USN CV strike fighter escort (or lack of it)

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

USN CV strike fighter escort (or lack of it)

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 >> USN CV strike fighter escort (or lack of it)

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

USN CV strike fighter escort (or lack of it) - 7/30/2009 1:57:20 PM

Akos Gergely

Posts: 733
Joined: 4/8/2004
From: Hungary, Bp.
Status: offline

I'm playing the Guadalcanal scenario as Allies and everything is fine and dandy except that when I get a Japanese air attack first my CAP seems to be using up all the fighters despite the 50% setting, resulting in no escorts at all for my strikes which in turn usually results in complete massaccare (lost 25 TBFs and 42 SBDs out of the first strikes 37 and 75 respectively). I've just lost yesterday 70% of my 3 CVs attack plane complement. True, my carriers were unhurt but still. I've rerun the turn 2 times and it was the same again. Japs get in their strik first and then no escort for the US planes. The range was ok, in one occasion it was only two hexes. Ohh and after the turn I've checked and had plenty of servicable fighters left on all 3 CVs.

Am I missing something? Any ideas?

As a sidenote the Ai was brillintly timing a multiple surface force attack on Lunga the turn after I lost my attack planes and Chokai single handedly sunk 7 APs plus all four Kongos bombarded Henderson and run amock among the merchies, all in separate TFs. My jaws dropped how competent the AI is so very well done again for Andy annd THE TEAM!

< Message edited by csatahajos -- 7/30/2009 1:58:44 PM >

_____________________________

My blog: https://warshipprojects.com/

Post #: 1

RE: USN CV strike fighter escort (or lack of it) - 7/30/2009 2:29:45 PM

DivePac88

Posts: 3119
Joined: 10/9/2008
From: Somewhere in the South Pacific.
Status: offline

Did you check their range is not set to '0', that's got me acouple of times because my CV's take turns supplying the point-defence CAP.

_____________________________

When you see the Southern Cross, For the first time
You understand now, Why you came this way

(in reply to Akos Gergely)

Post #: 2

RE: USN CV strike fighter escort (or lack of it) - 7/30/2009 3:34:53 PM

Akos Gergely

Posts: 733
Joined: 4/8/2004
From: Hungary, Bp.
Status: offline

Yeah pretty ure, I've checked with max normal (5) and extended ranges (6) as well, it was the same. Probably it's just me or bad luck multiple times but still strange...

And in the later phase when I did not get such a heavy incoming attack and my CAP was not bogged down I got escorts instantly, that's why I thought it has to do something with the CAP.

_____________________________

My blog: https://warshipprojects.com/

(in reply to DivePac88)

Post #: 3

RE: USN CV strike fighter escort (or lack of it) - 7/31/2009 12:03:29 AM

RAM

Posts: 402
Joined: 5/1/2000
From: Bilbao,Vizcaya,Spain
Status: offline

I don't know if this works as intended, but even if it doesn't, it isn't that bad or unrealistic.

Think of it. You got X planes and a big number of enemies are coming after you with a vengeance. So would you scramble up to the last one you can muster, to desperately avoid by any means the enemy reaching your ships, or will you say "hey, let's keep 40% of them so we can escort our future raid! To the hell if any bomb hits us!".

In such circunstances, I'd say that pretty much any fighter in the fleet would go behind the incoming strike, and god be damned with any future needs to escort a counterstrike. A 27000 ton CV is usually much, much, more valuable than a couple dozen strike aircraft, anyday, anytime (well ,maybe not for the Japanese in 1944, but other than that...)

Besides, it's not as if in the real, historic, CV battles, every strike was escorted. Certainly was not the case in quite some instances, for varying reasons...

_____________________________

RAM

"Look at me! look at me!!!

Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"

(in reply to Akos Gergely)

Post #: 4

RE: USN CV strike fighter escort (or lack of it) - 7/31/2009 12:43:00 AM

Kwik E Mart

Posts: 2447
Joined: 7/22/2004
Status: offline

I'm more impressed that the un-escorted attack planes passed all their checks (including not having escort) and pressed home their attack. Wonder what the dice rolls needed for that were? Extremely agressive attack squadron leader would account for some of it, I suppose.

_____________________________

Kirk Lazarus: I know who I am. I'm the dude playin' the dude, disguised as another dude!
Ron Swanson: Clear alcohols are for rich women on diets.

(in reply to RAM)

Post #: 5

RE: USN CV strike fighter escort (or lack of it) - 7/31/2009 9:53:16 AM

Akos Gergely

Posts: 733
Joined: 4/8/2004
From: Hungary, Bp.
Status: offline

Well that's absolutely fine with me, I've just thought (or at least it was in WitP) that strikes are happening at the same time in game reality, I just want to understand how to influence this if it's possible at all, what CAP settings to use etc.

Yeah I was impressed as well with their kamikaze like agressiveness to be honest, but it might be a factor that the CAP was only a few planes at first sight, then they scrambled and it was a slaugter afterwards...I'm 3 weeks later now and still recovering my airgroup wounds with one of the SBD squads switching back to SBD-2s :D But I don't mind in the end as I've sunk Shokaku (in a surface action finally) and damaged Zuikaku and Zuiho with not a scratch on my CVs (thanks to North Carolina's and Saratogas AA and the superbly functioning CAP) - and this was against well trained japanese attack pilots.

_____________________________

My blog: https://warshipprojects.com/

(in reply to RAM)

Post #: 6

RE: USN CV strike fighter escort (or lack of it) - 7/31/2009 12:52:55 PM

Xargun

Posts: 3690
Joined: 2/14/2004
From: Near Columbus, Ohio
Status: offline

I do not know if the rule still applies in AE - but it probably does. Remember in the early war the coordination of US CV-based air strikes sucks. That is why you should not have all 3 CVs in one TF. I never use more than 2 US CVs in a single TF even in late war. Sounds to me like you got bit by the coordination rule which will cause planes to not launch and just sit on the deck drinking their coffee.

The IJN has a bonus at the beginning of the war and the initial KB is immune to the rule I believe otherwise the PH strike would never happen.

Xargun

(in reply to Akos Gergely)

Post #: 7

RE: USN CV strike fighter escort (or lack of it) - 7/31/2009 2:51:35 PM

Akos Gergely

Posts: 733
Joined: 4/8/2004
From: Hungary, Bp.
Status: offline

Double post ...sorry

< Message edited by csatahajos -- 7/31/2009 2:52:05 PM >

_____________________________

My blog: https://warshipprojects.com/

(in reply to Xargun)

Post #: 8

RE: USN CV strike fighter escort (or lack of it) - 7/31/2009 2:52:46 PM

Akos Gergely

Posts: 733
Joined: 4/8/2004
From: Hungary, Bp.
Status: offline

All CVs were in separate TFs, I always use this tactic not just to avoid the coordination penalty but also as a hedge. Also I think there was a plane limit where the coordination rule hits, not to mention it was repeated two times.

I hope to have an other CV battle soon, then I can judge better if it was just a one off. In every respect it seems tha game got really random with all sort of results happening from one extremeties to the other.

_____________________________

My blog: https://warshipprojects.com/

(in reply to Akos Gergely)

Post #: 9