Allied KB (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

undercovergeek -> Allied KB (8/16/2007 8:19:46 PM)

its mar 42 i have all the US CVs - if i am to use them offensively is it best to have them in one TF, KB style, or 5 seperate TFs all in the same hex?

Ta




Yamato hugger -> RE: Allied KB (8/16/2007 8:35:42 PM)

5



aztez -> RE: Allied KB (8/16/2007 9:07:01 PM)

Basically Yamamoto hugger is correct.

Allthough I got luck with 4 US CV's in 1 TF vs KB in early 1942. None of the US sunk and I did put 3 IJN CV's to bottom.




Feinder -> RE: Allied KB (8/16/2007 9:25:51 PM)

I wouldn't be in a rush to take on KB in Mar-42.  If KB has split up, and you can destroy it piece-male, maybe 5 USN CVs vs. 2 or 3 IJN CVs, you'll be ok.  But don't go 5 on 5, and certainly not 5 USN vs. 6 IJN.

Patience.
-F-



crsutton -> RE: Allied KB (8/16/2007 11:19:37 PM)

What about late 42, when they have upgraded and have full airgroups? Together or in separate TF?



Gem35 -> RE: Allied KB (8/17/2007 2:22:25 AM)

against the AI you don't need all 5 in a death-star, it's easier to let the jap KB sail retardedly into your LBA to die horribly.
against humans I would still not organize all 5 in one TF, keep them seperate and as Feinder said and Guns N Roses sang, just a little patience.....



spence -> RE: Allied KB (8/17/2007 2:30:05 AM)

It is best to ignore all historical precedent when it comes to CV vs CV combat just as the designers did.



Halsey -> RE: Allied KB (8/17/2007 2:46:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

I wouldn't be in a rush to take on KB in Mar-42.  If KB has split up, and you can destroy it piece-male, maybe 5 USN CVs vs. 2 or 3 IJN CVs, you'll be ok.  But don't go 5 on 5, and certainly not 5 USN vs. 6 IJN.

Patience.
-F-


I go after the IJN as soon as I have 4 US CV's.
Usually around Aug/Sept/Oct 42.
I draw them in with multiple invasions somewhere around the Gilberts.

Two US CV's will get creamed, but I always get at least 4 of the IJN CV's.[;)]

After that, the KB is done being a major threat.



docpaul -> RE: Allied KB (8/17/2007 2:53:55 AM)

The KB just did the big STUPID in my game..June of 42 and they actually fell for the battle of Midway..again...I had ALL my SBD's and Devastators in either Midway or Johnson.  About 10 subs around and any other bombers I could fit.  ALl 4 of my carriers were there as well..One which was the bait.  I lost alot of planes but no carriers and he lost FIVE and a CVL...not all at once...by the time the dust settled...  Two were torpedoed going to Truk.  WHy the AI didn't retire right away is beyond me.  I absolutely got the best dice rolls under the sun..it was awesome, but now it'll be boring again.  I think he still will hace 3 or 4 carries though so I'll go at it awhile longer and see what happens.  Unfortunately I may need to restart as while I'm a noob...He's going to have a hard time I think minus that in June.  I have Guadalcanal already and Milne is pretty solid albeit only a 2 air right now.  I took Guam back right after the Midway fiasco.  They don't seem to be locking on any particular area though. He now has about 80 zero's at Rabaul so my B17's are getting slaughtered....and what's up with the 17C..that thing can't do anything despite decent experience....Hornet is pretty bad but at Pearl.   I love the game but organizing the first couple weeks takes forever..and is a bit tedious.  AI is on hard but I guess I'll try the super hard.  I'd love to try PBEM but I don't really get the logistical end good yet.  In reading the reports here and the messages...it would not be pretty for me....someday...lol



Big B -> RE: Allied KB (8/17/2007 3:38:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

its mar 42 i have all the US CVs - if i am to use them offensively is it best to have them in one TF, KB style, or 5 seperate TFs all in the same hex?

Ta




[:D]Hmmmm,...are you asking us to give away tactical secrets?!

Not sure I am going to publicly go there [:D]

B



BrucePowers -> RE: Allied KB (8/17/2007 5:31:27 AM)

I try not to put all my eggs, er CVs, in one basket that early in the war. Terminus almost killed me because I did that. I sent the Catalina pilots to Nome without thier airplanes after that one.[:D]



ctangus -> RE: Allied KB (8/17/2007 6:13:50 AM)

In '42 you risk coordination penalties for any TF with over 100 planes. (Section 7.something in the manual.) The US CVs carry roughly 80 planes in '42 so it's best to have 1 US CV per TF. If you're short on escorts you might have to go 2 CVs per TF. The Brit CVs, with roughly 50 planes each, can safely be put in 2 CVs per TF.

Splitting up your CVS also spreads out your risk. A single incoming strike will only hit one TF. If you're running with one CV TFs a single strike against you will almost certainly overwhelm & kill a single CV. But if you have a 5 CV TF a single strike could possibly sink or damage all of those carriers.

It's not grossly unhistorical to do so either - part of the reason the real USN often operated their CVs apart in '42 was to reduce the risk of losing multiple CVs at once.



bobogoboom -> RE: Allied KB (8/17/2007 9:28:54 AM)

I just lured a mini kb into a trap in April of 42 he moved in with 3cv's and 2 cve's + escort because he thought my CV’s were in oz. I killed his kb because it was all in 1 tf. But on my side enterprise took 3 torps and 10 bomb hits. While she sunk that was the only ship he hit because that was the only strike he got off. If I had had all my cvs in tf I would have probably lost 3cv's



crsutton -> RE: Allied KB (8/17/2007 6:01:50 PM)

OK, then what is the best config for KB to counter the multiple 1 CV taskforces of the allies? I have been using groups of 2cv with one CVL. Does it make more sense to have them all in single CV TF?



Yamato hugger -> RE: Allied KB (8/17/2007 6:35:12 PM)

I operate my Japs in pairs when I think there may be allied carriers around, and in a group of 4 (3 CV, 1 CVL) when I dont. I NEVER have more than 3 CVs + 1 CVL in a TF.



Feinder -> RE: Allied KB (8/17/2007 8:31:24 PM)

I would say that ideally, IJN would operate single CV TFs as well.  However, as IJN, you don't tend to have enough ships to do this, so IJN is forced to 2 - 3 CVs per TF.

-F-



Yamato hugger -> RE: Allied KB (8/17/2007 10:39:13 PM)

Exactly. Early war (7 Dec to middle of '42) about half the Jap DDs dont even have an ASW capability. Thats why I keep them tight.



undercovergeek -> RE: Allied KB (8/31/2007 7:34:19 PM)

if i do split them all up  - whats the best TF composition? i now have 5 lots of TFs with just 2 DDs and a cruiser each - seems a bit light for me poor carriers!

or do i stick all the non CVs in one TF and escort the 5 CVs?



Feinder -> RE: Allied KB (8/31/2007 8:03:26 PM)

Given that you probably can't do one flight deck per TF...

I'd split them up into something like

Akagi, Kaga,
Soryu, Hiryu,
Shok, Zui
Hiyo, Junyo
Shoho, Zuiho
Hosho, Taiyo

But basically, you're keeping elements with similar range and speed together.

You might also create a "bait" TF, by keeping mini-KB together (with Hiyo, Junyo), and then splitting your carrier divs into pairs, keeping all in same hex.  It will give a greater chance of the "bait TF" to get hit, than your large CVs.  It would stil hurt, but it would disperse your assets a bit.

Something like this...
Akagi, Kaga,
Soryu, Hiryu,
Shok, Zui
Hiyo, Junyo, Shoho, Zuiho, Hosho, Taiyo

-F-



undercovergeek -> RE: Allied KB (8/31/2007 8:45:16 PM)

its allied forces!




VSWG -> RE: Allied KB (8/31/2007 9:12:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

if i do split them all up - whats the best TF composition? i now have 5 lots of TFs with just 2 DDs and a cruiser each - seems a bit light for me poor carriers!

or do i stick all the non CVs in one TF and escort the 5 CVs?

Look here, section II.B, third thread from the bottom:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1274014

Ideally, every CV should be escorted by at least 14 ships in order to maximize the AA value of the TF. If you add more ships, the AA value still increases, but with diminishing returns.



ChezDaJez -> RE: Allied KB (8/31/2007 10:31:43 PM)

Regardless of whether we are talking KB or allied deathstars, it's best to have no more than 2 CVs per TF but you also need to make sure that these seperate TFs are mutually supporting and have at least one fast BB in the TF to increase the AA and to draw enemy bombers.

Alternately, a surface TF with 1-2 BBs stationed 1-2 hexes ahead of your carriers is quite useful in soaking up airstrikes.

For the allied player, the best way to deal with KB is to stay under cover of land-based air... especially your 4Es. After mid-late 42, KB is pretty much neutralized by the presence of allied 4Es and the strength of allied carriers. Not many Japanese players want to risk KB to 4Es unless the reward is really worth it.

As a Japanese player, I like to split KB up and use them to raid convoy lanes. I don't scatter them to the wind though. I keep the various KB TFs close enough to reform within 2-3 days. If I conduct a raid on a shipping lane, one TF attacks while at least one other remains in the background. In this way if something unexpected comes up I have the option to run or to bring the other TF forward.

I do try to keep at least 6 CV/CVLs in CENTPAC and the rest in the SRA.

Chez




spence -> RE: Allied KB (9/1/2007 1:17:25 AM)

quote:

I would say that ideally, IJN would operate single CV TFs as well. However, as IJN, you don't tend to have enough ships to do this, so IJN is forced to 2 - 3 CVs per TF.


Actually the IJN CVs should really all be in 2 ship TFs (1 CV, 1 DD). Their doctrine called for the CAP and ship manuevering for defense. The idea to "ring" a carrier or force of carriers closely with ships which supported the carrier(s) with their flak did not get past the 'study' stage in the IJN til 1944. It may have saved Zuikaku at Coral Sea - she was so far away from Shokaku (which got heavily damaged) that the Americans never saw her so the doctrine did have some benefits.

Since every foible of American doctrine is hard coded (and when its not the JP usually wants to make a house rule to force it on the AP) it really seems the Japanese ought to be bound by the same sort of thing.

KB was never TF38/58.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.016113