Allied Submarines - strategy and tactics

[Wirraway_Ace]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace

ORIGINAL: Alfred


My post addressed the efficiency issue.

In war sometimes the best course of action is not the most efficient. Clearly if air and surface naval assets are not an option and it is imperative to cover "that" strait, the deployment of subs is an option. But let's not confuse AE, the game, with a real war situation. IRL subs have their own means to locate and track enemy targets but in AE those means do not exist. Which means that in AE the cost benefit ratio is even worse and the opportunity cost is therefore higher.

In AE there is never a situation where doing something is "a necessity". There is always an opportunity cost. What the opponent is doing has to be factored in to one's own actions and usually there is more than one viable response to counter an opponent's actions. Are there times when covering a strait with subs only is a good deployment? The answer is yes but don't expect it to be an efficient use, in terms of sinking enemy ships, of your subs.

Alfred

Alfred, it has been a long time since I played the Allies, but I seem to recall that eventually U.S. subs get both surface and air search radars. I had assumed the surface radar did help them ID their own targets. Though, I also recall being advised by some wise lawyer, maybe named Alfred, not to believe everything you read. Sometimes the devices don't work within the game engine the way the player such as me might wish to believe.

The game's sub radars help in two areas:

(a) protection from enemy air assets

(b) target identification in battle.

They don't really assist in spotting the enemy task force they aren't really of assistance in MDL routines. That is one of the IRL situations not directly captured by the game. Also not directly captured are sonar signatures.

Players need to understand the differentiation between pre-combat parameters (which is MDL focused) and combat itself (which is DL focused). Don't assume DL/MDL carries over or has the same meaning in the two different stages. Abstraction is the order of the day.

The classic differentiation in the two stages being that in a surface combat (not ASW) shooting starts only once a visual contact is made, irrespective of how good the electronic assets are. But once visual contact is made, then the electronic assets can play a part in picking up and identifying enemy vessels to be targeted by your weapon systems. In game terms they can assist with the DL of individual enemy ships after visual contact with the enemy task force has been made. ASW combat is much more abstracted than surface combat.

Alfred

Got it, thanks!

[Taxcutter]

Good advice here.

At what point can an improved "minor port" (unmineable) become a mineable "major" port?

[Kull]

ORIGINAL: Taxcutter

Good advice here.

At what point can an improved "minor port" (unmineable) become a mineable "major" port?

You can lay minefields just about anywhere, and port size has no effect on how many you can place there manually (i.e. with a minelaying vessel), but I suspect you are talking about the "starting minefields". All ocean ports between size 5 and 10 will start off with minefields (Some size 4 ports get them while others don't...not sure why). The bigger the port, the larger the minefield. You can see this for yourself by starting a new December 8th campaign and looking at the minefields in each of your ports. This is a HARD CODE feature of the game, and cannot be adjusted in the editor. As with all minefields, these will begin to degrade on Day2, a process that can only be stopped by the presence of an ACM vessel (check the manual for details on ACMs and minefield dispersal rates).

Among other things, that means right from the get-go you will KNOW which enemy ports have mines, and how many they have there. That changes over time of course, but at least you know which enemy ports are *probably* safe for early war submarine visits.....and which to avoid.