Cargo Task Force ASW

[slane_slith]

Does it do any good to put minesweepers with ASW capability in Cargo TF's?

I want to run some TF's between Nomeau and Brisbane. The AI is running subs in the area so I need some type of ASW in the TF's but I don't want to use destroyers. I’ve got extra YMS and AM’s sitting is Sydney. Is there any point in putting them in the TF’s?

Thanks

[Sardaukar]

Yes, you do not want unescorted TF when subs are around.

I always escort Cargo TFs etc. with at least one ASW capable ship. Use AMs, since they are usually faster ships and speed matters.

[Itdepends]

You also want escorts with as large a range as possible as they'll slow the convoy down every time they refuel.

[dcpollay]

Does it do any good? Yes. While the secondary ships you're talking about are not great ASW vessels, any ASW-capable escort will be much better than none. Do not expect the minesweepers to kill many subs, but they can detect subs and prevent an attack on cargo vessels. A more likely occurrence will be that when a sub attacks your convoy, they will counterattack the sub and limit the damage it is able to inflict.

[slane_slith]

Thanks everyone. I was just really just looking for something to harrass and counterattack enemy subs not actively hunt for them.

[slane_slith]

Here’s another question then…

What I’m thinking about doing is setting a task force to run between Noumea and Brisbane. The task force will “patrol” with four days in each port. Can the minesweeper/ASW task force follow (or be followed) and still attack subs attacking the convoy or do they need to be merged for them to protect the convoy?

[Jim D Burns]

You want at least one escort in the convoy, otherwise there is a chance a following task force won't be able to engage and the sub can surface and attack your cargo vessels with its guns. Even if the escort in a cargo fleet is not likely to score a hit on a sub, at least it forces the sub to use its torpedoes and thus expend ammo that eventually will see it leave the area to rearm. Nothing worse than losing one or more vessels in an unescorted fleet to a subs guns and know it is still out there lurking with a full complement of torpedoes.

So don't follow unless you've already got escorts in the fleet and there are spare ships that need a job.

Jim

[slane_slith]

Oh well there goes my free lunch. Thanks everyone

[crsutton]

Any escort-even one without DC is better than none. The most important thing is the targeting model of the game. The sub will target the escort(s) over the escorted most of the time and usually miss-even if it is a slow escort. This really takes a lot of steam out of sub attacks. Shortage of escorts for the Allies really ends by late 42.

And yes, use your DDs as escorts some time-especially British or old American DDs. They have better crew experience and can actually hit enemy subs. Use DMS and DMs on occasion too as they generally have decent crews.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: crsutton
The sub will target the escort(s) over the escorted most of the time ...

Not quite true. The decision to take a quick shot at an escort instead of pushing through to the escorted ships is based on the sub skipper's skill ratings. Inexperienced/un-aggressive skippers take the easy way out, even if the chances are low. Some random in the check, like everything else, of course.

[jeffk3510]

You should have plenty of KVs, PCs, PGs, AVDs, AVPs (I think that's right), DMSs, DMs, DDs (four stackers), and AMs that are good for nothing but convoy escort for the first few months of the war... DMs are good for mining a forward port right away, but make for good escorts while your mine pools are low. You should combine same speed cargo ships going to the same area into larger convoys, and send them to main ports.... Brisbane, Sydney, Colombo, Pearl... etc.. (for Allies). This will really help you spread your escorts around, as you have some to begin with, just not enough for every single convoy you create.

My priority for convoy escorts:

Troop ships
Fuel
Supplies

In that order. I will escort an empty AP/TK/AO over a loaded AK that is supply only any day.

[rockmedic109]

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

You should have plenty of KVs, PCs, PGs, AVDs, AVPs (I think that's right), DMSs, DMs, DDs (four stackers), and AMs that are good for nothing but convoy escort for the first few months of the war... DMs are good for mining a forward port right away, but make for good escorts while your mine pools are low. You should combine same speed cargo ships going to the same area into larger convoys, and send them to main ports.... Brisbane, Sydney, Colombo, Pearl... etc.. (for Allies). This will really help you spread your escorts around, as you have some to begin with, just not enough for every single convoy you create.

My priority for convoy escorts:

Troop ships
Fuel
Supplies

In that order. I will escort an empty AP/TK/AO over a loaded AK that is supply only any day.

You've got your priorities right. I've never used AVDs or AVPs for escorts, though. Probably why the AI is smarter than me. DMs are a great idea once they run out of mines.....which is usually some time in early January of 1942.......

[Schanilec]

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

You should have plenty of KVs, PCs, PGs, AVDs, AVPs (I think that's right), DMSs, DMs, DDs (four stackers), and AMs that are good for nothing but convoy escort for the first few months of the war... DMs are good for mining a forward port right away, but make for good escorts while your mine pools are low. You should combine same speed cargo ships going to the same area into larger convoys, and send them to main ports.... Brisbane, Sydney, Colombo, Pearl... etc.. (for Allies). This will really help you spread your escorts around, as you have some to begin with, just not enough for every single convoy you create.

My priority for convoy escorts:

Troop ships
Fuel
Supplies

In that order. I will escort an empty AP/TK/AO over a loaded AK that is supply only any day.

As Jeff stated. Also SC's. With me, anything that I can get my grubby little hands on that carries depth charges.

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: crsutton
The sub will target the escort(s) over the escorted most of the time ...

Not quite true. The decision to take a quick shot at an escort instead of pushing through to the escorted ships is based on the sub skipper's skill ratings. Inexperienced/un-aggressive skippers take the easy way out, even if the chances are low. Some random in the check, like everything else, of course.

Don, not sure what you mean. I always use the most aggressive skippers in my subs. Typically through four years of game time they have more than 50% of the time attacked the escort-not the more valuable tankers and freighters. Do you mean to say that if I were to use less aggressive commanders that they would then most likely pass up a shot at the escort (warship) and are more likely then to take a shot at the cargo ships?

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Schanilec

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

You should have plenty of KVs, PCs, PGs, AVDs, AVPs (I think that's right), DMSs, DMs, DDs (four stackers), and AMs that are good for nothing but convoy escort for the first few months of the war... DMs are good for mining a forward port right away, but make for good escorts while your mine pools are low. You should combine same speed cargo ships going to the same area into larger convoys, and send them to main ports.... Brisbane, Sydney, Colombo, Pearl... etc.. (for Allies). This will really help you spread your escorts around, as you have some to begin with, just not enough for every single convoy you create.

My priority for convoy escorts:

Troop ships
Fuel
Supplies

In that order. I will escort an empty AP/TK/AO over a loaded AK that is supply only any day.

As Jeff stated. Also SC's. With me, anything that I can get my grubby little hands on that carries depth charges.

Yes, and Allied SC and PC get quite deadly after 1943 when they get radar, better DC and the Mousetrap. Still, for me the real killers have been DD ASW groups of four ships. In 1942 the British DDs were deadly.

I got a million DE and patrol frigates now but there are not any Japanese subs left for them to sink. Still I think the DDs are better due to crew quality.

[slane_slith]

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

You should have plenty of KVs, PCs, PGs, AVDs, AVPs (I think that's right), DMSs, DMs, DDs (four stackers), and AMs that are good for nothing but convoy escort for the first few months of the war... DMs are good for mining a forward port right away, but make for good escorts while your mine pools are low. You should combine same speed cargo ships going to the same area into larger convoys, and send them to main ports.... Brisbane, Sydney, Colombo, Pearl... etc.. (for Allies). This will really help you spread your escorts around, as you have some to begin with, just not enough for every single convoy you create.

My priority for convoy escorts:

Troop ships
Fuel
Supplies

In that order. I will escort an empty AP/TK/AO over a loaded AK that is supply only any day.

I've got runs from from the west coast to Australia. TF's from Hawaii to Noumea are covered by 4 DD's and at least 1 CA. Noumea to Brisbane is a "short" run. Japanese subs are not highly active in the area but I've managed to get in trouble with opposed landings and fighter duels in the area from Guadacanal to Rabaul. So I'm trying to use "leftover" ships to do the escorts so that I can have my fighting ships to counter moves by Japanese SCTF's.

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: slane
TF's from Hawaii to Noumea are covered by 4 DD's and at least 1 CA.

I'd be leery of using anything heavier than ASW capable escort ships in a routine convoy run. Putting a cruiser in a convoy to Noumea might help if there is an enemy surface fleet waiting for you at Noumea, but it opens the CA up to sub attacks along the entire route of the convoy since it travels at the slow speed of the convoy the whole way. Being a high value target any sub intercept is almost guaranteed to take a shot at it so you risk its loss for very little gain.

You're much better off creating a separate surface group in NZ and sending it north to sweep the port ahead of your convoy as it arrives to the area. Surface groups travel at much higher speeds and are far less likely to get attacked by subs.

If you have to escort convoys with heavy ships it's probably better to use a separate task force and follow the convoy. I'm not sure if the surface assets get penalized the same on sub intercept attempts or not when following, but it makes sense that they wouldn't as they have their own mission speed setting.

I'm talking about non-ASW capable ships here, there is no real benefit to putting them into the convoy itself unless you simply lack enough escorts to both escort the surface group and the convoy. Just realize you're putting the heavies at risk when you combine them due to the slow speed of the cargo ships in the convoy.

Jim

[JocMeister]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Any escort-even one without DC is better than none. The most important thing is the targeting model of the game. The sub will target the escort(s) over the escorted most of the time and usually miss-even if it is a slow escort. This really takes a lot of steam out of sub attacks.

+1
This is my experience too.

[Mundy]

I've had the Charleston beat off some AMC raiders which ran into one of my convoys.  I keep her pretty busy on the long runs.
Ed-

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: crsutton
The sub will target the escort(s) over the escorted most of the time ...

Not quite true. The decision to take a quick shot at an escort instead of pushing through to the escorted ships is based on the sub skipper's skill ratings. Inexperienced/un-aggressive skippers take the easy way out, even if the chances are low. Some random in the check, like everything else, of course.

Don, not sure what you mean. I always use the most aggressive skippers in my subs. Typically through four years of game time they have more than 50% of the time attacked the escort-not the more valuable tankers and freighters. Do you mean to say that if I were to use less aggressive commanders that they would then most likely pass up a shot at the escort (warship) and are more likely then to take a shot at the cargo ships?

Lot of complexity in that code. The intent was to have better skippers accomplish their mission more often than less-better ones. Problem is the use of random chance to generate some unpredictability. Good skipper can fail, bad one can get lucky. Like all these randomized results it should balance out over time. But...