Page 2 of 2

RE: PI Subs

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:01 pm
by John 3rd
Those remaining SS set off on war patrols pretty quickly and due to conservative Captains and horrific Torps did very little!

RE: PI Subs

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:15 pm
by vettim89
ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Those remaining SS set off on war patrols pretty quickly and due to conservative Captains and horrific Torps did very little!

That is incorrect. The last SS did not depart until the 20th. The Japanese finally did attack Cavite on the 14th and bagged one of the Subs still there and damaged another so severely that she basically ran for cover until she could make port at Freemantle for full repairs. Eight subs left almost immediately, the rest trickled out between the 11th and the 18th. Porpoise arrived on the 20th from Olongapo and quickly replenished before heading to sea. It is safe to assume those subs that did not leave on the 8th were not in material condition to go to sea. Most likely there were in various stages of overhaul/refit.

RE: PI Subs

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 8:10 pm
by Herrbear
ORIGINAL: vettim89

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Those remaining SS set off on war patrols pretty quickly and due to conservative Captains and horrific Torps did very little!

That is incorrect. The last SS did not depart until the 20th. The Japanese finally did attack Cavite on the 14th and bagged one of the Subs still there and damaged another so severely that she basically ran for cover until she could make port at Freemantle for full repairs. Eight subs left almost immediately, the rest trickled out between the 11th and the 18th. Porpoise arrived on the 20th from Olongapo and quickly replenished before heading to sea. It is safe to assume those subs that did not leave on the 8th were not in material condition to go to sea. Most likely there were in various stages of overhaul/refit.

According to Clay Blair in Silent Victory, chapter 3 he says that "By December 11, 22 of the surviving 28 submarines were at sea."

RE: PI Subs

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 8:33 pm
by Q-Ball
ORIGINAL: Schatten

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Talking about Stock, I think John's idea is a good one, and pretty fair. Even if all the subs are there, though, I favor Pearl Harbor for several reasons:

1. In AE, Pearl attack is often devastating; even ships that don't sink can take a very long time to repair.
2. In AE, LBA is not near as effective at killing ships as in WITP. This means AE is more of a Naval game. Surface ships are more important than in WITP, thus BBs more important. Taking out the USN BBs, even those old ones, will help secure all the Japanese landing zones early-on.
3. If KB is near Luzon, USN CVs can interfere with Wake, Tarawa, and other landings on that side of the Pacific.
4. It's historical anyway

Those BB´s absolut no Danger...AI dont even put them out of PH (and if the Torp Nell´s at Kawalajnen-or so- more as enough to v. them).
Your Carrier can go to Tarawa after 2 days to intercept any raid from PH or the US Carriers

With my Manila Strike i have sunk more US Subs as i will sink in all they next years for sure
And it has the nice effect that the AI--always great to do anything stupid-- sends now much Sub´s into defensive Missions so they no more any danger to your shipping--Sidenotice for the Devloper, pls build a Option into TF Menue that a Patrol Sub TF will ga back to rearm/refuel after used all Torpedos or 50% Fuel..if you have to use the Computer you have to deal time after time with those useless defensive Patrols.

for Nr.4: as last i dont replay Japans mistakes and defeat but try to win so i dont care what for foolish decisions they have make 1942.
Foolish enough not to attack only Russia or Russia the british and dutch alone and leave the Americans in the Phillipines alone where they were no danger and not give them any reason for war

I prefer PH against a human; against AI, I would probably go for the subs, because the AI knows how to use subs....not always true with BBs.

But humans know how to use BBs. And to me, they are more important in 1942 than a dozen US subs. Not taking out those BBs at Pearl is a serious mistake in a PBEM.

RE: PI Subs

Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2010 3:28 am
by jeffs
I think the Manila strike makes sense for an IJN player.

But I think a fairness/reality check means you do a John 3 type comprimise that lets around 1/2 (feel free to haggle over the exact amounts)
subs leave port before the strike.

An issue (and not just subs) with ahistoric openings is that one can not be really sure surprise would have happened.
For example if one does a split strike (PH 4 CVs, Manila other CVS) there might have been the chance that the Manila group gets seen Dec 6 and the alarm is spread.
So assuming that there would be all the subs would be there is ridiculous......

And I am one who thinks the Manila strike is at least plausible as it would have been done at a distance.
(I think warping the entire Singapore invasion fleet into Mersing turn 1 is a joke, but that is a different thread)

RE: PI Subs

Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 4:34 am
by John 3rd
Think your points are valid and make good sense.
 

RE: PI Subs

Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 7:29 am
by bklooste
ORIGINAL: Herrbear



According to Clay Blair in Silent Victory, chapter 3 he says that "By December 11, 22 of the surviving 28 submarines were at sea."

3 days and 6 are still there ... IMHO thats a string case for a second port check but x amount are in a task force at start.

RE: PI Subs

Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:05 am
by treespider
Simple workaround - Non-historical start for Japan begets a non-historical start for the Allies. Allied player forms Asiatic sub fleet into TF's on Turn 1.


RE: PI Subs

Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 5:19 pm
by Icedawg
ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I ALWAYS split the KB to hit Manila. 

Why split the KB in order to do this? You've got all those Nells and Bettys at Takao that can hit Manila instead. You can easily get 100+ naval MB's hitting the port at Manila. Shouldn't that be enough to knock out virtually all of those subs?

RE: PI Subs

Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 6:41 pm
by Schatten
ORIGINAL: Icedawg

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

I ALWAYS split the KB to hit Manila. 

Why split the KB in order to do this? You've got all those Nells and Bettys at Takao that can hit Manila instead. You can easily get 100+ naval MB's hitting the port at Manila. Shouldn't that be enough to knock out virtually all of those subs?

no its not enough due to much other ships here
you need full power of kb and the bettys/nells to strike the Port...dont worry about the Cap, you Zero´s will easily fight it down.