Admirals Edition Naval Thread II

[Q-Ball]

My head is swimming with the thought of managing all these YPC's and Trawlers and MTB's and whatnot. Not that I am advocating taking them out, but man.....it's alot to manage.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

My head is swimming with the thought of managing all these YPC's and Trawlers and MTB's and whatnot. Not that I am advocating taking them out, but man.....it's alot to manage.

Shouldn't be. Step through your bases and set up ASW TFs using the small craft. Destination = home base, react = 0. If necessary, form a TF with a larger escort ship and move them where you want them. Now and again (maybe monthly), give them a quick check. Or just leave them in port.

[Q-Ball]

Will all those Harbor Patrol Craft end the practice of "Port Squatting" by subs? In WITP you can stop that with ASW TF's, but they can't cover everything. (Or ASW aircraft, but that's another can of worms).

If so, that's a good thing, and realistic.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Will all those Harbor Patrol Craft end the practice of "Port Squatting" by subs? In WITP you can stop that with ASW TF's, but they can't cover everything. (Or ASW aircraft, but that's another can of worms).

If so, that's a good thing, and realistic.

In AE, a player that squats his subs at defended enemy bases will soon have squat for subs.

[PeteG662]

Cute

[Don Bowen]

A “buy-for-supply” type is a small craft that arrives on map due to the expenditure of supply points.

In WITP, these are US Navy PTs, Japanese Barges (AG in WITP), and small US Navy landing Craft (LCT, LCM, LCVP). A human player may “purchase” these for supply points at any base at which he has sufficient supply or from a TF that has sufficient supply as cargo. This emulates building the craft at the base or transporting them there from somewhere else. In addition, the AI player can move its buy-for-supply types by returning them to the pool (i.e. selling them for supply) and then buying them back after a delay. This emulates loading them onto a ship for transport somewhere else.


A number of changes have been made in AE.

PTs are now available for all nations (Japan and allied). Each nation’s units are kept separate and “bought” at a base or TF of that particular nation. Buy PTs at an Indian port and you get Indian PTs, etc. Actually Indian MTB, as British designation is used for British and Commonwealth units.

Other allied nations may also have landing craft under the same rules. And, of course, barges are now LB instead of AG

New buy-for-supply type Motor Gunboat (MGB) is available to all nations.

New buy-for-supply type Midget Submarine (SSX) is available for Japan only.

All buy-for-supply types may be ordered to arrive at a specific base. This overrides the player’s ability to buy them but still requires that enough supply be available to pay for them. If there is not enough supply, the arrival is delayed. If the arrival port has been captured and the unit is a barge/landing craft it is returned to the normal buy-for-supply pool. If the arrival port has been captured and the unit is a PT/MTB Boat, MGB, or Midget Sub, the unit is destroyed while building. This emulates building specific units at specific locations and is primarily designed for specific location arrivals early in a scenario.

Human players may now return buy-for-supply types to the pool for later re-purchase (and the AI still can), as in WITP. This can be done in any friendly port over which the human player has air superiority. The unit will be returned to the queue for repurchase after a delay. The delay varies by nation and is adjusted for repair time for damage to the ship (i.e. ship return is delayed for repairs and ship will return fully repaired). The player does not receive any supply, so this is return and not “sell”. This is specifically to solve the problem of moving these low-endurance ships long distances and in lieu of providing the ability to actually load them on ships as cargo (which turned out to be overly difficult).

In both WITP and AE, barges/landing craft automatically replace. This is not respawn – the same ship slot and name are used. The lost ship does not go into the sunk ship list, it is simply recreated as a “new” craft with a 60 day delay. Note that this is only for barge/landing craft types. Not for PTs, nor MGB/SSX.

[RevRick]

Oh, wondermous...fantabulifical... etc., etc., I used to fry my self when I accidentally hit the "Activate PT Boats" arrow instead of the "Exit" arrow and arrange to have 12 PT boats stationed in the dangerous and distant port of San Diego... That usually meant I had to have some poor freighter or tanker herd that cantankerous lot across the Pacific to some port they might be useful - about like herding cats - they seem to default to "Retire to Port" no matter where they are. After reminding them 2 or 3 times a day to "Follow the Task Force" I might get to refuel the little boogers and watch them scamper all over the ocean burning go juice. Now, I can, in effect, put there little tookuses on board a ship and make them behave, for a while... GREAT!!!!

[Hornblower]

ORIGINAL: RevRick

Oh, wondermous...fantabulifical... etc., etc., I used to fry my self when I accidentally hit the "Activate PT Boats" arrow instead of the "Exit" arrow and arrange to have 12 PT boats stationed in the dangerous and distant port of San Diego... That usually meant I had to have some poor freighter or tanker herd that cantankerous lot across the Pacific to some port they might be useful - about like herding cats - they seem to default to "Retire to Port" no matter where they are. After reminding them 2 or 3 times a day to "Follow the Task Force" I might get to refuel the little boogers and watch them scamper all over the ocean burning go juice. Now, I can, in effect, put there little tookuses on board a ship and make them behave, for a while... GREAT!!!!

been there, done that ... ick..

[helldiver]

Greetings.

These wonderful previews of the smaller craft types has me chomping at the bit to have a crack at the patrol/ASW aspects of AE. I have two questions, related, I guess, to both WitP and to AE:

1. From previous discussion, I have understood that a ship's ASW rating was a direct expression of # of ASW weapons carried. Is this so? Is it still so in AE?

2. If #1 is true, should judgments about the composition of ASW TFs be based solely on brute #'s? Is more always better in terms of ASW effectiveness? Is there a point of diminishing returns? (I get the impression that PBEMers have built house rules to restrict the # of ships in ASW TFs). Are there other factors in ASW effect?

Dev. Team: pls. hurry. I'm 62, and it's beginning to look as if I'll need at least 10 years to master the learning curve on AE.

Regards,
Helldiver

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Helldiver

Greetings.

These wonderful previews of the smaller craft types has me chomping at the bit to have a crack at the patrol/ASW aspects of AE. I have two questions, related, I guess, to both WitP and to AE:

1. From previous discussion, I have understood that a ship's ASW rating was a direct expression of # of ASW weapons carried. Is this so? Is it still so in AE?

Yes.

2. If #1 is true, should judgments about the composition of ASW TFs be based solely on brute #'s? Is more always better in terms of ASW effectiveness? Is there a point of diminishing returns? (I get the impression that PBEMers have built house rules to restrict the # of ships in ASW TFs). Are there other factors in ASW effect?

ASW TFs are limited to four ships in AE, so brute force is not an issue. For any TF, ASW or otherwise, the routines tend to select the best ASW ship(s) present to engage a submerged submarine. Always a little random to spice things up...

Dev. Team: pls. hurry. I'm 62, and it's beginning to look as if I'll need at least 10 years to master the learning curve on AE.

Regards,
Helldiver

I'm older than you, and been doing this for quite a while. I too am looking forward to release.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: RevRick

I used to fry my self when I accidentally hit the "Activate PT Boats" arrow instead of the "Exit" arrow and arrange to have 12 PT boats stationed in the dangerous and distant port of San Diego...

Use the escape key, Rev!

[RevRick]

Do you mean to tell me that there is a way to remedy that after four years!?!?!? Lord, have mercy!!! Tell me how that works, ooohhhhh Please, tell me. E-bloody-GAD!

[Kull]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ASW TFs are limited to four ships in AE, so brute force is not an issue.

Very, very, VERY nice!

[Fletcher]

In the book "Submarines of the Imperial Japanese Navy 1904-1945" we can read the following:
"Situation would force the Japanese submarine force to change its tactical concepts six times in the four years of conflict with the United States. And it was the Japanese Navy´s repeated use of submarines for purposes for which they were not designed that was a major reason for the failure of the submarine force to achieve a creditable combat record.
The tactical concepts employed by Japanese by Japanese submarines in World War II can be considererd in the following phases:
-Phase I: 1931-April 1942: Submarines operated with the surface fleet; their major role was reconnaissance and attacts against warships.
-Phase II: April 1942-November 1944: Submarines concentrated their efforts on attacking merchant shipping.
-Phase III: mid November 1942 to mid-August 1945: Submarines were employed primarily to supply bypassed island outposts.
-Phase IV: November 1944-April 1945: Submarines were converted to carry kaiten one-man torpedoes and operated in groups against warships in anchor.
-Phase V: April 1945 to August 1945: Submarines carrying kaiten operated in groups in the open sea, primarily against tankers and troop ships.
-Phase VI: July to August 1945: in a concept initiated but no completed. STo-class and AM-class submarines were to carry aircraft to strike US Base.
-Phase VII: considered but no initiated: the use of the new hight speed ST-class submarines.

In other pages of the same book (pages 32-33) we can read:
"The record of Japanese submarines in 1942 had not been impressive,especially their failure to provide effective reconnaissance of US carrier forces at Coral Sea and Midway, or to inflict more damage on American forces. Their major triumphs -which were significant in the course of 1942-were the sinking of the carriers Yorktown and Wasp, and the twice torpedoing of the Saratoga as well as the torpedo damage to the British battleship Ramillies. In 1942 Japanese submarines also sank a damaged US antiaircraft cruiser, two US destroyers, one US naval oiler, and approximately 125 Allied merchant ships (most in the Indian Ocean), plus the soviet submarine L-16.

At last my question... Will be reconsidered the japanese submarine doctrine in AE? 6 warships vs 125 merchant ships is a big difference, IMHO, of course.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Will all those Harbor Patrol Craft end the practice of "Port Squatting" by subs? In WITP you can stop that with ASW TF's, but they can't cover everything. (Or ASW aircraft, but that's another can of worms).

If so, that's a good thing, and realistic.

In AE, a player that squats his subs at defended enemy bases will soon have squat for subs.

Try that as Japan and by the end of January you have the same result without the port patrols. [X(] Still you gotta push the allies somehow, and forcing them to defend their own ports was a good tactic to slow down the juggernaut.

[Don Bowen]

At last my question... Will be reconsidered the japanese submarine doctrine in AE? 6 warships vs 125 merchant ships is a big difference, IMHO, of course.

Japanese sub doctrine has been tweaked.

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

At last my question... Will be reconsidered the japanese submarine doctrine in AE? 6 warships vs 125 merchant ships is a big difference, IMHO, of course.

Japanese sub doctrine has been tweaked.

Unexpected and interesting!..One wonders what other surprises await.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: m10bob

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

At last my question... Will be reconsidered the japanese submarine doctrine in AE? 6 warships vs 125 merchant ships is a big difference, IMHO, of course.

Japanese sub doctrine has been tweaked and an allied sub doctrine option added.

Unexpected and interesting!..One wonders what other surprises await.

Whoops, error on my part. Brain is breaking wind again. There always was an Allied sub doctrine. AE just adjusts it.

[W T Door]

I'm kind of excited that the various LCS will actually do something. It has long been a source of irritation that, as the allies, I had all those hulls that didn't do anything.

[Zeta16]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Will all those Harbor Patrol Craft end the practice of "Port Squatting" by subs? In WITP you can stop that with ASW TF's, but they can't cover everything. (Or ASW aircraft, but that's another can of worms).

If so, that's a good thing, and realistic.

In AE, a player that squats his subs at defended enemy bases will soon have squat for subs.

Was just reading a bok about US sub operations in WWII and when the US subs meet escorts they did a lot worse than normal. In WWII it was never a good idea to encounter the escourts. Are the very bad US torpedeo in the game until mid to late 43? The book I am reading talks about hiw the US sub commanders put the subs off the Manlia and Saigon and other ports when the should have been at choke points because escorts were to much around bases and the subs had no luck. When the US subs meet escored shipe there hit % went way down.