Reloading Torpedoes

[Skeksis]

3 hours ago, madham82 said:

Just for clarity, there are two topics under "torpedo reloads":

Reloads themselves might not be the issue at hand, e.g. early year DDs visibility range is so short that they can be invisible right up to where they can launch torpedo’s against the target, so no time for any defense, including larger ship defense by the way of maneuvering, and then these DDs retreat back into invisibility. Change these invisibility ranges and it could solve any reloading issues, or even something like reducing early torpedo ranges. Later year invisibility doesn't seem to be an issue.

Balancing DD damage output against DD vulnerability seems be a more practical solution.

The topic is more wide ranging than a history lesson.

[draconins]

 Definite example for actual reload by IJN ship is at least Battle of Kolombangara by Yukikaze's group under Captain Yoshima Shimai

http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-WH2Navy-c21.html

Quote

The Japanese account of the action says that their destroyers ‘withdrew for a while’ to the northwestward and, after reloading their torpedo-tubes in the remarkably short space of eighteen minutes, they ‘reversed course and proceeded to the scene of the action’.

Same account in Breaking the Bismarck Barrier page 187, and this also reference previous battle of Kula Gulf:

Quote

Nevertheless, all the "bastards" except Jintsu were doing very well. The destroyer transports had retired unseen along Kolombangara shore. Mikazuki seems to have stood by the cruiser for a few minutes then tried to catch up with the other destroyers of the support group. These, under the command of Captain Shimai in Yukikaze, scampered up the slot as soon as they had emptied their torpedo tubes. There, in a convenient rain squall, they reloaded their tubes in the remarkably fast time of 18 minutes. At Kula Gulf, as we have seen, their sister ships had taken over an hour to reload.

Be also aware the Kula gulf battle referenced in quote above is basically the Mutsukis and Fubukis, which only have first version of torpedo reload equipment. There is significant upgrade in Akatsuki then another upgrade on Hatsuharu.  In Battle of Kolombangara, Shimai's group (Yukikaze, Hamakaze, Kiyonami and Yugure) are basically later destroyer. Mikazuki did not reload.

I think there is another battle which IJN specifically report that they reloaded their torpedo as a group but I don't remember which one.

On doctrine there is reference on change of doctrine http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-067.php:

Quote

For example, up until about half-way through the Solomons Campaign, Japanese doctrine was to fire half of their ready torpedoes in one salvo, empty the tubes with the next and then withdraw to reload. About mid-1943, they appear to have abandoned this doctrine in favor of flushing the tubes on the first salvo, then withdrawing to reload.

 

[madham82]

14 hours ago, Skeksis said:

Reloads themselves might not be the issue at hand, e.g. early year DDs visibility range is so short that they can be invisible right up to where they can launch torpedo’s against the target, so no time for any defense, including larger ship defense by the way of maneuvering, and then these DDs retreat back into invisibility. Change these invisibility ranges and it could solve any reloading issues, or even something like reducing early torpedo ranges. Later year invisibility doesn't seem to be an issue.

But that's not exclusive to torpedo balance, that's an issue unto itself. Related to that, is the fact ships can train and fire guns at ships they cannot see (i.e. another friendly ship is spotting). It certainly won't solve any issues "fixing" this aspect alone. Unlike the upcoming "fix" for speed penalty. That will go a long way to balancing this. 

14 hours ago, draconins said:

 Definite example for actual reload by IJN ship is at least Battle of Kolombangara by Yukikaze's group under Captain Yoshima Shimai

http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-WH2Navy-c21.html

Same account in Breaking the Bismarck Barrier page 187, and this also reference previous battle of Kula Gulf:

Be also aware the Kula gulf battle referenced in quote above is basically the Mutsukis and Fubukis, which only have first version of torpedo reload equipment. There is significant upgrade in Akatsuki then another upgrade on Hatsuharu.  In Battle of Kolombangara, Shimai's group (Yukikaze, Hamakaze, Kiyonami and Yugure) are basically later destroyer. Mikazuki did not reload.

I think there is another battle which IJN specifically report that they reloaded their torpedo as a group but I don't remember which one.

On doctrine there is reference on change of doctrine http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-067.php:

 

That's exactly the sort of things I read before, but IMO those all show a "withdraw" from combat to reload. No one was reloading under fire. I wonder if the change in tactic might have had something to do with the several ships sunk/severely damaged by bombs hitting the loaded tubes in combat. So they decided to launch them all to be on the safe side. 

I would be good with a mechanic that would only reload the tubes if:

• The ship is not under fire
• The ship is moving at a reduced speed
• The ship is not firing at an enemy
• Sea state is not rough (or maybe a penalty to reload time to offset)

That said, it might not be possible or require too much to accomplish. If that's the case, perhaps just a penalty for each criteria not optimal to reduce speed of reloads in combat. 

[SonicB]

I'm seeing a fair few arguments that nerfing torpedo reloads would make destroyers useless in the current game.

Bear in mind that we haven't even seen how useful they will be in the campaign. They will probably be invaluable for strategic roles such as scouting, ASW and convoy escort, with only a secondary role of escorting heavier units in surface combat - as was the predominant case historically.

[Reaper Jack]

On 8/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, SonicB said:

I'm seeing a fair few arguments that nerfing torpedo reloads would make destroyers useless in the current game.

Bear in mind that we haven't even seen how useful they will be in the campaign. They will probably be invaluable for strategic roles such as scouting, ASW and convoy escort, with only a secondary role of escorting heavier units in surface combat - as was the predominant case historically.

This. a DD's primary roles were ASW and AA. Ship to ship combat for DD's was only employed on a major scale by the IJN (hence Long Lances designed specifically for this along with the other IJN torpedo specials like the powered loading equipment and turreted mounts) as neither of these roles has much use in game right now, all Destroyers revert to Torpedo Boats instead. 

While other nations certainly used their Destroyers against other surface ships, the cases where this resulted in the Destroyers winning the engagement were rare. Most of these engagements ended in either a stalemate, failed attack by the DD's or the loss of one or more of the DD's for no real gain. The only major success that comes to mind is the squadron of 4 British DD's which sunk one of the Myoko's in mid 1945 in the last gun to gun naval engagement in history, with no losses. 

Also note from my earlier comment; I forgot the obligatory *except the IJN which is always needed when discussing torpedo reloads. Other nations did not carry more than one full reload on their Destroyers, though some Cruisers did. And of course there are exceptions for one or two ships throughout. The problem I have in game with carrying an insane amount of reloads (2-3 full) is that it's not reflected that there are literally dozens of tons of explosives lying around on deck or in containers which are just eager to be set off. Torpedoes are big, much bigger than is usually realized, fitting even 30 of them aboard a ship takes a lot of space, that space is unlikely to be armored enough to resist even 127mm guns unless it's deep in the hull, in which case you're trading shell storage for it irl.  

Edited August 25, 2020 by Reaper Jack

[Skeksis]

1 hour ago, Reaper Jack said:

DD's primary roles were ASW and AA. Ship to ship combat for DD's was only employed on a major scale by the IJN

Not so such for WW1, actually 1914 destroyer main role was to defend the fleet against other torpedo boats, they themselves were also armed with torpedo's with the intention of attack. As the war progress ASW became the main role, AA role was mostly post war. 

Multiple reloads inspires tactics, any one who losses too many ships to multiple torpedo waves is not commanding their fleet probably, not using tactics to avoid torpedo's (maybe not using the pause button either).

And that's all that is needed to overcome torpedo's, simple gameplay! 

 

PS, oh except for that visual range thing.

Edited August 25, 2020 by Skeksis

[Reaper Jack]

On 8/25/2020 at 2:03 AM, Skeksis said:

Not so such for WW1, actually 1914 destroyer main role was to defend the fleet against other torpedo boats, they themselves were also armed with torpedo's with the intention of attack. As the war progress ASW became the main role, AA role was mostly post war. 

Multiple reloads inspires tactics, any one who losses too many ships to multiple torpedo waves is not commanding their fleet probably, not using tactics to avoid torpedo's (maybe not using the pause button either).

And that's all that is needed to overcome torpedo's, simple gameplay! 

 

PS, oh except for that visual range thing.

WW1 is a bit of an odd area for DD's agreed; as around 1916 (post Jutland) is when the switch was being made from Night Attack massed tactics to Escort Roles for Destroyers. Though Torpedo Boats made some very well documented successes in WW1; with the Italians using a patrol boat to sink one of the Austrian Dreadnoughts (admittedly a day after it had been transferred to the new proto-Yugoslav Navy without them knowing.) 

As I've mentioned in my other posts; torpedoes have a physical size, more than two full reloads should take up both considerable space on a Destroyer to the point of main gun ammunition being basically bare bones and anything above a single reload should be a huge explosive hazard as was the case historically for the IJN. Reloading under fire needs crew to be implemented as well in order to make it as dangerous as it realistically should be.