Naval Search's colored arcs

[s112233]

I have a unit of 6 Catalinas that I assigned to Naval Search, and when the search arcs were displayed on the map,
some were black, some green, and some blue. What do these colors mean? I can't find anything on them in the manual.

[Lowpe]

tm.asp?m=3163109&mpage=1&key=naval%2Csearch&%2365533;

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: BillLlorente

I have a unit of 6 Catalinas that I assigned to Naval Search, and when the search arcs were displayed on the map,
some were black, some green, and some blue. What do these colors mean? I can't find anything on them in the manual.

There are some subsidiary mini-manuals added in early patches. Arcs are covered in one. Find them in the Manuals sub-folder in your game install after you've done the patches.

[Disco Duck]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

tm.asp?m=3163109&mpage=1&key=naval%2Csearch&%2365533;

Link without the yellow search blocks. Pet peeve of mine
tm.asp?m=3163109&mpage

[dr.hal]

There are a number of folks on this forum that argue for not putting in search arcs (in other words use random searches) is just as effective. I for one don't buy this argument. I think it is better to concentrate your search along a threat axis so as to make your search more effective. I believe the developers would not have gone to the trouble of the creation of arcs if there wasn't something to them...

[durnedwolf]

Hmmm. I use an arc depending on the circumstance. Normally I've received a TF sighting from another ship/plane and I'm trying to track it track. I rarely search out past 15 hexes.

Naval Search – The aircraft will search for enemy Task Forces (subs or
surface) in all directions out to their extended range. They will carry an
extended range bomb load in case they spot a sub or surface ship, in which
case they will attempt to attack unless driven off by CAP or Flak. Individual
planes searching for enemy Task Forces conduct naval search. The search
continues until a TF is detected or the plane exceeds its range. Once a
TF is detected, the plane may terminate its flight depending on range to
target; the nearer the TF is to the plane’s base, more likely that the plane
may continue to fly searches.

Searches within 5 hexes of the base are
more likely to detect TFs as there will be a number of planes transiting to
and from the search areas. Setting the max range to a lower range than
the full extended range will improve the chance to detect, as this can
translate to more flights by the same plane.

Because the search can be terminated due to detecting a TF, it possible better targets may be missed.


Search missions can be given an arc of 10-degree sectors to be searched. Planes in a group
are assigned to a search one at a time from the start sector to the end sector. If there are more
planes than sectors, then the process is repeated. For example, 10 planes on search over arc
of 3 sectors end up as 4 to first, 3 to second and 3 to third. The benefit of this is that only TF’s
within this arc are looked at, thus concentrating assets on a particular threat. The chance of
sighting the enemy is increased with the number of planes searching. When a unit has a Nav
Search Level set greater than zero, then the set percentage of the unit will automatically fly this
Mission, with the remainder of the planes either flying the Mission set for the unit or resting (if
the Mission is Naval Search).

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

There are a number of folks on this forum that argue for not putting in search arcs (in other words use random searches) is just as effective. I for one don't buy this argument. I think it is better to concentrate your search along a threat axis so as to make your search more effective. I believe the developers would not have gone to the trouble of the creation of arcs if there wasn't something to them...

When I first started playing this game about 10 years ago I made that assumption and always used arcs. Lots of times the enemy was not detected.
Subsequently when several veterans said they left arcs random and got good results so I tried it in a new game (to have inexperienced pilots like the first few games). I did not keep stats but my strong impression was that the random arcs worked better for detection, and since that save a lot of time fiddling with arc settings I went with it.

Since then there have been some major official updates of the AI and a host of Beta patches. It is possible that the issue of arc settings was dealt with in those updates. So I leave arcs random when I have no info on enemy position and then when I get a definite DL on an enemy TF I decide whether or not to set an arc search, depending on what else might be out there and how far the detected target is.

[John B.]

I'm on my 4th game and I can't think of a time that I missed a major group of ships just using random search arcs. They've even picked up lone AKls that are wandering through the seas. I just leave it on random since it seems to be very hard to get any search arc that is bigger than 90 degrees.

[dr.hal]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Since then there have been some major official updates of the AI and a host of Beta patches. It is possible that the issue of arc settings was dealt with in those updates. So I leave arcs random when I have no info on enemy position and then when I get a definite DL on an enemy TF I decide whether or not to set an arc search, depending on what else might be out there and how far the detected target is.

That sounds like a good compromise. I would like to be lazy and not set arcs, as there are lots to set potentially. I agree, some can be left at "random" for best effect, however I still can't get over the idea that if your aircraft are stationed at a coastal town and the coast runs north to south for many hexes (such as in Oz), if you are conducting a naval search, it makes no sense to leave the search arcs to random, as then the planes spend about half their time searching land as well as water. There is nothing in the literature that states naval and ASW searches are ONLY conducted over water hexes even if left to random arcs.... Thus unless your aircraft are on a small island, I use sector searches for such ventures. To do otherwise is to waste valuable assets. Or do I have this wrong??? Did I miss something in the updates?

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Since then there have been some major official updates of the AI and a host of Beta patches. It is possible that the issue of arc settings was dealt with in those updates. So I leave arcs random when I have no info on enemy position and then when I get a definite DL on an enemy TF I decide whether or not to set an arc search, depending on what else might be out there and how far the detected target is.

That sounds like a good compromise. I would like to be lazy and not set arcs, as there are lots to set potentially. I agree, some can be left at "random" for best effect, however I still can't get over the idea that if your aircraft are stationed at a coastal town and the coast runs north to south for many hexes (such as in Oz), if you are conducting a naval search, it makes no sense to leave the search arcs to random, as then the planes spend about half their time searching land as well as water. There is nothing in the literature that states naval and ASW searches are ONLY conducted over water hexes even if left to random arcs.... Thus unless your aircraft are on a small island, I use sector searches for such ventures. To do otherwise is to waste valuable assets. Or do I have this wrong??? Did I miss something in the updates?

In a discussion a long time ago I am pretty sure one of the experts (developer, or perhaps Alfred), stated that the AI was smart enough not to do naval search over land masses that were not coastal hexes.

[dr.hal]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

In a discussion a long time ago I am pretty sure one of the experts (developer, or perhaps Alfred), stated that the AI was smart enough not to do naval search over land masses that were not coastal hexes.

If this is true that would be great, but I've never heard this at any point in my association with the game. Can any reader confirm this statement by BBfanboy?