neutered PT boats post 1095/1096

[stuman]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Keep in mind, guys, that this thread wasn't started about the effectiveness of PTs, but rather their willingness to prosecute attacks.

Otherwise, carry on...

Do we HAVE to be logical, well reasoned, mature and stick to the topic ? Where is the fun in that ?

[stuman]

ORIGINAL: freeboy

ok, so if pt was so much window dressing WHY DO THEY EXIST!! ok my hair pulled out and rant over, seriously, so much crap to wad through in the battle forthe game!!!
I could go for a complex game where things actually where clearly annotated and ,"blah blah blah blah blah" ok rant really over [:-][:-][:-]

Well for what it is worth I know that even if the PT boats do not prosecute an attack to its fullest they have caused TFs of mine to break off and sail away. So they didn't sink anything, but did disrupt landings. I will roll back to a earlier save ( when the PI battle was in full swing ) and rerun some turns.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: jackyo123

No, its for surface units. I dont think air units have the 'routing' option at all - the 2 options are 'routing' normal/safer/ direct and 'threat tolerance' normal lower high absolute' or somethinn like that.

I corrected myself elsewhere, but what I meant here was I thought the routed unit only considered the danger from air attack in the Normal, Low, Absolute heirarchy. Reading the patch notes, it looks like any threat. But, as seen with PTs, it looks like other code can overrule an Absolute order.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Keep in mind, guys, that this thread wasn't started about the effectiveness of PTs, but rather their willingness to prosecute attacks.

Otherwise, carry on...

What, stay on topic? Here?[:)]

I think Kull it it on the head when he pointed out that PT attacks are just surface attacks with some salt and pepper. We've all seen surface TFs decline combat and run when facing a superior force. It's not just PTs, but PTs are out-gunned by almost anything in the game. I'm sure there's some spice in there for aggression, etc., and daylight, but overall it's the surface code running, and it looks like it has summation routines, with sensitivity bands, asking "Can I beat him? Can he beat me?" "Bambi vs. Godzilla" was a boring movie after the first viewing. Sometimes running is a wise move.

As always, I don't really want to know what's under the AI hood. If I order PT attack and get it, great. It's gravy. If I don't I haven't lost much. As with fighter sweeps, I would never put the onus for a mission's sucess on a good, well-timed PT attack. YMMV (and no credit for hybrids.)

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: freeboy

ok lets try again
PT boats where inaffective
usingthem wastes time.. and is ahistorical, unless they are ineffective again wasting our time..
Why mnodel an ineffective part ofthe war,?game?.. 

Ineffective/effective isn't the point. WITP and AE try their best to offer what was there. What you do with it is up to you. You never have to form a PT TF if you don't want to. Leave them in the build pool.

If effective was the criterion I doubt we'd seen ancient Indian AF biplanes in AE, but we do, and it's a better game for it.

[bradfordkay]

"As always, I don't really want to know what's under the AI hood. If I order PT attack and get it, great. It's gravy. If I don't I haven't lost much. As with fighter sweeps, I would never put the onus for a mission's sucess on a good, well-timed PT attack. YMMV (and no credit for hybrids.)"

I can't find anything wrong with this philosophy. It was only when seeing PTs running from unescorted merchants that I began to wonder if maybe the last fix hadn't gone too far. There really is nothing less formidable out there than an unescorted merchant...

[Sheytan]

IF the Duke was in command not only would he have attacked, but after expending all of his shipboard ammo he would have then proceeded to board and capture anything still afloat...and the IJN personnel would have surrendered en masse once it became apparent it was in FACT...the Duke.

ORIGINAL: witpqs

You're right about not jumping on folks. This example isn't legit, though. On the hand, if The Duke were commanding the boat, it would have attacked!

[:D]

[ADB123]

In the fourth turn of my PBEM I had a TF of 4 PTs sitting in Cagayan waiting for a possible Japanese invasion. The invasion came, and it was a LOT bigger than I expected - there were at least 3 dozen ships, including almost a dozen small escorts.

My 4 PTs engaged, fired, closed, fired, pulled back, fired, closed again and fired again and so on, with the Japanese ships firing back like crazy. In the end my PTs fired off all of their torpedoes and most of their 50 cal ammo, and sank a Japanese DMS and an AKL, and damaged several other ships. None of my PTs were damaged.

Unfortunately, this attack didn't drive off the huge TF, which was likely commanded by a very agressive Japanese commander, but that seems realistic to me, because after my ships shot their loads there wasn't anything else they could to to the Japanese ships.

BTW - in preparation for this battle I had put the best Commander I could get in command of the PT TF and I also selected the best Captains that I could find to captain the individual PT boats. That cost me a fair number of PP points, but I'd say that it was worth it from the end result.

[freeboy]

Ok, I know I am cow tippin, and those sacred cows are not made of gold here, so, why do we need it "because it was there? Come on guys, there are literally thousands of units not in the game ..
We don't need no stinking eye candy, ok rant over.
I vote we totally revamp the way units are resupplied and devide supplies into all major food groups, PLUS, lets not forget teh hospitals, hospital ships, subs picking up downed pilots, oh ye, that is in the game, and the JAps used burning phospherous incederies to shoot down bombers, gotta have that!!!
And barrage balloons, derigables, spys.. code books decoding interception stations.. come on there is tons of stuff missing[X(][X(][:-][:-][:-]

[Kadrin]

ORIGINAL: freeboy

ok lets try again
PT boats where inaffective
usingthem wastes time.. and is ahistorical, unless they are ineffective again wasting our time..
Why mnodel an ineffective part ofthe war,?game?.. 

There are a lot of missions the PT boats did in reality that aren't modeled well or at all in this game.

As far as effectiveness in-game goes, well they torpedoed something like 12 or so ships during the war and sank I think 7 of them. I've also heard they shot down at least 5 aircraft. In return about 7 PT boats were lost to enemy action (ramming, strafing, naval gunnery, etc.). I do believe that's more effective than the Japanese minisubs which are also in the game and had only one purpose.

Good enough reason for me to have them.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

"As always, I don't really want to know what's under the AI hood. If I order PT attack and get it, great. It's gravy. If I don't I haven't lost much. As with fighter sweeps, I would never put the onus for a mission's sucess on a good, well-timed PT attack. YMMV (and no credit for hybrids.)"

I can't find anything wrong with this philosophy. It was only when seeing PTs running from unescorted merchants that I began to wonder if maybe the last fix hadn't gone too far. There really is nothing less formidable out there than an unescorted merchant...

Here's a good question before we quantify anything: Did the merchant convoy manage to surprise the PT group? Did they surprise each other?

Why I ask this is simple, if you thought nothing was there, and you saw a large number of ships show up in visual range suddenly without being able to determine if they are simply lumbering cargo ships or heavy cruisers might the wisest decision be to disengage until you know what you are dealing with? Discretion is the better part of valor, and sometimes running away is the best choice.

[noguaranteeofsanity]

ORIGINAL: freeboy

Ok, I know I am cow tippin, and those sacred cows are not made of gold here, so, why do we need it "because it was there? Come on guys, there are literally thousands of units not in the game ..
We don't need no stinking eye candy, ok rant over.
I vote we totally revamp the way units are resupplied and devide supplies into all major food groups, PLUS, lets not forget teh hospitals, hospital ships, subs picking up downed pilots, oh ye, that is in the game, and the JAps used burning phospherous incederies to shoot down bombers, gotta have that!!!
And barrage balloons, derigables, spys.. code books decoding interception stations.. come on there is tons of stuff missing[X(][X(][:-][:-][:-]

US fleet subs have ineffective torpedos up until late in the war, does that mean the US should have no subs until 1944 as well and give up on carrying out a submarine campaign against Japanese shipping? Just because they are ineffective, aren't sinking every ship they encounter or winning every single battle, doesn't mean they are useless. It simply means you are expecting too much of them and possibly misusing them.

Keep in mind the fact they are literally plywood boats and by no means a warship in comparison to other units, while if you send out any other ship of comparable size (Eg auxiliary minesweepers etc), do you really expect them to have the same results? Obviously their torpedo's are capable of sinking a ship, but the rest of their armament is unlikely to come close to sinking any decent size ship and during wartime, even a merchant ship might have equivalent armament (eg a few 0.50 caliber or other machine guns). For instance, do you expect your subs to sink every ship in a task force as well, simple due to their torpedos?

If they really were that effective and successful, dont you think the allies (or japan for that mattter) would have saved a lot of steel, sailors and all the other resources need to build an ocean going fleet and instead, simply commissioned 1000s or 10,000s of plywood PT boats?

However, it simply wasnt the case and they were by no means that successful, but did have an impact on the war and Japanese losses and so makes to include them in the game, especially when the Japanese side must go to so much effort to build and/or maintain the units lost.

[freeboy]

right, BUt theysubs, did use their ineffective torps... if we said there was a non working model of weapon x, it existed and never actually caused any damage, but we all love weapon X, should our love for the romance of X cause it to be included in the game?
I think we should step back and look at what we want... I think I made myself clear, disagree if you want, that is your choice no problem...
 
My point is the focus on the insignificant,pt uselessness, verses the things in the game that actually need our attention, repair rates, rearm rates overland 43 air fleet shuttles of Bombers across the MEd and India etc..
 

[Sardaukar]

I have had no problems with my PT-boats. But then, I do not expect them to engage in suicide missions. [8D] If it's daytime and good visibility, they are not going to engage. One has to remember, that even most AKs are armed with lot heavier weapons than PT boat and outranges even their torpedoes. Even Japanese 13.2mm AAMG would chew a PT-boat quite badly. 

I have disrupted couple of Bombardment missions and couple of Amphibious landing TFs but not with much other results.

PT-boats need to get close with their torpedoes and have surprise. With normal PT-boat captains, good luck. But as in original examples showed, they are not going to have much chance in broad daylight and good visibility. If opposing TF spots them outside their torpedo range, they are going to break off, because they are PT-boats, not suicide boats.

[bradfordkay]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

"As always, I don't really want to know what's under the AI hood. If I order PT attack and get it, great. It's gravy. If I don't I haven't lost much. As with fighter sweeps, I would never put the onus for a mission's sucess on a good, well-timed PT attack. YMMV (and no credit for hybrids.)"

I can't find anything wrong with this philosophy. It was only when seeing PTs running from unescorted merchants that I began to wonder if maybe the last fix hadn't gone too far. There really is nothing less formidable out there than an unescorted merchant...

Here's a good question before we quantify anything: Did the merchant convoy manage to surprise the PT group? Did they surprise each other?

Why I ask this is simple, if you thought nothing was there, and you saw a large number of ships show up in visual range suddenly without being able to determine if they are simply lumbering cargo ships or heavy cruisers might the wisest decision be to disengage until you know what you are dealing with? Discretion is the better part of valor, and sometimes running away is the best choice.

In my situation I am talking about a single xAK unloading at the home port of the single PT. Here's the combat report:

Day Time Surface Combat, near Miri at 64,87, Range 8,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
xAK Lisbon Maru

Allied Ships
MTB 11



Maximum visibility in Overcast Conditions: 9,000 yards
Range closes to 10,000 yards...
Range closes to 8,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 8,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 8,000 yards
Range closes to 5,000 yards
Baldwin K. orders Allied TF to disengage
Range closes to 3,000 yards
Range increases to 10,000 yards
Japanese Transport TF evades combat


The TF unloading report also shows just that one Japanese xAK and they were unable to budge the RAN base force at Miri, so I think that it's pretty solid that the Lisbon Maru was alone.

I find it hard to buy the idea that PT skippers will as a matter of course refuse to engage in daylight against unescorted merchants - especially ones disembarking troops in the PTs home waters... That an extremely timid PT skipper might refuse combat? Sure.

[noguaranteeofsanity]

ORIGINAL: freeboy

right, BUt theysubs, did use their ineffective torps... if we said there was a non working model of weapon x, it existed and never actually caused any damage, but we all love weapon X, should our love for the romance of X cause it to be included in the game?
I think we should step back and look at what we want... I think I made myself clear, disagree if you want, that is your choice no problem...

My point is the focus on the insignificant,pt uselessness, verses the things in the game that actually need our attention, repair rates, rearm rates overland 43 air fleet shuttles of Bombers across the MEd and India etc..

If they caused losses to the enemy and fits into the model of the game, then sure. PT boats sunk some Japanese ships during the war and had an impact, just look at The Battle of Surigao Strait and so deserve a place in the game, as you cant exactly have a PT boat task force, without PT boats.

While likewise, if your fictional weapon X that you love, caused enemy losses or played a significant part, then it should be modeled in the game, although a ship or boat is a unit not a weapon and I think you would find most, if not all, significant units are already included in the game and there is a limit to what is practical. Plus things are modeled in different ways, having infantry squads is fine and serves its purpose, there is no need to expand that further and break it down of the number of Thompsons, Bars and M1 rifles etc.

Finally, wouldnt taking PT boats out of the game, actually take up more of the Dev's time and be more work, than just leaving things as they are now? That way they would be able to concentrate on other things and seems somewhat like one step forward, two steps back, if you want them to instead work on other things.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

"As always, I don't really want to know what's under the AI hood. If I order PT attack and get it, great. It's gravy. If I don't I haven't lost much. As with fighter sweeps, I would never put the onus for a mission's sucess on a good, well-timed PT attack. YMMV (and no credit for hybrids.)"

I can't find anything wrong with this philosophy. It was only when seeing PTs running from unescorted merchants that I began to wonder if maybe the last fix hadn't gone too far. There really is nothing less formidable out there than an unescorted merchant...

Here's a good question before we quantify anything: Did the merchant convoy manage to surprise the PT group? Did they surprise each other?

Why I ask this is simple, if you thought nothing was there, and you saw a large number of ships show up in visual range suddenly without being able to determine if they are simply lumbering cargo ships or heavy cruisers might the wisest decision be to disengage until you know what you are dealing with? Discretion is the better part of valor, and sometimes running away is the best choice.

In my situation I am talking about a single xAK unloading at the home port of the single PT. Here's the combat report:

Day Time Surface Combat, near Miri at 64,87, Range 8,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
xAK Lisbon Maru

Allied Ships
MTB 11



Maximum visibility in Overcast Conditions: 9,000 yards
Range closes to 10,000 yards...
Range closes to 8,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 8,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 8,000 yards
Range closes to 5,000 yards
Baldwin K. orders Allied TF to disengage
Range closes to 3,000 yards
Range increases to 10,000 yards
Japanese Transport TF evades combat


The TF unloading report also shows just that one Japanese xAK and they were unable to budge the RAN base force at Miri, so I think that it's pretty solid that the Lisbon Maru was alone.

I find it hard to buy the idea that PT skippers will as a matter of course refuse to engage in daylight against unescorted merchants - especially ones disembarking troops in the PTs home waters... That an extremely timid PT skipper might refuse combat? Sure.

I think that qualifies as plain old cowardice. [&:] The AK got underway, but there is no way a merchie can outrun a MTB.

[bklooste]

ORIGINAL: Kadrin

ORIGINAL: freeboy

ok lets try again
PT boats where inaffective
usingthem wastes time.. and is ahistorical, unless they are ineffective again wasting our time..
Why mnodel an ineffective part ofthe war,?game?.. 

There are a lot of missions the PT boats did in reality that aren't modeled well or at all in this game.

As far as effectiveness in-game goes, well they torpedoed something like 12 or so ships during the war and sank I think 7 of them. I've also heard they shot down at least 5 aircraft. In return about 7 PT boats were lost to enemy action (ramming, strafing, naval gunnery, etc.). I do believe that's more effective than the Japanese minisubs which are also in the game and had only one purpose.

Good enough reason for me to have them.

meh about the same .. only 2 of those ships were warships . There are rumours a minisubs torp hit a battleship at Pearl and they came damn close to a CA in Sydney harbour but hit a ferry instead. They were used rarely to build sample data but 2* 30% chance of a hit on a capital ship is not nothing.

[Charbroiled]

I also had a problem with my PT's "running" away from what appeared to be an easy battle for them. When checking my PT squadron, I realized that they ran away because they didn't have any torpedos left after the last engagement and I hadn't returned them to Manilla to reload.

My point is, check your torpedos when using PT. PTs do not reload ammo like other warships and it is an easy thing to overlook and send them into battle without torpedos.[:-]

[Admiral Scott]

I think PT boats are fine the way they are now.
No more changes are needed to them.