True!

Post by ny59giants »

Do you have any of the old Flush Deck DDs left from Manila and/or SRA?? If so, the Clemson Class can convert to a nasty DE ASW platform (4/42). 
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6435
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: To Good to be True!

Post by JeffroK »

The last combat replay showed BB Mississippi at Luganville taking seven torpedoes

This could be FOW, though an extreme version

I've had 1-2 hits reported only to find no damage.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: To Good to be True!

Post by Canoerebel »

11/26/42 to 11/29/42
 
JeffK:  FOW doesn't work like that, does it?  I don't receive FOW on my own ships.
NYGiants:  I have some left and they've all upgraded.
Chickenboy:  Midway has about 60 mines.

SWPac:  The dream operation continues unmolested.  I have 12,000 supplies and 310 AV ashore at Merauke, with more on the way.  Most of my NE OZ coast airfields are at level six or seven, now, with plenty of base forces and 4EB present.  I want to send a big raid to Rabaul, but I'm afraid to do anything that might draw Miller's attention to this area.  For now, I'll just keep the planes parked and try to get as much moved to Horn Island, Merauke, and then to the island NNW of Darwin as I possibly can.  The interlude won't last forever, but when it ends I'll ramp up bombing.  I attribute the quiet to a failure of reconnaisance.

SoPac:  The KB or a version thereof just showed up between Suva and Noumea.  Fortunately for me I have nothing in the area.  So these guys are welcome to steam around and use up fuel.  I "hope" I have enough fighters at Noumea to discourage or prevent Miller from attacking, because BB Mississippi is disbanded into port there.

Burma/India:  A two-BB bombardment TF hit Chittagong.  I saw them coming, but elected not to sortie my one-BB TF at Diamond Harbor.  The Japanese only destroyed two aircraft on the raid.

China:  The Japanese tried a deliberate attack at Changsha.  It came off at 1:19 and cost the Japanese 16,823 compared to 1,832 for the Allies.  Since the Allies have the larger force present and are behind seven forts, this feels fairly reasonable to me.  The Japanese probably shouldn't be attacking unless they have numerical superiority.

Subwoes:  RO-33 gets an AK at Midway; I-164 gets an AKL at Midwayp I-34 gets an AM at Suva (though this may have been FOW - I didn't note a missing AM when I checked the list of ships sunk); I-6 missed a DD one hex from San Fran.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Kereguelen
Posts: 1474
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 9:08 pm

RE: To Good to be True!

Post by Kereguelen »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Mines are certainly scarce and precious in AE - not nearly enough to go around; but I have mined my major ports.  A handful of Japanese subs have fallen victim to minefields, including one recently at Nouma.  Miller has also lost subs to mines at Pago Pago, Pearl Harbor, and I think another port or two.

P.S. But it is also frustrating that Japanese subs still seem to be able to operate against docked ships at big, mined bases. RO-33 just got a docked AK at Midway, which is mined. This kind of thing has been going on at mined bases for many months of game time. How do you thwart subs when mines, ASW TFs, and ASW air patrols don't work?

Scapa Flow was protected by extensive minefields in 1939, did not help the Royal Oak. There is no guarantee that a ship (sub) will hit a mine if a minefield is present. But, as you have noticed, sometimes (actually quite often) subs hit mines when operating in mined base hexes. Anyway, I think this aspect works quite well in the game. Nevertheless, I understand your frustration - but you can pay back in kind to your opponent by doing the same (USN S-Class subs should work best for this kind of operations, they have fairly reliable torps & their limited range makes them less useful for long-range patrol missions than bigger US subs). Actually the Allies have an advantage here due to their SIGINT.
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: To Good to be True!

Post by castor troy »

ORIGINAL: Kereguelen

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Mines are certainly scarce and precious in AE - not nearly enough to go around; but I have mined my major ports.  A handful of Japanese subs have fallen victim to minefields, including one recently at Nouma.  Miller has also lost subs to mines at Pago Pago, Pearl Harbor, and I think another port or two.

P.S. But it is also frustrating that Japanese subs still seem to be able to operate against docked ships at big, mined bases. RO-33 just got a docked AK at Midway, which is mined. This kind of thing has been going on at mined bases for many months of game time. How do you thwart subs when mines, ASW TFs, and ASW air patrols don't work?

Scapa Flow was protected by extensive minefields in 1939, did not help the Royal Oak. There is no guarantee that a ship (sub) will hit a mine if a minefield is present. But, as you have noticed, sometimes (actually quite often) subs hit mines when operating in mined base hexes. Anyway, I think this aspect works quite well in the game. Nevertheless, I understand your frustration - but you can pay back in kind to your opponent by doing the same (USN S-Class subs should work best for this kind of operations, they have fairly reliable torps & their limited range makes them less useful for long-range patrol missions than bigger US subs). Actually the Allies have an advantage here due to their SIGINT.



they not just have an advantage due to sigint but also due to the fact that there are nearly 400 Allied subs. [;)]
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”