quote:

You can also try Ground Attack but the routines will single out the LCU with the highest AV.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Saso

quote:

You can also try Ground Attack but the routines will single out the LCU with the highest AV.

Interesting, I don't know this.
If in the base there's a division (more other LCU's but less AV), with a ground attack it will be hit for first.
Therefore if I want to preserve a division from ground attack is better divide it for decrease the damage, correct?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

quote:

ORIGINAL: Saso

quote:

You can also try Ground Attack but the routines will single out the LCU with the highest AV.

Interesting, I don't know this.
If in the base there's a division (more other LCU's but less AV), with a ground attack it will be hit for first.
Therefore if I want to preserve a division from ground attack is better divide it for decrease the damage, correct?

I don't believe dividing units actually decreases damage "overall" but some players like to do it hoping it will. They also like to do it for the Intel effect.

quote:

Shark 7:
In my experience, bombardments seem to do a good job of it, but you will have to suffer the return fire from those CD batteries.  If you use the bombard method, I'd go for 4-6 BBs and a handfull of destroyers and NO ESCORT BOMBARD so that at least the BBs are the only ones getting hit in return.

quote:

The fatigue and disruption will apply to a single regiment (assuming that unit is hit and not some other unit) not the whole division.

quote:

In my experience, bombardments seem to do a good job of it

quote:

Also watch out for mines and be sure to include some MSW TF in front of your bombardment groups or you may get a rude surprise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: engineer

quote:

Shark 7:
In my experience, bombardments seem to do a good job of it, but you will have to suffer the return fire from those CD batteries. If you use the bombard method, I'd go for 4-6 BBs and a handfull of destroyers and NO ESCORT BOMBARD so that at least the BBs are the only ones getting hit in return.

I concur. The BB bombardments usually do a wicked job on devastating supply dumps so any subsequent sieges can be over more quickly. However, I don't like to risk putting the BBs into too much yard time for repairing that return fire unless I really see the need to move quickly so I usually take the defenses into account, too. BB Bombardment TF's are good for bases defended by up to the 9.2 in guns, but if there are 14" or up rifles ashore, then I'd rather use air power first. Also watch out for mines and be sure to include some MSW TF in front of your bombardment groups or you may get a rude surprise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

It does to the extent that there are now (for example) three regiments where there was one division, and a given air attack will only hit one unit. The fatigue and disruption will apply to a single regiment (assuming that unit is hit and not some other unit) not the whole division.

quote:


Is the disruption and fatigue inflicted by an air strike on a single regiment 3X what the same airstrike would inflict on the intact division? I doubt it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

In my experience, bombardments seem to do a good job of it, but you will have to suffer the return fire from those CD batteries. If you use the bombard method, I'd go for 4-6 BBs and a handfull of destroyers and NO ESCORT BOMBARD so that at least the BBs are the only ones getting hit in return.

quote:

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

In the books I've read on Pacific amphibious operations, after, say, Guadalcanal, the operations always started with minesweeping operations. The bombardment mission may have started simultaneously with MS, but the bombarding ships stayed out at sea while the MS's came closer in. I know at Tarawa there weren't any naval mines, but later on, at Saipan and other invasions there were, yet I'm not sure how the sweepers managed to avoid getting shot up by the coast defense guns. Did they wait until the bombardment had silenced the guns (hard to do, can't get them all if they don't shoot back aka Iwo Jima), or did they just not get hit?

quote:

You can also use the "follow" command, but then your bombardment force will have all the disadvantages of slow movement since most purpose-built or converted trawler MSW only travel at 12 to 16 knots. On the plus side, most of the CD fire will usually fall on the bombardment TF so your MSWs will be better off than in independent in-hex sweeping operations. Rockmedic109 is right that the Allied DMS ships are a nice exception to that rule if you're on the Allied side.
The disadvantage is that you need air superiority to cover your minesweepers with the "patrol/don't retire" toggle to sweep for mines, give up surprise, and take more time since there seems to be a capacity of about 20 +/- a randomization factor for minesweeping capacity per MSW per day.  You are also likely to lose some minesweepers against dense minefields.

quote:

I am pretty sure you can sweep from the adjacent hex.

quote:

It's a trade-off:  are there minefields or not?, do I risk my high-value ships or not?, do I have the MSW assets and supporting assets to run a MSW mission or not?, does the MSW mission give my opponent an opportunity to set an ambush (or can I use the MSW mission as a feint) or not?  

quote:

"is there a way to spot a minefield? "

Only by feel! Sorry, but the only way to spot a minefield is to send a TF through that location. If you suspect that mines will be in a hex, it is best to include MSWs in your TF - otherwise DDs and PGs seem to be fairly efficient at clearing mines.

quote:

Only by feel! Sorry, but the only way to spot a minefield is to send a TF through that location.

quote:

but against a human player, it's probably a good idea to sweep your ports every so often.