Naval Attack vs. Naval Search?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Naval Attack vs. Naval Search?

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 >> Naval Attack vs. Naval Search?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Naval Attack vs. Naval Search? - 12/23/2018 3:36:13 AM

BKL

Posts: 106
Joined: 11/2/2013
Status: offline

Can someone tell me how these should be used differently when wanting to attack opposing ships of unknown location. I am playing Battle for Coral Sea and when the scenario starts, many of the planes are set for "Naval Attack" and then you have the option of selecting "Airfield, Port, Ground, Recon, Rest" But I want to find and attack the Japanese navy so should I instead change to "Naval Search." My understanding is "Naval Search" will look for and attack any surface or submarine units.

Can someone tell me how these options are used differently. Part of the reason for my confusion is that "Naval Attack" seems like it would mean attacking surface units, but that's not an options...only ports, airfield, etc.

Thank you.

Post #: 1

RE: Naval Attack vs. Naval Search? - 12/23/2018 3:55:57 AM

rms1pa

Posts: 370
Joined: 7/4/2011
Status: offline

naval attack is what you want in the coral sea scenario.

mind you the aircraft will only attack detected targets. so under the attack options you will see cap, asw, navsearch, training and rest. try 20 percent nav search at least.

good hunting.

rms/pa

_____________________________

there is a technical term for those who confuse the opinions of an author's characters for the opinions of the author.
the term is IDIOT.

(in reply to BKL)

Post #: 2

RE: Naval Attack vs. Naval Search? - 12/23/2018 5:00:35 AM

BKL

Posts: 106
Joined: 11/2/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rms1pa

naval attack is what you want in the coral sea scenario.

mind you the aircraft will only attack detected targets. so under the attack options you will see cap, asw, navsearch, training and rest. try 20 percent nav search at least.

So when do you want to use Naval Search instead of Naval Attack? What�s the difference betweeen these options, and pro/cons to each?

(in reply to rms1pa)

Post #: 3

RE: Naval Attack vs. Naval Search? - 12/23/2018 5:05:04 AM

Anachro

Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline

Planes can still conduct naval search while being set to naval attack. On US carriers for instance, historically Dauntlesses were used as both scouts and attack planes and in game this can be replicated by setting a percentage of your dauntlesses (or some other plane on the Japanese side, DB or TB) to also conduct naval search (this can be done in the patrol levels section, you can also set a certain amount to conduct ASW). Ideally, you want your plane with the farthest range to be conducting this search. When my carriers are operating in battle mode, I typically set 20% of my SBD's to naval search. Like so:

(in reply to rms1pa)

Post #: 4

RE: Naval Attack vs. Naval Search? - 12/23/2018 5:07:40 AM

Anachro

Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BKL

quote:

ORIGINAL: rms1pa

naval attack is what you want in the coral sea scenario.

mind you the aircraft will only attack detected targets. so under the attack options you will see cap, asw, navsearch, training and rest. try 20 percent nav search at least.

So when do you want to use Naval Search instead of Naval Attack? What�s the difference betweeen these options, and pro/cons to each?

Naval search on it's own dedicates the unit to only conducting search operations and they will not attack. For carrier assets, this is sub-optimal. Dedicated naval search is usually reserved for nav search planes like PBY's. You want your dauntlesses to always be ready to attack in case something appears in range suddenly, etc.

(in reply to BKL)

Post #: 5

RE: Naval Attack vs. Naval Search? - 12/23/2018 6:54:57 AM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

Planes in search only mode will attack ships on their own, but the results will not be spectacular and the rest of the squadron will not launch upon detection. If I have a large enough group of carriers I may only use 10% search and possibly only using either dive bombers or torpedo planes. If you have BBs and CA/CLs along for the ride their float planes should be set to Naval Search at 50% or more. If you have 6 or more FPs searching and the weather isn't too bad to operate FPs you should find the enemy with no problems. If you have a cruiser group moving two or three hexes ahead of your carriers with their FPs searching, so much the better. If you have no reason to expect a carrier battle, I usually have the squadrons not searching doing 10% ASW, to suppress any enemy subs in the area. The standard settings for altitude will work for both, i.e. 5,000 feet for torpedo bombers and 10,000 feet for dive bombers. DBs can find and deliver hits to subs from 10k feet. As I always play Japanese and my TBs have more range than my dive bombers, I generally have the TBs searching and the DBs doing the ASW. As American, you might reverse that. If you are in hopes of or are expecting a carrier battle to occur, have no planes doing ASW as the chances of encountering enemy subs will likely be too low to justify it. Your search planes will attack any subs they encounter anyway, and do it up to twice as far away.

An alternative in some cases might look like this: if you have 5 carriers with 10 squadrons of bombers, you could set one squadron to, say, 100% search with the rest at 0% search or ASW, especially in concert with float planes from cruisers. Because weather can spoil your plans as far as FPs go, if you arrange to have FP searches emanating from different hexes (likely with different weather), your chances of success are greater. One way to achieve that is to have a BB or CA group leading with your CV TFs following by, say, two hexes. Your lead group will then draw attacks away from your CV TFs and you will have an opportunity to spot his CVs before he spots yours. Having a too complicated leader TF with following TFs can lead to poor performance, though, and sometimes crazy outcomes.

I like to break up my CVs into as many TFs as possible and especially group CVs and their escorts by their maximum speeds. This is more of an issue for the Japanese than the Americans. I tend to group my CV TFs together in the same hex, or try to. One reason to have separate CV TFs is that sometimes, even if your TFs are all together in one hex, the enemy search planes will find one of the TFs and stop there, with the attacks being directed at the one TF, leaving your others untouched. A hex that is 40 nautical miles across is a big place. So make as many of them as you can, as long as each has an adequate escort. An adequate escort would consist of six or more DDs, one or two CLs, and a couple CAs or BBs. Make sure each TF has a good leader and, if you are aggressive, set the reaction range to six.

(in reply to Anachro)

Post #: 6

RE: Naval Attack vs. Naval Search? - 12/23/2018 7:22:10 AM

geofflambert

Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

Now, about your fighters. The purpose of an escort is to draw enemy fighters away from your bombers so that they can carry out their attacks. CAP can do two things to incoming attacks, shoot down bombers so they make no attack, and disrupt and distract bombers who still manage to get through, reducing the effectiveness of their attacks, perhaps, and especially in the case of TBs whose attack coordination must be high, all the way down to zero. A handful of fighter escorts can be as effective as two handfuls at drawing away enemy CAP, and you really need most of your fighters protecting your carriers. Another thing to keep in mind is the more fighter squadrons you have on Escort, the more likely any particular bomber attack will have an escort of some size. I usually set my CAP at 30%. Another third will be rearming and refueling leaving one third available for escort. You can however, set your CAP to 50% or even higher. Here's another scenario: let's say you're American and your CV has two fighter squadrons aboard. Let's say it's later in the war and one squadron is Hellcats and one is Corsairs. You might set the Hellcats to 30% CAP and the Corsairs to 100% CAP. Also set the Corsair's max range to say, two hexes, so they don't get far away from their carrier. 100% is fine for a one day affair, otherwise the fatigue will be significant if you try to stretch that to two days.

While we're at it, every nooby, and I mean every single flipping one, makes this same mistake, then doesn't do it again, but by then it's too late. Never ever put the first model of Corsairs on a CV. They are not carrier capable and will muck up if not eliminate any functioning air wing on a carrier. They cannot take off (in battle) and cannot under any circumstances land on a carrier. Don't even put them on a CVE just for transport to a base. Put 'em in crates and ship them on an xAK. P-p-p-period!

(in reply to geofflambert)

Post #: 7

RE: Naval Attack vs. Naval Search? - 12/24/2018 3:18:38 AM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BKL

Can someone tell me how these should be used differently when wanting to attack opposing ships of unknown location. I am playing Battle for Coral Sea and when the scenario starts, many of the planes are set for "Naval Attack" and then you have the option of selecting "Airfield, Port, Ground, Recon, Rest" But I want to find and attack the Japanese navy so should I instead change to "Naval Search." My understanding is "Naval Search" will look for and attack any surface or submarine units.

Can someone tell me how these options are used differently. Part of the reason for my confusion is that "Naval Attack" seems like it would mean attacking surface units, but that's not an options...only ports, airfield, etc.

Thank you.

Your understanding is not accurate.

Read s.7.1 (pages 143-155) of the manual. It provides relevant details and an intelligent reading provides guidance as to what is appropriate when.

Alfred

(in reply to BKL)

Post #: 8

RE: Naval Attack vs. Naval Search? - 12/25/2018 4:17:08 AM

BKL

Posts: 106
Joined: 11/2/2013
Status: offline

Thank you!

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 9