Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

 
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 >> The War Room >> RE: Carrier Task Force Composition Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Carrier Task Force Composition - 7/16/2014 7:52:25 AM   
margeorg

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 1/3/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Louisvillan

[...] Although Franklin was able to steam back to the States, the Navy wrote her off as too damaged to repair. [...]


Well,

Franklin got repaired completely, which took until 1946. Their upper structures above the hangar deck were completely cut off and rebuilt from scratch. Due to this the navy considered Franklin to be in very good condition after the repairs. Despite this, the carrier was reclassified 3 times (CVA-13, CVS-13 thereafter, and AVT-8 finally), but never used actively again.



< Message edited by margeorg -- 7/16/2014 9:40:11 AM >


_____________________________

Cheers
Martin

(in reply to margeorg)
Post #: 31
RE: Carrier Task Force Composition - 7/17/2014 7:53:17 PM   
jmalter

 

Posts: 1673
Joined: 10/12/2010
Status: offline
I loves me some "Big E". Can't think of any other ship that says "US Navy" all by herself, except perhaps USS Constitution.

(in reply to margeorg)
Post #: 32
RE: Carrier Task Force Composition - 7/18/2014 7:58:38 AM   
sanch

 

Posts: 421
Joined: 10/30/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Louisvillan

Great feedback on Enterprise, 'wdolson', but carriers Bunker Hill and Franklin suffered much heavier damage and casualties in March - April 1945. Although Franklin was able to steam back to the States, the Navy wrote her off as too damaged to repair.
...

Read a book on the kamikaze hit on the Bunker Hill. It was truly a close call; the engine and boiler room crews got lots of kudos for keeping things running despite the heat, smoke and especially the bad hot air.

(in reply to Louisvillan)
Post #: 33
RE: Carrier Task Force Composition - 7/19/2014 4:37:01 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Everyone has a pet TF composition. Myself, I never split my original six American Carriers into multiple TFs. I keep them together. There is a "risk" of coordination penalties but I much prefer that to carrier TFs separating when one reacts towards the enemy and the other does not. This usually leads to disaster. Late war I go for about six carriers to a TF. Usually four fleet and two CVL carriers in a TF. But this varies depending on the opposition and the mission.

< Message edited by crsutton -- 7/19/2014 5:38:20 PM >


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to margeorg)
Post #: 34
RE: Carrier Task Force Composition - 7/26/2014 12:25:58 AM   
SenToku

 

Posts: 57
Joined: 11/29/2012
Status: offline
Here goes my personal opinions on CV TF composition. As JFB I am more familiar with IJN, but most advice works for both.

First; to max out offensive capabilities, cordinated strikes are must. Disorganized strikes in 1942 for USN or later for IJN can easily be shot down by superior CAP planes of your opponent.

To get cordinated strikes you first need to have plane count on TF smaller than the random numbers mentioned on manual page 167. I try to keep max number of planes in single TF at bellow limit for 75% chance of full strike (250 planes/TF for IJN).

For USN this 75% limit would limit the plane count on TF to 125 in '42, about 185 in '43 and 250 after '44.

Second, you need a good Air skill on your TF commander. Remember, Air Combat TF's commander is equal to Air HQ commander for planes in the TF and thus the air skill determines number of strike/patrol aircraft launching. I have an impression that Air skill of HQ/CV TF has no effect on CAP planes. Not too sure about that, but seem to remember it that way.

For more planes, you need multiple TF's. To get past problem mentioned by crsutton and others (only one TF reacting), easiest thing is to place ALL CV TF's on follow and create an ASW TF to lead them all. Follower TF's do not react and you can move them all just by issuing orders to the ASW TF. I like to make the CV's trail the ASW by hex or so, just to make sure that ASW is the first TF over any sub on route. Added bonus is "free" bait TF for enemy planes, so if you are lucky some enemy bombers go after your tin cans instead of the bird farms.

As for composition,one thing not mentioned here is Max Speed. Sometimes it pays to do a fast dash with carriers, either to get away or intercept and then the max speed matching might determine the winner.

So placing all the fast IJN carriers (Shokaku, Zuikaku, Hiryo and Soryo) along the Tone-class "escort" cruisers and fast DD's in one TF, creates fastest CV TF in game (34 kts). This is 4 hexes/turn faster than US CV TF (8 hexes, if opponent has BB in that TF) capable of hitting a target well beyond Allied patrol plane range (=complete surprise). Thus my ideal combo in 1942 would be KB with two TF's; 1st Division with all the fast ones and 2nd with all the rest. All following single ASW TF. Plane count in mid 1942 withing limit and fast 1st division can seperate and do a fast dash at any moment.

USN has less variety in their ships, but for defensive purposes I would be carefull with BB's in TF at least in 1942. While it increases the AA values, it might be the reason I need AA in the first place. My feel is that it should not be used on "raid" - type missions, where I am hitting a target and getting away. On landing supports and set battles it would be different story. If I leave BB's away, I try to compensate with CA's. Mainly to deter any surface actions.

I handle ASW with seperate ASW TF's, including the "Tow"- TF which CV TFs are following, trusting them to take some load from CV-TF and allowing less dedicated ASW ships with CVs themselves. For USN these ASW platforms could be older models, especially the LR DE versions with range almost as good as CV's themselves. Lower top speed of escorts in seperate ASW screen does not matter, since CVs can ditch the screen anytime they need to. Also since screen is the first over any sub, there is less chance of getting torps on important parts, such as flatops. Even if sub is not hit/sunk, or even if sub sinks an escort, it still has increased DL by the time CV's come around.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 35
RE: Carrier Task Force Composition - 7/27/2014 4:52:08 AM   
Barb


Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline
In any battle where enemy strike your CVTF, it is much essential to have BBs included - they are real magnet for enemy bombers - and each bomb hitting your BB can save your carrier to fight another day ... They are also helping with the AA.

Kongos, Yamatos, KGVs+Repulse, NoCars, SoDaks and Iowas are really usefull in protecting carriers...


_____________________________


(in reply to SenToku)
Post #: 36
RE: Carrier Task Force Composition - 7/27/2014 3:28:47 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
quote:

Original: SenToku
First; to max out offensive capabilities, cordinated strikes are must. Disorganized strikes in 1942 for USN or later for IJN can easily be shot down by superior CAP planes of your opponent.

To get cordinated strikes you first need to have plane count on TF smaller than the random numbers mentioned on manual page 167. I try to keep max number of planes in single TF at bellow limit for 75% chance of full strike (250 planes/TF for IJN).

For USN this 75% limit would limit the plane count on TF to 125 in '42, about 185 in '43 and 250 after '44.


This isn't correct. Exceeding those numbers is merely doubling your chance to fail the coordination check. This is a subtle difference. You are not guaranteed to fail by exceeding the numbers given.

If you have a 10% to fail, exceeding the numbers simply means you now have up to a 20% to fail. The base chance for coordination depends upon the Air skill of your TF commander, and possibly your airgroup leaders' Air skill.

(in reply to SenToku)
Post #: 37
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> RE: Carrier Task Force Composition Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

0.766