Logic Patch for DD attacks? v1.4?

[jackyo123]

The following combat reports highlight one of the major flaws in the gamelogic - its predilection for subs to attack DD escorts instead of other targets - note - the allied TF's had about 3500 troops aboard ... and the TF with Stronghold had 2 carriers.

PLEASE make some changes so the subs dont always go after the hapless escorts!



AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jun 07, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Belep Islands at 114,151

Japanese Ships
SS I-17

Allied Ships
DD Walke
APD Manley
AP John Jones29
xAP Rangitata
xAP William McArthur
xAP Bloemfontein
xAK Elisavet
DD Downes



SS I-17 launches 4 torpedoes at DD Walke
I-17 is diving deep ....
DD Downes fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Sydney at 92,168

Japanese Ships
SS I-171

Allied Ships
DD Verenson
DE Levers



SS I-171 launches 2 torpedoes at DD Verenson
I-171 diving deep ....
DE Levers fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Belep Islands at 114,151

Japanese Ships
SS I-17

Allied Ships
DD Walke
APD Manley
AP John Jones29
xAP William McArthur
xAP Bloemfontein
xAK Elisavet
DD Downes



SS I-17 launches 6 torpedoes at DD Walke
I-17 diving deep ....
DD Downes attacking submerged sub ....
DD Downes is out of ASW ammo
DD Downes is out of ASW ammo
DD Downes is out of ASW ammo
DD Downes fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Downes fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Downes fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Downes fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub Attack near near Belep Islands at 114,151

Allied Ships
DD Stronghold, Torpedo hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CA Cornwall
CL Capetown
CL Ceres
CV Lexington
CV Saratoga
CLAA Van Heemskerck
DD Encounter
DD Norman
DD Nizam
DD Griffin



SS I-154 launches 8 torpedoes at DD Stronghold
I - 154 is diving deep ....

[spence]

In Example 1 I don't agree there is a problem. IJN believed in attacking warships. In example 2 the sub should try for the big boys but trying does not mean succeeding so maybe the sub just took what shot it could get rather than no shot at all (that TF most assuredly will clear the subs AO fairly rapidly).

[John 3rd]

They do APPEAR to be attracted to Tincans though...
 

[Kaletsch2007]

My PBEM,
End of DEC 41, CORAL SEA

During 24 hours two attacks by Japanese Sub against CV TF Enterprise. Twice attack an CV Enterprise.
I that case the boats were able to break through the defences. That's at least how i read it.

[vlcz]

I read the same, simply faults at geting a good approach to the intended targets…

IFor two opposite examples (both on the same PBEM)

Sub attack near Nadi at 130,160
Japanese Ships
SS I-25, hits 2
Allied Ships
CV Yorktown, Torpedo hits 2, on fire
CA Northampton
CL Adelaide
DD Cummings
DD Russell
DD Mustin
DD Whipple
DD Clark
DD Phelps
DD Cassin

ASW attack near Ndeni at 120,143

Japanese Ships
SS I-170

Allied Ships
BB Warspite, Torpedo hits 1
AP President Jackson
AK Alchiba
TK Gulfhawk
xAP Duntroon
xAP Lurline
xAK Sloterdijk
xAK Doryssa

[Canoerebel]

This has been previously addressed at length in a thread called "Nuclear Subs." Jackyo is right - Japanese subs are far too lethal against escorts, especially DDs (it probably works the same for Allied subs, though the data hasn't developed yet because nobody's gotten that far into the game).

I don't remember the exact numbers, but something like 44 American DDs were sunk in the Pacific in World War II - three (yes, 3) by Japanese submarines. None (that's right, zero) were serving as escorts or in ASW TFs. All three were doing other stuff (like the DD taking survivors off Yorktown).

In my game I've lost more than a dozen DDs to Japanese subs, including some since the latest patch and hot fix.

In the real war, Japanese subs steered clear of DDs that were serving as escorts or in ASW TFs and/or couldn't hit them if they tried. In AE it's a regular occurrence.

It shouldn't be.

[Feltan]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

This has been previously addressed at length in a thread called "Nuclear Subs." Jackyo is right - Japanese subs are far too lethal against escorts, especially DDs (it probably works the same for Allied subs, though the data hasn't developed yet because nobody's gotten that far into the game).

I don't remember the exact numbers, but something like 44 American DDs were sunk in the Pacific in World War II - three (yes, 3) by Japanese submarines. None (that's right, zero) were serving as escorts or in ASW TFs. All three were doing other stuff (like the DD taking survivors off Yorktown).

In my game I've lost more than a dozen DDs to Japanese subs, including some since the latest patch and hot fix.

In the real war, Japanese subs steered clear of DDs that were serving as escorts or in ASW TFs and/or couldn't hit them if they tried. In AE it's a regular occurrence.

It shouldn't be.

Ditto.

Exactly correct.

Regards,
Feltan

[xj900uk]

IMO subs are just too lethal in WITP-AE full stop,  they should be toned down by about 50% (ie make less attacks).  sea and air ASW are about right though

[Canoerebel]

ASW isn't "about right."  At least judging from my game (which is all I can judge by with any authority).  Japanese ASW has been unusually strong in 1943.  I'm losing far more American submarines to ASW than were actually lost in '43.  These subs are in shallow and deep water (much of the DEI, for instance, is deep water).  None of these subs are set to patrol in base hexes, though no doubt some have reacted into base hexes.
 
Yes, my game could be an anomaly - a statistical abnormality at the tail end of a bell-shaped curve of Japanese ASW effectiveness.  I don't think that's the case, though.  My gut instinct is that Japanese ASW is too powerful.
 
There could be two other possibilities that might explain this situation, though I don't know:  First, we're playing Scenario Two.  Second, perhaps Miller's ASW captains and crews have gained such tremendous experience, for one reason or another, that they've become Uber Crews that will be rare or absent in other games.   

[moose1999]

I'm playing the Japanese and I'm in July 42.
I'm putting a lot of emphasis on ASW, both air and naval, and I've only managed to sink one US sub as of yet.
I damage one once in a while, but sinking them is VERY difficult.

A couple of times, I've managed to catch a bunch of subs while they were repairing/replenishing in port with a daring CV raid, so my tally is over 10 sunk subs in all.
But only 1 sub sunk directly by ASW.

[topeverest]

I am playing Allies, and I have had similar DD losses to Jap subs and subs against Jap DD's. At the beginning, the Jap subs were so lethal that any convoy traveling less than 15 was guaranteed an attack...and loss. Now the escorts are thrwarting about half the the attacks before they can occur, but the Jap subs are by far the most consistant threat to anything afloat.

Jap effectiveness in this period just stikes me as a bit too effective. It approaches 80% in my experience.

Of interesting irony and potential bug, is the fact that if an allied sub attacks a enemy task force with more than 5 ASW types, that many or more can attack the sub, but ASW convoys can only have 4 ships. That seems odly out of place.

[John Lansford]

Wouldn't it make sense, though, that if the escorts were doing their job then the subs wouldn't be able to get close enough to the transports to actually attack them?  IOW, the subs are attacking the escorts because they can't get close enough to anything else.

In my CG one of my escorted transport TF's located an enemy sub, depthcharged it, got a few hits, and forced it to surface.  A gunnery duel broke out, with the I-boat shelling one of the transports that fired on it, put a torpedo into the transport, hit the old destroyer trying to protect the transport, and then managed to evade the rest of the escorts on the surface.  I thought that was unusual enough that I decided to mention it; on a later turn I forced a sub to the surface and two DD's took turns putting shells into it until it sank for the final time.

[fflaguna]

Speaking of Osaka, the Cubs have a third baseman who played in the Little League World Series against a team from Taiwan a few years ago.

[topeverest]

I am not sure about the Cubs third baseman or the average wingspeed velocity of a coconut laden swallow...

My only personal observation is the efficacy of the Jap subs and ASW in the first year.

I will play the game either way, but I favor a bit of a dial-back.

[Chickenboy]

Don't want to be a skeptic here, but here are my PBEM (2x) experiences:

1. Allied ASW is about right.
2. Japanese ASW is about right-nigh unto worthless without MAJOR effort.
3. I haven't seen uber Allied subs.
4. I haven't seen uber IJN subs.

I'm not interested in asking / demanding / rehashing / beating a dead horse this change of the developers because it is clear that this just hasn't been a universal issue with all players. Until it is, recoding of the game is the last thing I'd wish for. I suspect that we'd have other very frequent posters skepticizing (my word) openly about 'nerfed' this and 'nerfed' that. God, what a thankless job the devs. must have...[8|]