escorting convoys

[niceguy2005]

I have a question for the experienced players. I am the allied player in my game. I am trying to fend off the insidious japanese subs, who are threatening my valiant merchant fleet. In the rule book it states that sub captains will evaluate the risk and gain of each opportunity and decide whether or not to attack. The question is, does anyone have a magic formula for number of cargo ships and number of escorts in a fleet given that the sub threat is moderate? I assume the more escorts, the less likely a sub will attack.

As a side question, is there anything players can do to influence the effectiveness of sub attacks. My subs are getting a lot of shots off at the japanese, but 3 out of 4 shots are missing, and then of course 50% of the hits are duds.

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

I have a question for the experienced players. I am the allied player in my game. I am trying to fend off the insidious japanese subs, who are threatening my valiant merchant fleet. In the rule book it states that sub captains will evaluate the risk and gain of each opportunity and decide whether or not to attack. The question is, does anyone have a magic formula for number of cargo ships and number of escorts in a fleet given that the sub threat is moderate? I assume the more escorts, the less likely a sub will attack.

As a side question, is there anything players can do to influence the effectiveness of sub attacks. My subs are getting a lot of shots off at the japanese, but 3 out of 4 shots are missing, and then of course 50% of the hits are duds.

Well, normally i will put several ASW vessels (MSWs, PCs and PGs usually) into the transport convoy, and then in addition escort the convoy with 4-6 DDs/APDs/DMS or whatever is available. This seems to catch the rascal IJN subs before they can torpedo some poor freighter or whatever. Even then they can sometimes get through.

EDIT - as for the second part, the non-Fleet subs are better (as are the Dutch and Brits). Otherwise, you will have to wait for 1943.

[niceguy2005]

rtapasso, thank you for the reply.

escorts in each tranpsort TF and an escorting asw fleet, certainly would do the trick. It is still the first month in the war, so I don't have a lot of escorts to spare. My hope is to have at least 3 escorts (msw, avd, pg, etc.) with each fleet of 2-5 AK/AP. I want to have enough ships left to have at least some roving ASW fleets.

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

rtapasso, thank you for the reply.

escorts in each tranpsort TF and an escorting asw fleet, certainly would do the trick. It is still the first month in the war, so I don't have a lot of escorts to spare. My hope is to have at least 3 escorts (msw, avd, pg, etc.) with each fleet of 2-5 AK/AP. I want to have enough ships left to have at least some roving ASW fleets.

Usually i use much larger convoys in order to cut down on escort requirements (around 25 ships, but you can put up to 100 in a transport TF) - some stay at each location visited and unload, while the rest of the transports continue on. The unloaded transports pick up escorts from returning convoys. Sometimes i have an ASW TF stationed in one zone for this purpose (returning empty transports) -i.e. between SF and PH.

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

rtapasso, thank you for the reply.

escorts in each tranpsort TF and an escorting asw fleet, certainly would do the trick. It is still the first month in the war, so I don't have a lot of escorts to spare. My hope is to have at least 3 escorts (msw, avd, pg, etc.) with each fleet of 2-5 AK/AP. I want to have enough ships left to have at least some roving ASW fleets.

Usually i use much larger convoys in order to cut down on escort requirements (around 25 ships, but you can put up to 100 in a transport TF) - some stay at each location visited and unload, while the rest of the transports continue on. The unloaded transports pick up escorts from returning convoys. Sometimes i have an ASW TF stationed in one zone for this purpose (returning empty transports) -i.e. between SF and PH.

I see how that could work. I would normally do somewhat larger convoys, bound for a single destination. However, the KB spent the first few weeks lurking off the west coast. So, rather than wait for it to leave I sent out small TFs in all directions. It worked well against the KB, but hasn't worked well for subs.

[Feinder]

Keep the mega-convoys away from KB.

Erstad found one, and sank 50(!) AKs. Fortunately, I didn't need to learn the lesson twice.

And keep a MSW in your convoys, esp if it's PBEM. Folks around here are facinated by mines. They're mostly annoying (the mines and the people *grin*), but suddenly having an AK in your convoy with 55 float dmg because forgot the minesweeper is truely irritating.

-F-

[ltfightr]

Mines I love mines MINE MINE MINE thats my motto.

[saj42]

For convoys to SOPAC/SWPAC area i use 6-10 AKs escorted by 1x MSW/PG/AVD/'four-stacker' DD. The route Hilo/Palmyra/Canton/Pago Pago/Efate Noumea has 2x PBY squadrons at each location, with a 3-4xDD ASW TF at Canton and Pago Pago for when subs are spotted (P.H. and Noumea have enough ships to use for ASW as a matter of course).

Convoys of APs when carrying LCUs will have 1 escort for 2 transports.

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: Tallyho!

For convoys to SOPAC/SWPAC area i use 6-10 AKs escorted by 1x MSW/PG/AVD/'four-stacker' DD. The route Hilo/Palmyra/Canton/Pago Pago/Efate Noumea has 2x PBY squadrons at each location, with a 3-4xDD ASW TF at Canton and Pago Pago for when subs are spotted (P.H. and Noumea have enough ships to use for ASW as a matter of course).

Convoys of APs when carrying LCUs will have 1 escort for 2 transports.

Tallyho, is that 1 each msw, pg, avd, and dd, or do you mean simply one escort. One escort ship, to me, would not seem to be enough.

[saj42]

Only one !!!

Yes it doesn't seem much, but with sub doctrines 'ON' I feel my transports are relatively safe (what's the loss of a few AKs???). With the overlapping PBY cover, If I see a sub then it gets a wide berth. It means watching all your convoys. After early 43 when I get more escorts then i might increase numbers

[Crimguy]

Do you put the DD's and MSW's directly in the TF or set up an escort convoy? Does it make a difference?

[Sardaukar]

BTW, never use Escort mission for combat. As mods said it doesn't do what manual says but is used to get crippled ships home and tries to avoid combat. If you want to escort a transport TF (for example) add DDs, PCs, PGs directly in to convoy or have ASW TF set to follow the Transport TF. You can also add Surface Combat TF to follow the Transport Tf if aftraid of surface intercept. But latter is rare due to surface intercept difficulties, usually happens only in enemy ports when invading. Or in your own ports when enemy is invading..open sea intercepts are rare but not impossible..both forces just have to end their movement phase in same hex.

[Tom Hunter]

I run small convoys and leave 4-6 ship ASW groups at various locations on the convoy routes. When something gets attacked I jump on the sub. I have taken some attrition of merchant shipping and the Japanese have lost some subs.

For some reason (maybe just luck) my ASW groups seem to do a better job of finding subs than my convoy escorts.

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Crimguy

Do you put the DD's and MSW's directly in the TF or set up an escort convoy? Does it make a difference?

Personally, i put the MSWs in the transport TF and the DD in an ASW TF. The ASW TF seems to do a better job in catching the subs, but once in a while they'll get through, and usually the MSWs will pick them up. The 2-tiered method seems to work better than putting all the escorts in either the ASW TF or the Transport TF. If i put everything in the Transport TF, more ships seem to get torpedoed. If i put everything in the ASW TF, more ships seem to get torpedoed (plus, for reasons unknown, sometimes the ASW TF seems to lag behind the Transport TF, leaving the transports vulnerable for a while).

[bradfordkay]

Later on you might include some DEs in an important supply convoy, but DDs are too valuable (IMO). Like others above, I run lots of smaller (5-10 ship) convoys, with MSWs and SCs as escorts (for supply convoys, only one of these). Even though a single escort doesn't often get to make attacks, it does seem to discourage sub attacks to some extent.

DDs, DMSs, DEs are quite useful in troop convoys, and - of course - in ASW TFs. I agree that having patrol aircraft up over the supply routes can also be very helpful.

I will not run large (25+ ship) supply convoys unless I start to take a lot a merchant losses. I feel that only a few of the ports in the Pacific can handle such large convoys (remember, the game unloads all ships at the same time), but am willing to change that attitude the same way that the US did in the Atlantic after the U-boats "Happy Time".

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Later on you might include some DEs in an important supply convoy, but DDs are too valuable (IMO). Like others above, I run lots of smaller (5-10 ship) convoys, with MSWs and SCs as escorts (for supply convoys, only one of these). Even though a single escort doesn't often get to make attacks, it does seem to discourage sub attacks to some extent.

DDs, DMSs, DEs are quite useful in troop convoys, and - of course - in ASW TFs. I agree that having patrol aircraft up over the supply routes can also be very helpful.

I will not run large (25+ ship) supply convoys unless I start to take a lot a merchant losses. I feel that only a few of the ports in the Pacific can handle such large convoys (remember, the game unloads all ships at the same time), but am willing to change that attitude the same way that the US did in the Atlantic after the U-boats "Happy Time".

Haven't gotten any DEs yet (but looking forward to it).

As for the 25+ ship convoys - i don't unload all the ships at the same time (except at large ports), but will leave a couple of ships (with escorts and protection from patrol AC) at a small base whilst the large mass of ships presses on towards a large port (Sydney, Brisbane, etc.) Not only does trying to unload a big TF take a lot of time in a small port, but you can easily waste a lot of supply by accidentally unloading too many supplies (going over the spoilage limit).

The ships that are left behind take a long time to unload in a small port - they stay in port and get swept up by returning (empty) convoys, and their escorts are added in.

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Later on you might include some DEs in an important supply convoy, but DDs are too valuable (IMO). Like others above, I run lots of smaller (5-10 ship) convoys, with MSWs and SCs as escorts (for supply convoys, only one of these). Even though a single escort doesn't often get to make attacks, it does seem to discourage sub attacks to some extent.

DDs, DMSs, DEs are quite useful in troop convoys, and - of course - in ASW TFs. I agree that having patrol aircraft up over the supply routes can also be very helpful.

I will not run large (25+ ship) supply convoys unless I start to take a lot a merchant losses. I feel that only a few of the ports in the Pacific can handle such large convoys (remember, the game unloads all ships at the same time), but am willing to change that attitude the same way that the US did in the Atlantic after the U-boats "Happy Time".

SC's are great, I can't wait to start getting them. IMO, there just aren't enough patrol craft (msw and PG/PC) to adequately escort all the transports at the beginning of the war. SC's don't work very well in ASW fleets, but are great for short to medium supply runs. I agree that DD's other than flushdecks are too valuable to waste on cargo escort.

When I first started playing WitP I researched subchasers. I don't think that WitP adequately simualtes the impact they had. While they were not very effective right after their introduction, by the end of the war they performed ASW very effectively. This is because the commanders were running the subchasers at full speed lowering their detection capability. Once they learned to slow down on ASW patrol they became much more effective.

[bradfordkay]

I'm still not sure how effective subchasers are in WITP, but I found them to be invaluable in UV. I would include one or two in every supply TF, and my supply TFs were rarely attacked by subs. My SCs did little actual damage, but the Japanese subs did very little damage to my ships (this did carry over into other TFs, if I had escorts in those TFs there were few attacks). Because of my experience with them in UV, I am continuing to use them in a similar manner in WITP. I found them to be highly ineffective in ASW TFs, as that usually resulted in sunk SCs...

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

I'm still not sure how effective subchasers are in WITP, but I found them to be invaluable in UV. I would include one or two in every supply TF, and my supply TFs were rarely attacked by subs. My SCs did little actual damage, but the Japanese subs did very little damage to my ships (this did carry over into other TFs, if I had escorts in those TFs there were few attacks). Because of my experience with them in UV, I am continuing to use them in a similar manner in WITP. I found them to be highly ineffective in ASW TFs, as that usually resulted in sunk SCs...

while I love SCs I try not to use them in fleets going long distance because the constant refueling really slows down the fleet. But, for medium to short hauls they are great.