Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

maximum carriers in a task force?

 
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 >> maximum carriers in a task force? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/9/2021 1:12:21 AM   
Mower


Posts: 41
Joined: 12/3/2009
Status: offline
What is the max number for optimum efficiency in US task forces?
Post #: 1
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/9/2021 1:23:48 AM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline
I do believe that depends upon the year. There is some discussion somewhere about this if you search for it.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Mower)
Post #: 2
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/9/2021 4:15:40 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
The correct answer is: as many as you have escorts for.

I should put 25 carriers in a TF in a game and have it launch strike after strike with Halsey as the CO, just to see how much/often the coordination penalty applied (if at all).

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 3
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/9/2021 11:04:52 AM   
Mower


Posts: 41
Joined: 12/3/2009
Status: offline
Im pretty sure the AI IJN is putting all 6 of the Kido Butai in one TF.

< Message edited by Mower -- 3/9/2021 11:08:23 AM >

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 4
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/9/2021 3:56:00 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mower

Im pretty sure the AI IJN is putting all 6 of the Kido Butai in one TF.

That may depend on which scenario you are playing. In basic AI it breaks up KB to add CVs to multiple concurrent missions. That is one of the things that allows the Allied player to break the AI in early 1942.

But the revamped AI and Iron Man scenarios may have coding that keeps the KB together except for upgrades. I haven't played those so I can't say.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Mower)
Post #: 5
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/9/2021 6:38:23 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline
In Shattered Sword, peeling off CVs to "sideshows" was deemed to be one factor that doomed IJN in Midway.

Hard to see USN coming out winner in 3 vs 6 fight, even when counting Midway I. airbase into it.

As said, any target worth attacking was worth attacking all of KB or none at all.

Peeling off Shokaku and Zuikaku to Coral Sea was mistake. Also, doctrinally IJN air groups did belong to CV unlike USN where they could be swapped (and often were) between any CVs. IJN could have gotten 1 extra CV into Midway battle by swapping damaged CVs air group to undamaged (which had lost lot of planes). It just was against their doctrine or maybe they didn't see it worth it. Also one reason why they lost, operational rigidity.

_____________________________

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


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 6
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/9/2021 7:02:29 PM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 1674
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mower

Im pretty sure the AI IJN is putting all 6 of the Kido Butai in one TF.

Rarely, even in Ironman. Once TF1 is disbanded after the return of KB, after the PH strike, the AI will keep using them in groups of 1 to 3. The AI is also quite bad at filling the air groups...

Regarding your original question, I believe you refer to the coordination penalty chance : it is only a chance to get a penalty on the coordination rolls, if you have more planes in the hex than a given number. Whether they’re in the same TF or not is, AFAIK, irrelevant.

The threshold number is also not fixed, at it’s a base number of 100/150/200 (depending on the year) more a random number included between 1-100/1-150/1-200. So, anywhere from 101-200/151-300/201-400.

However, the penalty doesn’t look quite severe, and having all the CV in the same hex gives a much better defense, with a grouped CAP, and all additional escorts (whether in the same TF or accompanying TF) give better security against submarine or surface threats. There are so many factors influencing a strike coordination, so many things which may go wrong, that taking the risk of splitting the CV’s isn’t worth it IMHO.

To get a decent number of escorting warships, I like to include 4-6 CV/CVL, 4-6 BB/CA/CL, and one DD per capital ship (so, 8-12). And additional ASW & Surface Combat TF’s. All in the same hex, following an ASW TF or two.


EDIT : for IJN carriers, the threshold is 200 + 1-200 I think, from the start of the game.

< Message edited by Ambassador -- 3/9/2021 7:03:24 PM >

(in reply to Mower)
Post #: 7
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/9/2021 7:28:55 PM   
Nomad


Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: West Yellowstone, Montana
Status: offline
The manual states that the uncoordination chance is based on the number of carrier aircraft based in the TF, not the hex.

_____________________________


(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 8
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/9/2021 10:05:30 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline
If I remember correctly, and you might want to search on this looking for posts from "Alfred" among others, for US CVs/CVLs it is 3/1 or 2/2.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Nomad)
Post #: 9
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/9/2021 11:22:02 PM   
Mower


Posts: 41
Joined: 12/3/2009
Status: offline
Great discussion thanks guys

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 10
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/10/2021 12:07:44 AM   
Dan1977

 

Posts: 62
Joined: 1/28/2021
Status: offline
Mower,
From the manual (at the bottom see the info on carriers):
7.2.1.11 COORDINATING STRIKES (pages 166 & 167)
Each base or ship containing an air unit is considered a unique entity for purposes of determining offensive Missions and Escorts. Under certain circumstances planes flying different Missions and planes flying from different starting points will coordinate their attacks. Coordination of attack is determined by several factors. Type of Aircraft, altitude selection, and point of origin all help discriminate coordination such that it is more difficult to mount massive raids of several different types of aircraft. The result is a smaller, more selective raid formation.

During the Resolution Phase the computer forms up air strikes from each base/ship depending on the orders the air units have been given and the information those units have about the enemy’s forces. Planes that are performing offensive Missions and their accompanying Escorts, all flying from the same base/ship to the same target hex, will no longer necessarily fly together even if they have different Missions.

For example, you could have 3 bomber units flying together from the same airfield, with 1 each to bomb an airfield, a port and a ground unit within the same target hex. 2 fighter groups flying escort and another fighter group flying a Sweep Mission could accompany these bombers. A plane flying a Recon Mission could also accompany them.

If the Bomber groups were the same type (Medium bomber for example) they would stand a greater chance of coordinating than if they were 1 Dive Bomber group, 1 Attack Bomber Group, and 1 Light Bomber Group.

Air strikes from different bases/ships flying to the same target hex will approach the Target together if the range to the target hex is the same. This allows aircraft carriers to coordinate their attacks. However, before the attacks are made, there is a chance that some of the units will become separated from each other and this may result in piecemeal attacks on the target. In addition, a unit may escort attacks originating at another base/ship if the escorting unit has a Target that matches the target being attacked, and the escorting fighter is closer to the target than the aircraft being escorted. Occasionally this can occur even if no priority target is set for the escorting unit.

The coordination of air strikes is affected by how many Carrier aircraft are based in the TF launching a strike.

The chance of uncoordination is doubled under the following circumstances:
»»Allied TF in 1942 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 100 + rnd (100).

»»Allied TF in 1943 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 150 + rnd (150).

»»Allied TF in 1944 or later or a Japanese TF at any time and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 200 + rnd (200).

(in reply to Mower)
Post #: 11
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/10/2021 5:24:38 AM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 1674
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline
Yeah, TF, not hex, my bad.

(in reply to Dan1977)
Post #: 12
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/10/2021 2:30:50 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

Yeah, TF, not hex, my bad.


Considering what job you have with the need for exact language:

On the General thread, I made a post about a missing comma that cost a company 5 million USD and there are plenty more examples out there.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 13
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/11/2021 4:06:28 PM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 1674
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

Yeah, TF, not hex, my bad.


Considering what job you have with the need for exact language:


That’s why I’m a judge, and not the Pope. I’m not infallible.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 14
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/11/2021 9:51:41 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

Yeah, TF, not hex, my bad.


Considering what job you have with the need for exact language:


That’s why I’m a judge, and not the Pope. I’m not infallible.


I am not even a judge and the only infallible person they nailed to a tree.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 15
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/13/2021 5:42:20 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
I'll keep beating this horse:

It's a chance for strikes to splinter (functionally speaking), and is only a chance. That chance is there whether you exceed the numbers listed in the manual or not. The penalty listed there simply doubles the chance. If you're responsible with your unit and TF commanders, you will basically never see splintered strikes in the first place. Two times almost zero is still almost zero, so when weighing the various factors this doesn't really carry much weight. I seriously give it zero weight, it just doesn't matter. The other considerations are what is going to determine my TF composition before I even get to thinking about this non-factor.

It's easier to protect 1 TF from the air, but potentially more vulnerable if it gets caught on the surface, unless you balloon the size up very high in which case it's easier to spot with a stray search plane so you want to keep escort numbers as low as possible, which also allows you to maintain more surface TFs, and so on... It's a balancing act of those factors more than anything else. And different situations call for different balances.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 16
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 3/13/2021 5:49:33 PM   
Alfred

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

Yeah, TF, not hex, my bad.


Considering what job you have with the need for exact language:


That’s why I’m a judge, and not the Pope. I’m not infallible.


Infallibility only applies to doctrine.

Alfred

(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 17
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 4/19/2021 7:36:13 AM   
sven6345789

 

Posts: 1050
Joined: 3/8/2004
From: Sandviken, Sweden
Status: offline
The chance of uncoordination is doubled under the following circumstances:
»»Allied TF in 1942 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 100 + rnd (100).

»»Allied TF in 1943 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 150 + rnd (150).

»»Allied TF in 1944 or later or a Japanese TF at any time and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 200 + rnd (200).

That translates to

Japan maximum: 4 CV or 2 CV + 4 CVL
Allied Maximum: 3 CV or 2 CV + 2 CVL

To minimize the chance of your whole CV-Fleet going down in one attack, i recommend 2 CVs per task force, with 1 or 2 CVLs if available.

_____________________________

Bougainville, November 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9. It rained today.

Letter from a U.S. Marine,November 1943

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 18
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 4/20/2021 4:31:09 AM   
Lokasenna


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

The chance of uncoordination is doubled under the following circumstances:
»»Allied TF in 1942 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 100 + rnd (100).

»»Allied TF in 1943 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 150 + rnd (150).

»»Allied TF in 1944 or later or a Japanese TF at any time and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 200 + rnd (200).

That translates to

Japan maximum: 4 CV or 2 CV + 4 CVL
Allied Maximum: 3 CV or 2 CV + 2 CVL

To minimize the chance of your whole CV-Fleet going down in one attack, i recommend 2 CVs per task force, with 1 or 2 CVLs if available.


Nope. There is no maximum.

Limiting yourself to these proposed limits is... well, only limiting yourself.

Do not let this rule in the code dictate what you do. It really does not make as much difference as any of your other considerations. Do not consider it at all. If this rule enters into your calculus, you've made a mistake.

(in reply to sven6345789)
Post #: 19
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 4/20/2021 12:00:08 PM   
HansBolter


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

The chance of uncoordination is doubled under the following circumstances:
»»Allied TF in 1942 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 100 + rnd (100).

»»Allied TF in 1943 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 150 + rnd (150).

»»Allied TF in 1944 or later or a Japanese TF at any time and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 200 + rnd (200).

That translates to

Japan maximum: 4 CV or 2 CV + 4 CVL
Allied Maximum: 3 CV or 2 CV + 2 CVL

To minimize the chance of your whole CV-Fleet going down in one attack, i recommend 2 CVs per task force, with 1 or 2 CVLs if available.


Nope. There is no maximum.

Limiting yourself to these proposed limits is... well, only limiting yourself.

Do not let this rule in the code dictate what you do. It really does not make as much difference as any of your other considerations. Do not consider it at all. If this rule enters into your calculus, you've made a mistake.


+1

I typically run the following set up with no discernable negative impact on coordination:

'42: 2 CVs

'43: 2 CVs + 2 CVLs

'44: 4 CVs + 2 CVLs

'45 on: 4-6 CVs + 2 CVLs

As many do, I also keep multiple CV TFs following a leader, staying together in a single hex [AKA..Death Star (DS)] and consistently get coordinated strikes from the entire group.

The coordination penalty, like the non-carrier trained penalty, is negligible.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 20
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 4/20/2021 12:50:20 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline
Only downside with coordination penalty is that your strikes may arrive unescorted. That obviously is a bad thing when facing heavy air opposition.

I have not worried about that too much, since I rarely use carrier air against land targets...and at sea with numbers that usually can overwhelm enemy CAP.

_____________________________

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


(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 21
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 4/20/2021 3:34:50 PM   
pontiouspilot


Posts: 1127
Joined: 7/27/2012
Status: offline
and that is why I am pontiouspilot!

(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 22
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 4/21/2021 8:07:47 AM   
sven6345789

 

Posts: 1050
Joined: 3/8/2004
From: Sandviken, Sweden
Status: offline
"Nope. There is no maximum."

I am aware that you can form larger taskforces. There is no need for that in my opinion.

If you put 6 CVs in one TF all will come under attack if this TF is attacked.

Of course, for the Allies, it doesn't matter anymore in 1944/45 since the japanese should have extreme difficulties getting through the fighter cover and the flak.

_____________________________

Bougainville, November 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9. It rained today.

Letter from a U.S. Marine,November 1943

(in reply to pontiouspilot)
Post #: 23
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 4/21/2021 11:16:00 AM   
HansBolter


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

"Nope. There is no maximum."

I am aware that you can form larger taskforces. There is no need for that in my opinion.

If you put 6 CVs in one TF all will come under attack if this TF is attacked.

Of course, for the Allies, it doesn't matter anymore in 1944/45 since the japanese should have extreme difficulties getting through the fighter cover and the flak.


Leakers get through no matter how large the cap.

I have had carriers sent home to for dry dock repairs when covered by a 1500 plane CAP consisting of mostly Corsairs and Bearcats.

The real point is that by that time losing 3-6 carriers from the Death Star while on station off the HI is simply the cost of doing business and does not result in the kind of setback losing 3-6 carriers in '42-'43 does.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to sven6345789)
Post #: 24
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 4/21/2021 4:16:32 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mower

Im pretty sure the AI IJN is putting all 6 of the Kido Butai in one TF.


not just the AI, me too and it works just perfectly. As the IJ I put up to ten CVs into one carrier TF and it works just as well or as bad as only having four.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 4/21/2021 4:19:47 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Mower)
Post #: 25
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 4/21/2021 4:18:45 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

The chance of uncoordination is doubled under the following circumstances:
»»Allied TF in 1942 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 100 + rnd (100).

»»Allied TF in 1943 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 150 + rnd (150).

»»Allied TF in 1944 or later or a Japanese TF at any time and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 200 + rnd (200).

That translates to

Japan maximum: 4 CV or 2 CV + 4 CVL
Allied Maximum: 3 CV or 2 CV + 2 CVL

To minimize the chance of your whole CV-Fleet going down in one attack, i recommend 2 CVs per task force, with 1 or 2 CVLs if available.


Nope. There is no maximum.

Limiting yourself to these proposed limits is... well, only limiting yourself.

Do not let this rule in the code dictate what you do. It really does not make as much difference as any of your other considerations. Do not consider it at all. If this rule enters into your calculus, you've made a mistake.


Trust Loka, 100% true!

_____________________________


(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 26
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 4/21/2021 5:49:54 PM   
Nomad


Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: West Yellowstone, Montana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

The chance of uncoordination is doubled under the following circumstances:
»»Allied TF in 1942 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 100 + rnd (100).

»»Allied TF in 1943 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 150 + rnd (150).

»»Allied TF in 1944 or later or a Japanese TF at any time and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 200 + rnd (200).

That translates to

Japan maximum: 4 CV or 2 CV + 4 CVL
Allied Maximum: 3 CV or 2 CV + 2 CVL

To minimize the chance of your whole CV-Fleet going down in one attack, i recommend 2 CVs per task force, with 1 or 2 CVLs if available.


Nope. There is no maximum.

Limiting yourself to these proposed limits is... well, only limiting yourself.

Do not let this rule in the code dictate what you do. It really does not make as much difference as any of your other considerations. Do not consider it at all. If this rule enters into your calculus, you've made a mistake.


Trust Loka, 100% true!

I agree also. The right answer to the OP is 25, that is the maximum size of a CV TF.

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 27
RE: maximum carriers in a task force? - 4/21/2021 7:02:48 PM   
Macclan5


Posts: 1065
Joined: 3/24/2016
From: Toronto Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


+1

I typically run the following set up with no discernable negative impact on coordination:

'42: 2 CVs

'43: 2 CVs + 2 CVLs

'44: 4 CVs + 2 CVLs

'45 on: 4-6 CVs + 2 CVLs

As many do, I also keep multiple CV TFs following a leader, staying together in a single hex [AKA..Death Star (DS)] and consistently get coordinated strikes from the entire group.

The coordination penalty, like the non-carrier trained penalty, is negligible.


+2

--

43 3 CV + 1 CVL

It all depends on 'timing' - which ones are 'delivered and in Pearl vs which ones are in the Canal.

i.e. Its different in July 43 vs November 43

_____________________________

A People that values its privileges above it's principles will soon loose both. Dwight D Eisenhower.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 28
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> maximum carriers in a task force? Page: [1]
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

0.781