Speed and avoiding submarine attacks

[Herrbear]

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

VSWG: I've thought about it a little bit more, and I think I know what you're saying. You're saying if the crippled ship's top speed is five, then it's cruise is maybe 3kts. This would make for a very slow cruise, therefore an easy chance of being attacked. IOW you're thinking it's working off the damaged modified speed. I have looked at the quote better, and I can see where you're coming from, I'm just not too confident that's the case.

I suppose setting a TF at cruise speed is a good thing, even if it being no longer able to attain it's true cruise speed isn't possible, but considering the sub at full speed certainly isn't right for the "chances" of a sub attack. Certainly the sub might go to full speed during the attack, but certainly isn't flanking around the sea all the time beause it increases chances of attacking TF's (though they certainly might at various times).

Why not the sub's max speed. It represents the speed of the sub in trying to get into position for a shot. Now whether or not the sub could always do it on the surface may be another question and if it was submerged its max speed would be much less.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

VSWG: I've thought about it a little bit more, and I think I know what you're saying. You're saying if the crippled ship's top speed is five, then it's cruise is maybe 3kts. This would make for a very slow cruise, therefore an easy chance of being attacked. IOW you're thinking it's working off the damaged modified speed. I have looked at the quote better, and I can see where you're coming from, I'm just not too confident that's the case.

I suppose setting a TF at cruise speed is a good thing, even if it being no longer able to attain it's true cruise speed isn't possible, but considering the sub at full speed certainly isn't right for the "chances" of a sub attack. Certainly the sub might go to full speed during the attack, but certainly isn't flanking around the sea all the time beause it increases chances of attacking TF's (though they certainly might at various times).

Why not the sub's max speed. It represents the speed of the sub in trying to get into position for a shot. Now whether or not the sub could always do it on the surface may be another question and if it was submerged its max speed would be much less.

That's the key point. Could the sub do a surfaced "end around" to get into an attack position again?..... Against a Merchant ship or convoy -- probably yes......Most warships could easily accelerate for a while and outrun the threat.....And a carrier force's A/C would probably prevent the sub from surfacing for the rest of the day. But as a basic rule to apply to the game, faster TF Speed should equal less danger from subs.

[Charles2222]

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

VSWG: I've thought about it a little bit more, and I think I know what you're saying. You're saying if the crippled ship's top speed is five, then it's cruise is maybe 3kts. This would make for a very slow cruise, therefore an easy chance of being attacked. IOW you're thinking it's working off the damaged modified speed. I have looked at the quote better, and I can see where you're coming from, I'm just not too confident that's the case.

I suppose setting a TF at cruise speed is a good thing, even if it being no longer able to attain it's true cruise speed isn't possible, but considering the sub at full speed certainly isn't right for the "chances" of a sub attack. Certainly the sub might go to full speed during the attack, but certainly isn't flanking around the sea all the time beause it increases chances of attacking TF's (though they certainly might at various times).

Why not the sub's max speed. It represents the speed of the sub in trying to get into position for a shot. Now whether or not the sub could always do it on the surface may be another question and if it was submerged its max speed would be much less.

I think you see part of the problem, though your second sentence shows it's not complete. The sub doesn't increase speed to get into position if it doesn't know where the TF is. IOW, as I read the quote, it suggests that the sub doesn't know the TF to be there initially so they have no reason to speed up. Sure, there's nothing wrong with considering full speed once they've detected them, the problem is that it's considering the sub already at full speed in order to 'detect' them as if the sub were constantly going at flank speed so they could detect TF's. That seems a bit backwards, as often they could detect TF's by sound, which meant slowing down and using hydrophones underwater. It is only once they got a sound fix that they should steam in that direction. Naturally they had some visual sightings too, but I would be more inclined to think they were going more at cruise speed, than flank speed, when doing visual search alone.

[VSWG]

I think you're putting to much tactical consideration into the code routine: the code simply computes a ratio between the speed of the sub and the speed of the target. As long as cruise and full speed of a ship are proportional to each other (I know that they are separate values in the editor, but in general a ship with a high full speed will have a high cruise speed), it doesn't really matter what speed is used. The resulting ratio will be multplied by an unknown factor (and a die roll) anyway to generate the likeliness of an attack.

[Charles2222]

I don't know, I just don't get why someone would consider a sub always at full speed and the TF always at cruise, for the chances of an attack occuring. It makes sense to assume those speeds once the attack starts, but not before the sub has even seen them. Maybe that's the problem here. I'm assuming this means the TF hadn't been spotted and this is how the percentage of spotting occurs based on speed (as well as the other factors), but maybe what this really means is that the spotting is done by some other means and that this only determines whether the sub will proceed with attacking, in which case makes a lot more sense, since the skipper of the sub would consider the speed of his boat to get into position.

[frank1970]

I always wondered why my ASW-Taskforces were hit so often by Japanese (AI) subs. Obviously the type of mission the TF has isn´t important either.
A sub which is detected in a coastal hex should not be able to attack a ASW TF in broad daylight regularily and even sink ships.
The same is true for MSW and minewarfare. MSW/DMS should only destroy minefields if they are in a minewarfare mission or on low speed. Both isn´t happening.

[dtravel]

This starts getting in to what scale of game this is supposed to be.  Is it a tactical game where the player has to control the individual ships and aircraft in every naval battle?  Or is it a grand strategy game where the player assigns assets to theatres and tasks and leaves the details to his subordinates?

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Charles_22

ORIGINAL: VSWG

Speed is a factor when determining the chance of a submarine attacking a TF:

ORIGINAL:  The manual, p. 104

The chance of a submarine attacking a TF varies with the:

1. Sub’s maximum speed
2. TF’s cruise speed
3. Sub crew’s experience
4. Prior detection of the sub

That sounds as though to me that the speed you have either the TF or the sub running do not matter. It always assumes the sub to be at maximum speed and the TF at cruise. Seems there should at least be an exception for CVTF's. It works both ways though. If your CV is severely crippled the sub will have to deal with it as if it were cruising. Also, if your sub is severely damaged it will be going full speed for attack purposes.

This manual is not always right: it depends on the understanding of the writer. [I knew the writer of the UV manual - and he was constantly exclaiming "I didn't know that" when I did this or that in a game.]

In this case the manual may be half right: It appears TF cruising speed DOES matter. It appears that the sub does not get to attack in every hex it enters - although allegedly this was fixed in UV days - it only appears the sub "looks" once per 12 hour phase - in whatever hex it ends that phase in.

[seydlitz_slith]

My experience is that sub combat is the same as surface combat. The sub and the potential target have to end one of the naval movement phases in the same hex for the game to check for a potential attack.&nbsp; You can line your subs up all day along the travel route of a task force, and the only subs that will ever get an attack will be the ones in the hexes where the task force ends a movement phase.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; This was never fixed and was basically the same in UV.&nbsp; To be good with your subs, you have to be able to project where your enemy will be at the end of a movement phase and place your subs there.&nbsp;&nbsp; That is the strategy that I use, and I am certain that my PBEM opponent will vouch for the effectiveness of my subs in the first 12 turns of the PBEM that we have started.&nbsp; In it, I am keeping a fully documented excel spreadsheet tracking not only individual sub performance, but also statistics about sub combats in the game including ASW attacks, sub attacks (successful, missed shots, and dud torpedos).&nbsp; It is very interesting, and after I have&nbsp; a bit more accumulated data, I may share with the forum if others would like to see this.&nbsp; However,&nbsp; I do not want to reveal too much too early in the game lest my opponent read this thread <g>.

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: seydlitz

My experience is that sub combat is the same as surface combat. The sub and the potential target have to end one of the naval movement phases in the same hex for the game to check for a potential attack.  You can line your subs up all day along the travel route of a task force, and the only subs that will ever get an attack will be the ones in the hexes where the task force ends a movement phase.    This was never fixed and was basically the same in UV.

I have had subs in different hexes attacking the same TF in the same movement phase.

[frank1970]

ORIGINAL: dtravel

This starts getting in to what scale of game this is supposed to be. Is it a tactical game where the player has to control the individual ships and aircraft in every naval battle? Or is it a grand strategy game where the player assigns assets to theatres and tasks and leaves the details to his subordinates?

If I give order to do an ASW-mission I´d expect my ships to do exactly that. ASW-Taskforces should be a threat to subs, not victims. This has absolutely nothing to do with tactical or not. It has to do with logic.

[seydlitz_slith]

Dtravel said: "I have had subs in different hexes attacking the same TF in the same movement phase."
&nbsp;
Are you absolutely certain of this?
I know that this is how it is supposed to work, but under the current patch it does not seem to work.&nbsp; I am tracking every aspect of&nbsp;sub ops in my pbem including recording deployment hexes on a map andchecking with actual hexes of the attack. I am not seeing any attacks (or ASW combats) in any hexes except those where the subs and task forces co-occupy at the end of a movement pulse.&nbsp; The only times where I have seen subs in adjacent hexes attack the same TF is in cases where both are along the projected move path, the first attack damages one or more ships, and the TF slows up due to the damage, ending the next move pulse in the adjacent hex occupied by the other sub, which then attacks.&nbsp;&nbsp; Most merchant convoys move two hexes each movement pulse, or four&nbsp;hexes total per turn.&nbsp;

[Charles2222]

It would seem as though it could be tested quite easily (not that I could do it mind you [:D]) just by having about 10 subs in every hex and have TF go through their path. If you're afraid the TF will re-route around it, then have ALL possible 45-90 angles to the destination covered with at least 3 subs and see what happens. Maybe do that 5 or 6 times in clear weather and perhaps that will answer the question finally.

[Drex]

It didn't help th Lex in one of my games. Despite a 4 destroyer escort at high speed, she got 2 torps.

[Knavey]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Guess nobody really knows what is under the hood.[8|]

WAIT!!! I know this one!

The ocean floor! Just watched a program on the Hood vs. Bismark. There is definitely a lot of water on top of the Hood and ocean floor underneath her.

[:'(]

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: seydlitz

ORIGINAL: dtravel
I have had subs in different hexes attacking the same TF in the same movement phase.

Are you absolutely certain of this?

Yes, I am.

I have also had subs attack a ship in one hex during the daytime movement phase and then another sub attack the same ship/TF in a different hex during one of the subsequent damage control phases.

I also replace all the Cautious and Careful sub commanders with Aggressive and Very Aggressive ones as fast as I can. Given how convoluted the game mechanics are, it is possible that affects this.

It becomes much easier to see (in part because it will happen more often) late in the war when the US has so many subs that the Allies can blanket the seas around Japan.

[Dino]

3.0 SEQUENCE OF PLAY

Several times during both the Night and Day Resolution Phases, the computer checks for submarine contacts and submarine attacks.