Turkey Shoot?

[Rykaird]

SHIII is one of the only games I've ever played that gets much, much harder as you progress through the timeline. 1939 is lke a relaxing day at the beach compared to later years.

We all know the US was ultimately much more successful in their submarine warfare campaign than Germany. I've read a lot of threads on this forum saying that Japanese ASW isn't very good, that their depth charges detonate too shallow, etc.

So, my question is, is anyone concerned this is going to be a turkey shoot? Will campaigns get easier over time as the Japanese are broken?

I've never played on the winning side before, and I really like the difficulty progression in SHIII.

[NefariousKoel]

While probably not becoming absolutely suicidal to go on patrol in the Pacific, I'm sure it will get more difficult as time goes by. After all, there's a reason for multiple AI crew experience on enemy ships.

[Avatar]

Evolutionary speaking, I guess it would get harder, with more experienced ASW efforts, but the fact of the matter is that late in the war there simply were not as much targets to shoot. Also, due to some politician the Japanese set there DC's deeper from 200 to 300ft. and, in turn, sank some boats. These kind of things should add up.

[Crosseye76]

It will start somewhat hard, due to the well discussed flaws in the Mk-14 torpedo.

It will get somewhat easier as those flaws are fixed, and new equipment comes along. ( SD and SJ radar, MK-18's, Cuties, Sub BT, Etc.)

But it will never be a Turkey Shoot. Japanese ASW was not as good as Allied ASW was late in the war, due to the amount of Escort ships built and the ASW tech. the Allies introduced ( Not to mention ULTRA/MAGIC ). However, Subs were lost from the very first days of the war until almost the very last. The Japanese used the tools and ships they had very well, and some became very good at what they did.

It's just that, in the end, ULTRA, Numbers, and Technology doomed the U-boats. Those tools will now be working FOR you, not AGAINST you. :up:

[Sgian Dubh]

SHIII is one of the only games I've ever played that gets much, much harder as you progress through the timeline. 1939 is lke a relaxing day at the beach compared to later years.

We all know the US was ultimately much more successful in their submarine warfare campaign than Germany. I've read a lot of threads on this forum saying that Japanese ASW isn't very good, that their depth charges detonate too shallow, etc.

So, my question is, is anyone concerned this is going to be a turkey shoot? Will campaigns get easier over time as the Japanese are broken?

I've never played on the winning side before, and I really like the difficulty progression in SHIII.
I would say it depends on what you mean by an increase in difficulty.

The war in the pacific is almost the inverse of what the Germans faced in the atlantic. The IJN became weaker as the war progressed, their ASW efforts were much less effective and they didn't demonstrate the innovativeness and proactive improvement of these forces as the Allies did. There is even mention in the book "Take her Deep" that some U.S. commanders held the IJN's ASW efforts in contempt - and that even the planes were usually not much of a threat unless it was very cloudy to allow the planes to get close under cover. The weather really favored the submarines it seems to me. In addition, the U.S. subs had pretty decent radar almost from the start and when the PPI came along things became really nice.


So if you mean will it get easier and easier to sink merchants as the warr goes on, then I would say yes. *IF* you can find the shrinking number of merchants afloat.

The challenge I am anticipating is having to penetrate closer and closer to the home islands, having to operate in shallow water and still be effective in finding and sinking merchants and IJN ships.

Then there is also the clandestine operations, where the real goal isn't to sink anything (or at least not at the start) the challenge is to get in, do the assigned task and then get back out without being detected. (But I admit that I am also a NUKE lover and I love the clandestine missions for SC and DW - leave the boom, boom to the surface dwellers - I'd rather be landing that SEAL team (Frogmen in SH4) that is going to go in and really put the hurt on the enemy)

I am hoping the shore-spotters are modled with respects to this. If you surface, even at night, near and island there should be a chance that you are spotted, reported and shipping being re-routed away from your location.

I have already assigned Bernard to the position of #1 rubber raft paddler.:D

I am so keen to get this thing installed I may have to take a day off..........

[NefariousKoel]

The challenge I am anticipating is having to penetrate closer and closer to the home islands, having to operate in shallow water and still be effective in finding and sinking merchants and IJN ships.

Yes indeed. More highly concentrated forces in a smaller area and increasingly more fanatical.

[AirborneTD]

Also, late in the war, mines were a huge problem when moving ever closer to the home islands. Many mines would break loose from their moorings. There is a nice account in Red Scorpion about shooting mines with .50 cal mgs on one of the Rasher's later war patrols (6th I believe).

[AVGWarhawk]

I believe it will be difficult and far from a turkey shoot. Remember that the game will have operational perimeters as well, such as, finding downed pilots and I believe delivering off commandos. I think we are in for a great surprise with this game.:up:

[Iron Budokan]

If the game closely models what happened historically it should become easier as the war wanes. Japanese air cover will be almost non-existant and all the good targets other than a few leaky sampans will be sailing in Japanese waters. It will be very difficult for us to be surprised with our superior radar and technological edge. Numerical forces will be in our favor.

Therefore, I doubt the game will model history that realistically. Even the devs admit you can't start a career in '45 because what's the point? But to remain a fun and engrossing game I don't know what the devs have done to counteract this, but I'm looking forward to seeing it.

[JSF]

That would depend on how well the game is modeled and how careless a skipper you are.





http://www.veramarnavalproducts.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/T-Join%20the%20Navy%20the%20Service%20for%20fighting %20men.jpg

[cmdrk]

In addition, the U.S. subs had pretty decent radar almost from the start and when the PPI came along things became really nice...
Yes, when they were working.

If I recall correctly in O'Kane's books, radar was sensitive and prone to break downs. The heat dissipation was a problem causing components to fail (mostly SJ). Also, the radar mast may jam and be unable to rotate (not as common). A sub may be without radar for days at a time because of failures or lack of spare parts.

The first radar used was a non-directional air warning one, then surface search came along. O'Kane was wary of using the radar. To prevent heat induced failures it would be used when needed. And he was wary of Japanese radar detectors being used to vector ASW forces his way.

If the game models the radar problems as well, it would add more spice to the game.

[THE_MASK]

You are forgetting that SH4 isnt just about sinking ships anymore . :yep:

[RaisinCain]

So, my question is, is anyone concerned this is going to be a turkey shoot? Will campaigns get easier over time as the Japanese are broken?


While the Japanese never got as good as their US counterparts, that doesn't mean they didn't get better as the war progressed. Minefields were laid out to prevent US subs from getting into richer waters (ie the Sea of Japan, the Inland Sea, the Straits of Formosa, etc). While initially lagging in ASW vessels, they also later fielded subchasers (ie the Matsu class) which were designed all the way from the drawing board as ASW platforms. These ships also featured improved depth charges (which could detonate at deeper depths) and improved sonar, so I feel confident that there will be enough to keep us on our toes!

Aside from these historical observations, it would be a huge blunder for the SH4 development team to devise a game that is overly easy. These guys are sharp, so I doubt they will make such an obvious mistake. Good luck and have fun!

[Crazy Ian]

Not to forget the Japanese didn't set their depth charges below 200ft (They didn't believe a sub could dive deeper than that!)

[LukeFF]

On the subject of Japanese air patrols, I recall reading in a book about the Bowfin how the Japanese had fitted radar to some of their planes late in the war. If so, when did this happen and how effective was it?

[Torplexed]

On the subject of Japanese air patrols, I recall reading in a book about the Bowfin how the Japanese had fitted radar to some of their planes late in the war. If so, when did this happen and how effective was it?
Here's one example. The Kyūshū Q1W Tokai ( "Eastern Sea"), was a land-based anti-submarine patrol bomber aircraft with radar developed for the Imperial Japanese Navy in World War II. The Allied code name was Lorna.

The design may have been derived from the German Junkers Ju 88 medium bomber, the Japanese Navy having received some examples for technical evaluation during the war. The radar antennae were located on the back fuselage near the tail.

The IJN ordered development as the Tokai in September 1942, and the first test flight took place in September 1943. It finally entered service in January 1945. The Q1W carried two low-power engines, allowing for long periods of low-speed flight, and was the first purpose-designed anti-submarine warfare aircraft in the world. Due to lack of resources some models were constructed solely of wood. Given their rather low production rate and how briefly they were in service not much is know about how effective these planes were.


http://www.star-games.com/exhibits/japaneseradar/tokaitype3.gif

[JSF]

On the subject of Japanese air patrols, I recall reading in a book about the Bowfin how the Japanese had fitted radar to some of their planes late in the war. If so, when did this happen and how effective was it?
Here's one example. The Kyūshū Q1W Tokai ( "Eastern Sea"), was a land-based anti-submarine patrol bomber aircraft with radar developed for the Imperial Japanese Navy in World War II. The Allied code name was Lorna.

The design may have been derived from the German Junkers Ju 88 medium bomber, the Japanese Navy having received some examples for technical evaluation during the war. The radar antennae were located on the back fuselage near the tail.

The IJN ordered development as the Tokai in September 1942, and the first test flight took place in September 1943. It finally entered service in January 1945. The Q1W carried two low-power engines, allowing for long periods of low-speed flight, and was the first purpose-designed anti-submarine warfare aircraft in the world. Due to lack of resources some models were constructed solely of wood. Given their rather low production rate and how briefly they were in service not much is know about how effective these planes were.


http://www.star-games.com/exhibits/japaneseradar/tokaitype3.gif

Look at your date....the end of the war was for gone conclusion. This plane was of no consequence for the Japanese war effort. I would venture that we (USA) derived more benefit from it's existence after the war than the Japanese Empire during the war.

[Shaffer4]

[quote=LukeFF]

If there are 2 examples were the allies excelled it was our ability to read thier mail and turn darkness into light. Everything else was academic from that point on.


:rotfl:

[Torplexed]

Another area the Allies excelled in was the ability to build stuff....a lot of it. The Second World War more than any other war was a war of material attrition. This situtation was particularly acute in the Pacific where a secondary industrial power challenged the mightiest industrial base on earth.

The War in the Pacific simply put wasn't a fair fight and Japan's industrial infastructure back then simply wasn't up to the myriad demands of the war. During the 1930s, by a prodigious but an ill-planned and poorly organized effort, certain industries vital to Japan's war purposes had been built up. However, Japan's industrial base's footprint wasn't widened in the process. Thus, while total aircraft production was forced-fed into a 1300% increase from 1931 to 1941 this came at a price to other war vital industries such as electrial equipment in which production scarely increased by 30% between the war years of 1941 and 1944. Needless to say, exotic for the time technologies, like radar suffered and lagged as a result.

Those Japanese did at least have a decent torpedo tho. That was the USA's big oversight.

[Ducimus]

I have a suspicion that more often then not, we'll find ourselves in shallow water's.
If that ends up being true, i wouldnt worry too much about things being too easy.

[Nightmare]

I have a suspicion that more often then not, we'll find ourselves in shallow water's.
If that ends up being true, i wouldnt worry too much about things being too easy.
Exactly! I think it was “Clear the Bridge” where O’Kane wrote that in later years of the war the Japanese tried routing their shipping to hug coastlines if at all possible. In one attack on his 3rd or 4th patrol in Tang (I’m going from memory) he was concerned that after going in after a target near the coastline, he didn’t have enough depth under the keel so as to avoid the torpedoes hitting the seabed (torpedoes could drop several feet after launching and run deep for several dozen yard till they got to their set depth). That’s pretty shallow if you ask me.

Now if that is modeled, we are going to have to be very aggressive and go in to the shallows. A submarine in shallow water can easily become a dead submarine.

[CCIP]

To play devil's advocate, of course, shallow water is only deadly when there's competent ASW present! During Operation Drumbeat, many of the kills by U-boats were in waters off the coast that were too shallow to even dive in, and yet no boats were lost.

That said, I don't expect SHIV to be a turkey shoot! It certainly shouldn't be easier than SHIII - and even though someone very rightly called SHIII an 'ace simulator', which will certainly expand to SHIV, I don't think you can count on getting away with impunity. A subsim shouldn't be murderous at every turn - I think it's always a matter of respecting your enemy and not making errors. It will be a fun game to play as long as it rewards good, cautious behaviour and punishes for mistakes and recklessness.

[Ducimus]

To play devil's advocate, of course, shallow water is only deadly when there's competent ASW present!


Yes, but this is a video game were talking about, not real life. I don't think the implentation of the AI will have changed all that much from SH3. Oh sure the nodes in the AI_sensors.dat will be differently named, (maybe even the file named differetnly) but mechanically, ill bet it works very similar to SH3.

And if that is indeed the case, when you look at that, in conjunction to all the shallow areas in the pacific in the SH3 map (if its to be, beleived as any real gauge or indicator of the depth that ubi will use), and the amount of work they did to draw/render the bottom of the ocean with seaweed, plankton and such... well, makes me wonder if they modeled thermal layers this time.

[Steeltrap]

Hmm....

For starters, if they've NOT included thermal layers then I for one will return SHIV!! Sreiously, they were a vitally important tactical consideration, often giving the boats huge advantages in avoiding detection. This is made clear over and over in material published by those who were there (Dick O'Kane and Edward Beach to name a few).

Secondly, there's really no such thing as an easy time when you are thousands of miles/km from friendly assistance. The most mundane problem can become a matter of life or death under those circumstances.

As for the ASW of the Japs, it suffers from comparitively poor technology and, most significantly of all, it was regarded as almost 'peasant' work by the IJN. In fact, many ASW forces weren't even PART of the regular IJN. That attitude was a big factor in why they never got organised the way the Allies did, even though it was as vital to them as it was to the Brits in the Atlantic.

In reading some of the works by actual skippers, the fact that many of them really didn't encounter large numbers of ASW aircraft even when close to the home islands is something that sticks in my mind.

I guess it is likely to be a case of never getting worse than 1942 in the Atlantic by comparison. It SHOULD be considerably 'easier' than what we've grown used to in the super mods in SHIII, but it shouldn't actually be a case of charge in and shoot everything in sight with impunity (unless you've playing on 0% realism.....).

Cheers

[Shaffer4]

Would be nice if we were able to run "screen" missions for Carrier taskforces