ASW way to effective

[briantmar]

The ASW unitis in the game seem way to effective!

In a scenario I am playing (Guad 42), I just watched the computer create an asw task force of about 15 destroyers and PC. I had lined up subs from Kaviegn to Truk. I watched this on task force move from kaviegn to Truk and destroyed 6 subs in one pass. This means that the task force found and destroyed 6 out of the 8 subs it found in one day. Most of the subs suffered 10+ hits and all 6 were sunk.

All of these subs were in deep water (60 mile hexes).

So in one evening, This ASW task force isolated and killed 6 out of 8 subs it passed in one evening in deep water. This never happened in the war that I know of.
1) The ASW seems to be able to locate and destroy subs in deep water way to easily
2) Once an ASW executes an attack, the odds of achieving a hit is way to large. Especially seems that about a 60% hit rate for each depth charge launched. I have read of many cases of destroyers dropping all their depth charges and going home empty, even late in the war.

Also, It also seems very unrealistic for the task for to pursue 6 subs contacts in one night. Does not this take some time?

In addition, it seems that placing a large amount of surface units in one task force guarantees a kill. I believe this should help in surface actions but I do not think this is the case in ASW action. Maybe this a case of using late war tactics early in the war. I could not find any case of anyone doing this in the war of creating 10+ ship ASW patrols and sending them out. I believe they did not do this as it was not effective. The current game mechanincs favor this tactic.

I have also run this test several times using saved games to see if happened again. I had similar results over and over as they at some point the japs send out a monster ASW force.

Brian

[von Murrin]

Actually, it did happen once. DD England got 6 in several days before Philippine Sea, IIRC. Her ASW group did have lots of Ultra help, however.

I really haven't see the ASROC ASW yet. Guess I'm just lucky.[&:]

[briantmar]

I have seen some of that. I was refering to 6 in one evening.

Brian

[mogami]

Yike it would be scary to be a submarine skipper in that game. In my current game it was 3 weeks before a single submarine was attacked and then 5 were killed in 1 week.
(4 IJN and 1 Dutch) 3 of the IJN were in the Malacca strait. THey had inflicted heavy damage in the weeks prior and then a killer ASW group came down. (It was whacked by LBA from Khota Bharu but too late for the subs. The other had sat 60 miles outside LA for weeks (waiting on Saratoga) It was sunk after attacking an AK. The Dutch sub appeared to me to first be engaged in a surface gun battle before being sunk by DC. (I swear it hit one of my CL with it's deck gun)

OK now that that is out of the way. Isolated freak occurances are to be expected when many games are played but if it becomes a pattern and no other explanations can be found then prehaps ratings need to be adjusted. We went back and forth on ASW in testing.
Were any of your subs spotted by ASW aircraft in the turns proceeding their demise? If so did they remain in the same location? Had they made any attacks and remained or was this just out of the blue?

Many actual incidents will likely not be repeated. (The sub torpedo spread of 6 torpedos that sunk theWasp and a DD and damaged a BB will never happen in that manner. (a sub would have to conduct 3 attacks to match that)

Expect submarine loss for Allies to exceed historical esp in PBEM games. The Japanese player will be operating like late 1943 in early 1942 (Escorting convoys and conducting ASW patrols long before Japan actually decided such measures were needed.) Also human Allies will send subs to risky patrol areas. However we finally settle this submarine actions will be more common in game then in reality. Early war patrols will be better placed. (we know exactly where to place submarines) Both sides will make major efforts to destroy submarines that have been spotted and patrol likely areas for submarine deployment. Could 10 ASW sink 6 enemy submarines? Only if they found them. If a submarine is spotted at night on the surface by such a large TF out looking for them the submarine is in real danger. Allied surface ships might be radar equipped and can see submarines at night before the sub is aware it has been spotted.

Lets all keep a record of the how when and wheres of ASW combat. I think there is a trend of most such attacks being fatal. I think of the past 20 submarines I have had attacked only 2 have survived. (I lost another submarine but that was to enemy patrol aircraft when it was at Kendari to refuel reload. )

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: zendar

I have seen some of that. I was refering to 6 in one evening.

Brian

Your complaint is very legitimate if the submarines were in different hexes as you
description implies. You are complaining about the "INSTANT" nature of ASW. To
cover the distance you suggest in your post, the DD TF would have to be travelling
at 30+ knots. Problem is that WWII ASW equipment didn't function at that kind of
speed because your own vessel would be producing too much noise and interferance.
That's the reason purpose built ASW ships rarely had a top speed of much over 22 kts.
High speed was a counter to sub attacks only in that the targets moved through an
area so quickly that a sub couldn't "set up" to attack them..., but by the same token,
the sub itself was pretty safe from them as well.

This whole area of the game is messed up. ASW efforts expend no time and are con-
ducted at any speed setting. Totally wrong. Even if you know that a sub has been spot-
ted in an area, finding them once they've submurged is a slow and painstaking process.
It could easily take a whole day. It's not that the Japanese TF didn't have a good
chance of finding, fixing, and sinking the nearest sub (they brought enough units), but
the speed you describe for running down the whole patrol line is idiotic in the extreme.

[moses]

It seems to me that at the level of individual actions ASW in the game seems to be way off. But at an overall level the ASW seems almost perfect. Paradoxical but I'll explain.

The JP ASW forces seem to engage way too often given what I think I know about the success of dedicated ASW forces during the war. On the other hand they allow me to prevent the allied player from doing all the things I hated in UV. Assuming I plan properly the allied player cannot just camp his subs in ports and invasion hexes and he can't just sit along prime convoy routes for weeks at a time hitting ship after ship. As long as I have aircraft doing ASW and ASW task forces patroling key sites I can keep his subs at bay. If the allied player insists on trying the above tactics he will suffer losses. If he concentrates on areas where I fail or am unable to provide adequete ASW he will score successes at little cost.

The allied ASW seems insanely out of wack. I ran some tests when the game came out that showed 6 destroyer ASW task forces hitting 50% of the subs that they shared a hex with. I was ready to cry "bug" and wait for the patch. Then I realized that its a big ocean and as long as I stayed away from major navel bases and used my subs as they were historically I was pretty safe.

Now I still think allied ASW needs to be toned down a little but I sort of think that the system works as is.

I don't know. Is it possible for the game to be wrong at the level of individual actionsbut correct in an overall sense?