IJN ASW is hard to characterize. I think the new AI is heading in the right direction, might need some tweaks (perhaps the other way, now?). Shooubg at scopes, etc, is required, IMO. I just read an account of a cruiser firing on a periscope at over 4000 yards. I'm the first one to berate IJN ASW doctrine, BTW, it was neglected horribly.
OTOH, we also know (possibly changed in 1.3?) that the DCs are/were set way too powerful. There is a balance between gameplay and reality call that needs to be made there. I think a desirable goal is more attacks on the player, but they should generally be ineffective attacks unless the player plays like an idiot.
The benchmark of actual subs lost as a function of patrols certainly downplays the risks that subs actually faced. Many patrols were pretty boring. Late in the war, based on my almost completed rereading of Silent Victory, it looks like a large % of patrols came back not only empty handed, but unable to even make contact with real shipping.
The bulk of sinkings came from a few boats. I think risks (lost subs/patrol) need to be weighted some how for actually meeting enemy combatants. Ie: throw away all patrols that were not prosecuted by ASW assets (and desultory DCings nowhere near don't count in some cases (trying to weed out timid skippers, here)).
All in all 1.3 sounds like a major improvement.
|