Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Surface Combat TF size?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Surface Combat TF size? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2012 4:28:15 PM   
DicedT

 

Posts: 800
Joined: 11/2/2006
Status: offline 		How big can a surface combat TF be before there are penalties?
Post #: 1
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2012 4:34:02 PM   
rockmedic109

 

Posts: 2390
Joined: 5/17/2005
From: Citrus Heights, CA
Status: offline 		It used to be 15 before AE. I think it still is, but am not positive.

(in reply to DicedT)
Post #: 2
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2012 4:37:05 PM   
Puhis


Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline 		It's still 15.

(in reply to rockmedic109)
Post #: 3
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2012 4:51:37 PM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
It's 25 in AE

(in reply to Puhis)
Post #: 4
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2012 4:58:19 PM   
dr.hal


Posts: 3335
Joined: 6/3/2006
From: Covington LA via Montreal!
Status: offline 		And 15 in WITP-AE..... I would be curious as to how that limit was decided... there should be some sort of reasoning.. Anyone know it? Hal

_____________________________


(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 5
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2012 5:23:18 PM   
Balou


Posts: 841
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline 		I'd rather know what the mean/max size of surface TFs usually was in RL. I imagine the bigger a TF, the harder to command.

(in reply to dr.hal)
Post #: 6
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2012 5:35:09 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


It's 25 in AE


+1

It was 25 in stock as well. The "15" is a soft limit on AA effectiveness. After 15 ships the cumulative AA total incurred a diminishing returns penalty.


_____________________________


(in reply to Don Bowen)
Post #: 7
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2012 5:52:39 PM   
Cavalry Corp

 

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline 		Ships do seem to collide more in big TF - or is that my imagination.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 8
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2012 6:09:04 PM   
DaveConn

 

Posts: 254
Joined: 5/3/2001
From: Bainbridge Island, Washington
Status: offline 		If so, then I am imagining the same thing. Also seems to me there are more collisions when moving at maximum speed.

_____________________________


(in reply to Cavalry Corp)
Post #: 9
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2012 6:14:19 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		It's true that risk of collisions increase with TF size.

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to DaveConn)
Post #: 10
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2012 6:16:50 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		I believe that for anti-aircraft purposes, going over 15 ships led to diminishing returns on their strength.

Might be where the confusion lies.

Ed-

_____________________________


(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 11
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2012 6:23:35 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mundy

I believe that for anti-aircraft purposes, going over 15 ships led to diminishing returns on their strength.

Might be where the confusion lies.

Ed-


25 ship TF still have more AAA strength than 15 ship (if composition is roughly similar). Just that ships over 15 count contribute less and less (aka not fully, because TF is spread so wide).


_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to Mundy)
Post #: 12
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2012 8:26:36 PM   
ross119


Posts: 5
Joined: 7/11/2012
Status: offline 		Well TG 38.1-TG 38.3 in of December 1944 was 27- 28 ships consisting of 3-5 fleet/escort carrier mix and adjoining BB/CA and numerous destroyer escorts. These Task Groups and others at the time made up the 3rd Fleet which essentially was one big 132 ship fleet.
I have also seen pictures of at least 20 carriers all sailing in the same fleet ( again carrier mix of fleet.cve ), in the closing stages of the war. Task Force 42 I think was one of the largest I believe?
I don't think those Task Forces had any penalty's for over 20+ ships in RL tho! lol

_____________________________


(in reply to Balou)
Post #: 13
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/8/2012 3:47:38 AM   
Cribtop


Posts: 3890
Joined: 8/10/2008
From: Lone Star Nation
Status: offline 		Several discussions in AARs left conventional wisdom as recommending no more than 10ish for good surface combat fighting, although the official impacts are at 15 and 25 as stated. The 10 ship thing is anecdotal but seemed supported by the fact that ships in bigger TFs failed to engage often.

Even more important was TF composition. Matching speeds and, critically, main gun ranges for TF capital ships was demonstrably better per the collective wisdom, articulated best by Nemo's excellent posts on the matter.

_____________________________


(in reply to ross119)
Post #: 14
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/8/2012 2:39:52 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		I never really found matching gun size and speed were as critical as some do. As long as things are close I think it is OK. I have not seen any adverse effect in placing say six inch CLs in a TF with eight inch gunned CAs, or a 32 knot DD in a TF with a 36 knot DD. I do think TF size in a night action is important and really never use TFs larger than 10 ships if looking for a night fight. But there are many other factors. Moonlight is just a critical as TF size and composition. Anyone using BBs in a TF with little or no moonlight is just asking to eat torpedoes while perhaps the larger capital ships won't fire a shot in return. On the other hand, full moonlight might allow for an extra ship or two and generally opens the ranges making it more suitable for larger ships. And it depends on your goals. Smaller but multiple TFs may overwhelm a larger superior TF.

Most important this is you want every ship to fire its guns and torpedoes. This becomes less likely the larger a surface TF is.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Cribtop)
Post #: 15
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/8/2012 3:09:08 PM   
Puhis


Posts: 1737
Joined: 11/30/2008
From: Finland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cribtop

Several discussions in AARs left conventional wisdom as recommending no more than 10ish for good surface combat fighting, although the official impacts are at 15 and 25 as stated. The 10 ship thing is anecdotal but seemed supported by the fact that ships in bigger TFs failed to engage often.



Yes, no point to put more than 10-12 ships to surface combat TF. One of my opponent tend to used 20-25 ships. Those TFs could do absolutely nothing.

One of my best combat TF was just 4 Japanese Fubuki-class destroyers. They sunk modern allied BB with Long Lances, and badly damaged heavy cruisers. It was night time combat with little moonlight. Eventually I lost 2 DDs.

(in reply to Cribtop)
Post #: 16
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/8/2012 3:44:01 PM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		I like to keep my surface groups around 8 ships and my carrier groups around 11-12. Found I had the best luck with them.

_____________________________


(in reply to Puhis)
Post #: 17
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/8/2012 6:22:47 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline 		Size penalties aside, I have found that 4-8 ships in a surface combat TF will generally outperform a TF larger than that.

I have used SAGs with 1 Cruiser and 2-3 DDs very effectively, even more so than an SAG with 2 BBs in them.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 18
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/6/2021 1:17:33 PM   
Cavalry Corp

 

Posts: 3107
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline 		In my experience I have found that a surface combat task force usually around 10 ships the best. Though smaller ones can do well.
I did read a while back but you should not mix the gun ranges too much like for instance not mixing light cruisers with battleships because the task force will try and close when you maybe don't want it too. I have generally tried to stick to this rule. So the big guns in any task force usually have a similar range.
For carriers, I usually go for 15 if possible for the best Flak and ASW

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 19
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2021 5:39:56 AM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline 		I'm not sure you'll get a prompt response from Shark7.

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to Cavalry Corp)
Post #: 20
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2021 2:05:14 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cribtop

Several discussions in AARs left conventional wisdom as recommending no more than 10ish for good surface combat fighting, although the official impacts are at 15 and 25 as stated. The 10 ship thing is anecdotal but seemed supported by the fact that ships in bigger TFs failed to engage often.

Even more important was TF composition. Matching speeds and, critically, main gun ranges for TF capital ships was demonstrably better per the collective wisdom, articulated best by Nemo's excellent posts on the matter.



I use an even dozen as my optimum target size for a SAG and 15 for my carrier TFs while they operate with two carriers in the early war period and hold to the 25 maximum after I start putting three or more carriers in each CAG in mid '43.

However, there are too few destroyers to go around in the early period so many SAGs operate with 6-8 ships.

There likely is no correct size, just what feels right and performs well for any given player.
Experience is the best determinant.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Cribtop)
Post #: 21
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2021 3:39:49 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Old topic...and the answer depends.

Multiple small task forces can really perform well...under the right circumstances as can a fully loaded taskforce with 25 ships.

You have your goal, your likely opposition (both air and sea) to plan for, your stance (offensive, defensive) in addition the quality of your leaders, fuel and ammo and search capability to all plan for that makes no stock answer correct.


(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 22
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2021 4:12:00 PM   
Moltrey


Posts: 297
Joined: 4/11/2010
From: Virginia
Status: offline 		Just remember... larger task forces are easier to find and track, so there is a tradeoff (as one would expect).
I imagine there is a "somewhat happy medium" in there... somewhere.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 23
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2021 4:16:59 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Moltrey

larger task forces are easier to find and track, so there is a tradeoff (as one would expect).
I imagine there is a "somewhat happy medium" in there... somewhere.


Sometimes, that is what you desire!

(in reply to Moltrey)
Post #: 24
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2021 4:33:45 PM   
btd64


Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moltrey

larger task forces are easier to find and track, so there is a tradeoff (as one would expect).
I imagine there is a "somewhat happy medium" in there... somewhere.


Sometimes, that is what you desire!



True....GP

_____________________________

Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 25
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/7/2021 7:26:26 PM   
Nomad


Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: West Yellowstone, Montana
Status: offline 		And of course sometimes the size and composition of a TF depends on what you have available at that location. It is not always possible to create the perfect TF.

_____________________________


(in reply to btd64)
Post #: 26
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/8/2021 1:53:51 AM   
rustysi


Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline 		And on, and on, and on....

But its still fun to talk about.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to Nomad)
Post #: 27
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/10/2021 7:07:10 PM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

And on, and on, and on....

But its still fun to talk about.


Lowpe is an expert at small TF night combat missions, especially, and gets a lot out of all ships. As he says, it depends, but it is fun to debate.

I'd add that low moonlight, heavy weather, favors multiple smaller TFs one fewer larger ones. Daylight, good visibility favors well composed TFs of medium size in an offensive roll. Defensively sometimes it's good to stack up to 15-20 ship to hope that your functional BBs/CAs don't end up without escorts when damaged are detached.

It's a lot of personal play style and how you fit with your opponent as well. Post surface battle air strikes are a huge factor and eat up detached and damaged ships in daylight. .

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 28
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/11/2021 3:48:00 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 4378
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline 		More good info thanks guys! I'm done with 25 ship task forces too many collisions!

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 8/11/2021 7:28:46 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 29
RE: Surface Combat TF size? - 8/11/2021 9:53:30 AM   
Trugrit


Posts: 947
Joined: 7/14/2014
From: North Carolina
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

More good info thanks guys! I'm done with 25 ship task forces too many collisions!

You might rethink “Done” at some point.

And….I don’t want new players to get the Idea that a 25 ship surface combat TF is useless.

Veteran Players often use “combine and Split” tactics.
A 25 ship surface combat TF can split into two or more TF’s.

As lowpe and obvert pointed out it depends on the situation.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Surface Combat TF size? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.605