Carrier Interdiction

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Carrier Interdiction

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] >> Warplan Pacific >> Carrier Interdiction

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Carrier Interdiction - 7/17/2021 11:19:47 PM

Duck Doc

Posts: 693
Joined: 6/9/2004
Status: offline

In my current game, April 26, 1942 playing as the Allies vs the AI. A carrier engagement occured in the Coral Sea between Lexington and Yorktown vs Zuikaku and Shokaku. Zuikaku was sunk and Lady Lex sustained 2 damage. Battle reports list this as "Carrier Interdiction".

In this sense what does "Interdiction" mean? Why not "Engagement"? What am I missing?

Also, the report lists some A/A losses on each side. Are these not repaired with the ships? Why should I know or care?

Just curious,

Post #: 1

RE: Carrier Interdiction - 7/18/2021 7:34:53 AM

ncc1701e

Posts: 7380
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline

Carrier based planes are repaired only in port. So if you are losing all your planes, your CV are quite useless. This is important to check.

Carrier interdiction means one CV fleet has intercepted the other one.
You have also Carrier Strike, if I remember well. This is a deliberate attack from you.

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to Duck Doc)

Post #: 2

RE: Carrier Interdiction - 7/18/2021 2:48:08 PM

Duck Doc

Posts: 693
Joined: 6/9/2004
Status: offline

The carrier engagement was not listed as a battle but as an interdiction. I was just curious why.

I meant AA Gun losses, not Air to Air Losses. Why is it important I know?

(in reply to ncc1701e)

Post #: 3