Allies Set-up Spreadsheet for AE

[RangerJoe]

Turn off replacements and upgrades for all that you can buy out and all that you can't. Save the devices!

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS

Okay, thanks for the replacement tip. I will turn off replacements for those I want to change HQs.

So far I am still getting a 3:1 favourable exchange rate wrt Air. I know that the IJN and IJA had some rather fragile planes but is this normal? I don't think I have come across the KB in combat yet, so possibly I am not up against the first string.

One mnor area that puzzles me, at the moment.
5 Sdn RAF. It seems to be split into two dets. One is an Audax det doing Bomber work. The other is a Mohawk det doing fighter stuff. The Audax det has a note that it will upgrade to mohawks. When is this likely to happen? Can I force it somehow? Those Audaxes are cute but I'd rather have Mohawks.

Before you change aircraft models, look at your pools and production numbers for that aircraft to see if you can get enough to make the switch. Not much point changing if you cannot fill out the unit.
Lots of RAF/IAF units and some RAAF units have split units with different aircraft in the detachment. IIRC, most of them require PP to change aircraft so it may not be worth getting them all on the same model.
The other way to get them standardized is to disband the detachment (if possible). But disbandment may result in destruction of the aircraft it does have. Check the manual for rules about supply, size of airfield and range of Air HQs that affect upgrades and disbandments.

[RangerJoe]

If you do disband, also see if the detachment can be disbanded into another unit with the same type of plane at the same base.

[LGKMAS]

Sorry RJ but your message was chopped somehow. Can you repeat it?

also,after some rather disturbing IJN SS successes, I am trying to see what ASW TFs I have. Yet when I call up the list of TFs and sort by type, ASW does not appear. Even when I find one on the map and then try and find it on the list of TFs, it is not listed. Yet the individual ships show them in the right TFs.
Any idea what is happening and why I cannot locate ASW TFs in the list. I would have thought they were an essential TF.

[LGKMAS]

Damn, there must be something wrong with this forum. The minute I posted that I had a chopped message from RJ, and my own message turned up, then RJ's suddenly appeared in full. Frustrating.

[Alfred]

They are listed under Surface TFs.
 
Here is a suggestion.  Try clicking on each of the Headings to see where the different types of TFs are located.  There is a logic why disparate types of TF are grouped together.
 
Alfred

[LGKMAS]

Found them! I am continually amazed at what there is to find in this game and how slow I am to discover them.
Trying now to set up some sub hunting packs in areas where IJN SSTFs are a damned nuisance. I am finding the low ASW rate for some of the DDs etc are pitiful and rather worrying. However, I take the point that even 4 x YPs with a meager 4 ASW points between them will probably soak up torpedoes.
What is a powerful early war ASW pack? 16? The BRITCOM AMs all have a basic 4 ASW pts. That makes them one of the more powerful vessels for ASW. But does that translate to a good ASDIC (SONAR)? to detect the IJN Sub patrols? Or do we need a good SS Radar to pick them up?

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS

Found them! I am continually amazed at what there is to find in this game and how slow I am to discover them.
Trying now to set up some sub hunting packs in areas where IJN SSTFs are a damned nuisance. I am finding the low ASW rate for some of the DDs etc are pitiful and rather worrying. However, I take the point that even 4 x YPs with a meager 4 ASW points between them will probably soak up torpedoes.
What is a powerful early war ASW pack? 16? The BRITCOM AMs all have a basic 4 ASW pts. That makes them one of the more powerful vessels for ASW. But does that translate to a good ASDIC (SONAR)? to detect the IJN Sub patrols? Or do we need a good SS Radar to pick them up?

Early on, the four-stacker DDs you convert to APDs are some of the best ASW ships available. Some US DDs get refits in January and more in February that add DC throwers. Those are part of the weapons suite that goes into the ASW value. I think the quality of Sonar is hidden in the update data or it magically improves at certain dates, the way torpedoes do.

More important than those things is the quality of the captain and crew. Captains need good Naval Skill 60+ and high Aggression 70+ if possible. Aggression influences persistence in attacks. Low aggression Captains break off the attack after a pass or two, high aggression Captains keep searching longer. Crew experience over 60/60 is usually needed to get actual hits on the sub. I think it also influences who spots who first.

[LGKMAS]

Thanks for the tip. I tried looking up the DDs etc on the Allied Database but it does not give values on that unlike when you click on a specific ship where it says AA value 76 ASW value 2 etc. Although it does show how many DC racks and throwers there are, I have not yet worked out how that translates to ASW values.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS

Thanks for the tip. I tried looking up the DDs etc on the Allied Database but it does not give values on that unlike when you click on a specific ship where it says AA value 76 ASW value 2 etc. Although it does show how many DC racks and throwers there are, I have not yet worked out how that translates to ASW values.

Each device is an ASW value.

[LGKMAS]

So how do I find the device?
I have looked at the Database for ASW weapons. It shows name, accuracy, depth and effect with load cost, all rather large numbers. none of which would allow me to say that that DD has an ASW value of 2.

When I look at DDs, take the Benson 2/43, it shows ASW weapons by name, how many mounts, ammo and effect eg 300. Again, the numbers are rather large and would not allow me to add up to say 8.

I look at the I screen and look under industry/resources/ etc and all that gives me is production numbers.

There must be a screen I have not stumbled on yet?

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS

So how do I find the device?
I have looked at the Database for ASW weapons. It shows name, accuracy, depth and effect with load cost, all rather large numbers. none of which would allow me to say that that DD has an ASW value of 2.

When I look at DDs, take the Benson 2/43, it shows ASW weapons by name, how many mounts, ammo and effect eg 300. Again, the numbers are rather large and would not allow me to add up to say 8.

I look at the I screen and look under industry/resources/ etc and all that gives me is production numbers.

There must be a screen I have not stumbled on yet?

Look at the ship screen shot. The number of ASW weapons is the ASW value. The amount of ammo does not matter, just the mounts.

[LGKMAS]

It seems that the number of mounts is a game fudge.
The HDMLs that are there in early 1942 are supposed to have 4 DC Throwers each for a value of 4. In real life they had 12 DC that were dropped rather than thrown. in fact the recoil from DC throwers would probably have smashed the wooden hulls.
I then went and looked at a late war 1945 DE. 4 DCT each side, two racks off the rear and one hedgehog for a value of 11.The Hedgehog is rated as only 1 ASW mount, yet it was a game changer and much more effective than simply tossing DCs left right and centre.
Nevertheless, I am happy to accept that the game designers went the way they did to simplify things.

[Kull]

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS

It seems that the number of mounts is a game fudge.
The HDMLs that are there in early 1942 are supposed to have 4 DC Throwers each for a value of 4. In real life they had 12 DC that were dropped rather than thrown. in fact the recoil from DC throwers would probably have smashed the wooden hulls.
I then went and looked at a late war 1945 DE. 4 DCT each side, two racks off the rear and one hedgehog for a value of 11.The Hedgehog is rated as only 1 ASW mount, yet it was a game changer and much more effective than simply tossing DCs left right and centre.
Nevertheless, I am happy to accept that the game designers went the way they did to simplify things.

It's not a fudge - number of mounts is just one of MANY variables. As BBfanboy points out, others include crew experience and Captain skills, and yes, perhaps some hidden approximations. And the devices themselves matter. You have the Allied Spreadsheet - go look at the devices tab. The Hedgehogs you mentioned are deadly not because of "number of mounts", but because they have accuracy ratings far in excess of the other ASW weapons. And most important are detection levels. An unseen sub can't be attacked, much less killed.

Try not to think of the game as a set of numbers. How did ASW REALLY work during this period? Hunter-killer groups (as opposed to convoy escorts) worked only when they were aided by intel or were directed by air spotters. Sending a group of destroyers out to hunt subs absent those factors will be just as ineffective in-game as it would have been in real life.

Play the game using real-world tactics and you'll find that your in-game results will be pretty similar. Play it as if were a pile of numbers that have to be individually sifted and evaluated and you'll just get a headache.

[LGKMAS]

Sorry but I think you miss my point. If the number of mounts determines the ASW rating, then the Hedgehog is under-rated. The DE example I cited from l945 is rated as 11. based on RJ's post, every mount counts. So the DE has 4 throwers on either side . 4 x2 = 8. Plus two racks off the stern . 2 x 1 = 2 . Total so far = 10. And one hedgehog!. That means the hedgehog is only worth 1 as the total seems to be 11. 10 for conventional DC racks and throwers and 1 for the Hedgehog!
Back in 1942, a HDML has four throwers each side so has an ASW rating of 4x2 = 8.
Unless the ASW ratings really don't matter, and I cannot imagine why that would be. Or perhaps RJ has jumped to a wrong conclusion and I can't see that happening either. So if RJ is correct, then the number of mounts determines the ASW rating. The success or otherwise of attacks will, as you point out, depend on a number of other factors. Captains ratings, accuracy, effect, and so on. But I would rather send a vessel rated as ASW 8 than one Rated as ASW 1, even with a huge difference in Captains rating that favour the ASW 1 vessel.

Yes, I saw the increased accuracy of the Hedgehog and mousetrap and the effect. But I am not certain how this translates to ASW ratings.

I have also looked at commanders but a large number of my ASW vessel commanders are grey and cannot be changed. A reasonable number are yellow and I have done some changes there. However, they cannot all be Johnny Walkers! Do the ratings change over time?

I don't intend sending out hunter-killer teams wandering around just yet. maybe in a year or two. However, there is a pesky IJN SS TF around Horn island that I need to deal with. If I put a couple of reasonably high rated ASW TFs patrolling Torres Strait, then I should be able to at least deter the IJN SS Tf? There always seems to be a IJN Sub from Horn Is across to Port Moresby so saturating that area with ASW patrols should keep them occupied. My ASW air patrols keep spotting the subs but can't seem to do anything about them.

I am not trying to play with numbers but to understand the system. In real life, as the CinC Pacific fleet and elsewhere, I would have a file a couple of feet thick on commanders abilities, have access to weapons experts to advise on capabilities of various classes of ships and have years of personal experience to assist me. All I have at the moment are raw ASW ratings for ships to tell me which are the best ones to use for the purpose. And a few Captains ratings that I may or may not be able to fix. The raw numbers allow me to see whether it is worthwhile sending this ship off as an ASW screen or best kept back to add to the AAW screen. And so on.

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS

Sorry but I think you miss my point. If the number of mounts determines the ASW rating, then the Hedgehog is under-rated. The DE example I cited from l945 is rated as 11. based on RJ's post, every mount counts. So the DE has 4 throwers on either side . 4 x2 = 8. Plus two racks off the stern . 2 x 1 = 2 . Total so far = 10. And one hedgehog!. That means the hedgehog is only worth 1 as the total seems to be 11. 10 for conventional DC racks and throwers and 1 for the Hedgehog!
Back in 1942, a HDML has four throwers each side so has an ASW rating of 4x2 = 8.
Unless the ASW ratings really don't matter, and I cannot imagine why that would be. Or perhaps RJ has jumped to a wrong conclusion and I can't see that happening either. So if RJ is correct, then the number of mounts determines the ASW rating. The success or otherwise of attacks will, as you point out, depend on a number of other factors. Captains ratings, accuracy, effect, and so on. But I would rather send a vessel rated as ASW 8 than one Rated as ASW 1, even with a huge difference in Captains rating that favour the ASW 1 vessel.

Yes, I saw the increased accuracy of the Hedgehog and mousetrap and the effect. But I am not certain how this translates to ASW ratings.

I have also looked at commanders but a large number of my ASW vessel commanders are grey and cannot be changed. A reasonable number are yellow and I have done some changes there. However, they cannot all be Johnny Walkers! Do the ratings change over time?

I don't intend sending out hunter-killer teams wandering around just yet. maybe in a year or two. However, there is a pesky IJN SS TF around Horn island that I need to deal with. If I put a couple of reasonably high rated ASW TFs patrolling Torres Strait, then I should be able to at least deter the IJN SS Tf? There always seems to be a IJN Sub from Horn Is across to Port Moresby so saturating that area with ASW patrols should keep them occupied. My ASW air patrols keep spotting the subs but can't seem to do anything about them.

I am not trying to play with numbers but to understand the system. In real life, as the CinC Pacific fleet and elsewhere, I would have a file a couple of feet thick on commanders abilities, have access to weapons experts to advise on capabilities of various classes of ships and have years of personal experience to assist me. All I have at the moment are raw ASW ratings for ships to tell me which are the best ones to use for the purpose. And a few Captains ratings that I may or may not be able to fix. The raw numbers allow me to see whether it is worthwhile sending this ship off as an ASW screen or best kept back to add to the AAW screen. And so on.

The ASW rating does not represent the value of the ASW equipment.

When you have AE questions, I suggest you search the forum for my answers to the issue. This thread:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... w&#4410518

is one of many where I have dealt with this issue.

AE is full of string variables which players erroneously take to mean literally what the heading says. Some of these players just never learn, or are unprepared to ditch their erroneous preconceptions, that AE incorporates many abstractions.

You should never choose your naval ASW assets on the basis of the displayed ASW rating. The characteristics of the individual ASW devices make a mockery of that displayed number.

Alfred

[LGKMAS]

Hi Alfred,
Thanks for the input.
I do realise that there are many variables for ASW. The more sophisticated ASW systems have yet to surface in my play. I am only up to Feb 1942. So the only ASW weapons to hand are either DC Throwers or DC racks off the stern. Given that, It makes sense to me to pick a vessel that has an ASW rating of 4 over one that has one of 1. The reason is that they have more ASW weapons. Two side throwers and two racks off the stern means a bigger and hopefully better pattern more likely to gather in an enemy sub. As opposed to a single rack dropping DC off the stern.

Once more sophisticated systems start appearing, such as hedgehogs, then I will need to look carefully at each escort vessel. Not certain when that happens as the devices list suggests hedgehogs are already in service.

As my captains get better and so does the crew, maybe a DD of 2 will produce better results than a KV of 4? For the moment, I have no other way of assessing how effective my ASW vessels are.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS

Hi Alfred,
Thanks for the input.
I do realise that there are many variables for ASW. The more sophisticated ASW systems have yet to surface in my play. I am only up to Feb 1942. So the only ASW weapons to hand are either DC Throwers or DC racks off the stern. Given that, It makes sense to me to pick a vessel that has an ASW rating of 4 over one that has one of 1. The reason is that they have more ASW weapons. Two side throwers and two racks off the stern means a bigger and hopefully better pattern more likely to gather in an enemy sub. As opposed to a single rack dropping DC off the stern.

Once more sophisticated systems start appearing, such as hedgehogs, then I will need to look carefully at each escort vessel. Not certain when that happens as the devices list suggests hedgehogs are already in service.

As my captains get better and so does the crew, maybe a DD of 2 will produce better results than a KV of 4? For the moment, I have no other way of assessing how effective my ASW vessels are.

Think of the chance of getting a hit or near miss on a sub as being a combination of the number of "shots" (ASW devices) times the accuracy value x the effect value. All that gets compared against the sub skipper's Naval Skill at evasion and how good the DL was on the sub before the attack. There would also be abstracted randoms for thermocline layers in the water, depth of water, etc. But trying to get a single value that says how good the ship itself is at ASW is, as Alfred indicates, a headache that cannot be totally resolved.

From my experience with the game, good captain and crew is what gets the results, with a strong assist from patrol aircraft getting detection.

[LGKMAS]

Thanks for all the input. I do understand ASW. I had some very good instructors back in the day.
However, when I cannot change my commanders, because they are greyed out, and if they are all roughly the same ratings, then I think it a good idea to use the ASW vessel rating. Why? Because the thermocline etc will still apply, the sub commanders rating at evasion will be the same. I cannot change my ASW commanders ratings, at least with what I have in the region at the moment. The only variable I can alter is the number of ASW weapons being used. So a ship with a rating of 4 is better than one with a rating of 1, everything else being the same.
I am looking at those commanders in the region and starting to sort out who might make a good ASW commander and making a list of their ships.
re the Commanders ratings. Do they change over time? I take it there is no Training aspect as we have with pilots? Is it OJT for these guys?
What about those greyed out? Are we doomed to have them in charge of the same ship for the rest of the war?

[RangerJoe]

If the ship is at sea, you can't change the commander.