Matrix Games Forums

Is it better to set search arcs or to just leave them unset (IE, 360 degrees)?

I have been told many times in my AAR by helpful, well-meaning players that it was absolutely necessary to set search arcs (and of course to make sure they overlapped so that you had complete coverage of the areas you needed to cover). But recently somebody else said that setting search arcs doesn't work as designed so that you are better off not setting them.

So I'm seeking a definitive word on this issue, if anyone knows.

I stopped using them in my games vs AI and didn't see any less spotting. I cannot say I see any better spotting either, though.

I too have given up on search arcs. I am getting plenty of spots. (Unfortunately, I am also losing a lot of Dinahs to allied CAP. The price one pays for figuring out where the enemy is.) I don't really think they are working.

I find if I leave it at 360 I get too many surprise visits. Against the AI its not too hard to figure out routes so you just patrol those, but against a human its a guess.

unless I suspect ships are in the vicinity or have already spotted a TF, I rarely use search arcs. Either way though, you can still miss sighting a TF.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Is it better to set search arcs or to just leave them unset (IE, 360 degrees)?

I have been told many times in my AAR by helpful, well-meaning players that it was absolutely necessary to set search arcs (and of course to make sure they overlapped so that you had complete coverage of the areas you needed to cover). But recently somebody else said that setting search arcs doesn't work as designed so that you are better off not setting them.

So I'm seeking a definitive word on this issue, if anyone knows.

Michaelm can correct me if i'm recalling his explanation incorrectly.......Setting a search arc will increase DL rolls in that arc vs outside it. This way, you can use it or not use it and still have your patrol planes "search". There's no "penalty" for not using search arcs. The degree of bonus of course is subject to other factors. Its a neat solution as the original code was designed to be automated so making it manditory does add greatly to player burdens. Hence you have a choice.

Myself....i rarely bother with them for the GC. Too much work. It can't say it's hurt me.

I am gradually turning them off fpr searching as a test. So far I think search works just as well if not better without them. But I am just trying this out now. I sometimes use them if I want to search one port. They are also useful if you have an opponent who parks a sub in one spot.  If your asw bombers are in a differnt location, just set one arc to that position, and you will get many more asw spots and attacks.

I assume by not setting a search arc the computer randomly determines where the planes are sent. If you are send out your planes from a shore base does the A.I. restrict it's arcs to sea areas only? or will it send search missions into the heart of Australia?

ORIGINAL: Ranger5355

I assume by not setting a search arc the computer randomly determines where the planes are sent. If you are send out your planes from a shore base does the A.I. restrict it's arcs to sea areas only? or will it send search missions into the heart of Australia?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that each hex in the 360 degree circle is given the same % of success of finding something based on the number of planes and experience of the pilots, and that that % is modified by weather, number of ships in TF, number of TFs in hex, etc. No?

I play the game assuming bjmorgan is correct, therefore I nearly always set arcs manually.

So there's no consensus on this issue.  From what I've read thus far, it seems like some players suspect manual setting of search arcs is unnecessarily tedious because such settings don't achieve noticeably better results, while other players think you can achieve better results. 

I just focus on approaches to choke points or assumed routes. If I do not, I find that ships sneak by but when I have the planes out looking I find them and can react.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

So there's no consensus on this issue.  From what I've read thus far, it seems like some players suspect manual setting of search arcs is unnecessarily tedious because such settings don't achieve noticeably better results, while other players think you can achieve better results. 

I checked Michaelm's explanation to us dev types and i had it backwards. THere is a penalty in detecting if you don't use search arcs because (AI excepted) your assumed to be on the wrong bearing because your covering all the bases (aka 360 degree search). If you set arcs, and the target being groped for is on that correct bearing, you don't get a penalty. (if the target is outside your arc....its the same as not setting an arc in terms of penalty) Basically its the same overall answer. Yes....using search arcs increases your rolls but not using them won't gurantee you won't detect anyway. AI gets a pass.

Nik... thanks for that explanation. I will continue to set arcs in this case, as it appears that I still have a chance of sighting TFs outside of those arcs and a better chance of sighting them within my chosen arcs.

I do recall wondering why I have occasionally sighted a TF outside my search arcs. Now I know why.

Thanks Nik, that makes lot of sense. Actually it explains perfectly what I have experienced.
 
So, back to setting some arcs. [:D]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

Nik... thanks for that explanation. I will continue to set arcs in this case, as it appears that I still have a chance of sighting TFs outside of those arcs and a better chance of sighting them within my chosen arcs.

I do recall wondering why I have occasionally sighted a TF outside my search arcs. Now I know why.

Ditto on this, I don't fly any land based search without search arcs and was wondering how come I would get hits outside the arc. Thanks Nik/MichealM

Thanks. I definately didnt have it right.