Better formation? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room



Message

kriegmarine -> Better formation? (11/4/2011 10:15:32 AM)

Today is August 42 , now I have 8 CV and 3 CVL, What would be the ideal training?
The KB is forming in 3 TF:
- 3 CV, 1 CVL, 1 BB, 1CA, 1CL, 6DD.
- 3 CV, 1 CVL, 1 BB, 1CA, 1CL, 6DD.
- 2 CV, 1 CVL, 2 CA, 2 CL, 6 DD.
Would you be good, or better distributed differently?



CT Grognard -> RE: Better formation? (11/4/2011 11:24:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kriegmarine

Today is August 42 , now I have 8 hp and 3 CVL, What would be the ideal training?
The KB is forming in 3 TF:
- 3 CV, 1 CVL, 1 BB, 1CA, 1CL, 6DD.
- 3 CV, 1 CVL, 1 BB, 1CA, 1CL, 6DD.
- 2 CV, 1 CVL, 2 CA, 2 CL, 6 DD.
Would you be good, or better distributed differently?


Ideally you'd need more destroyers in each task force...but not sure how many fast ones you have?



henhute6 -> RE: Better formation? (11/4/2011 11:35:03 AM)

I like to put fast carriers together: Hiryu, Soryu, Shokaku and Zuikaku. Rest of the carriers will form another slower fleet. I usually put one heavy cruiser to fleet in case on surprise surface battle. In my opinion BB is wasted in pure AA platform role in carrier force. BB can be in separate surface task force which is mopping up the remnants of enemy fleet. I also use 6 destroyer package with KB fleet.



KenchiSulla -> RE: Better formation? (11/4/2011 11:40:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: henhute6

I like to put fast carriers together: Hiryu, Soryu, Shokaku and Zuikaku. Rest of the carriers will form another slower fleet. I usually put one heavy cruiser to fleet in case on surprise surface battle. In my opinion BB is wasted in pure AA platform role in carrier force. BB can be in separate surface task force which is mopping up the remnants of enemy fleet. I also use 6 destroyer package with KB fleet.


Fast BBs are great for soaking up damage...



Puhis -> RE: Better formation? (11/4/2011 1:19:13 PM)

Carrier's best protection is a battleship. BBs are bomber magnets, easily 1/3 of bombers attack battleships instead of those precious flight decks. And battleships can take more bomb hits than carriers. [;)]


Usually I'll have 2 KBs, fast ones (Hiryu, Shokakus and Akagi) and slower ones (speed 28 kts or less).

Later I might even separate slowest 25-26 kts carriers and use 3 KBs.



crsutton -> RE: Better formation? (11/4/2011 5:16:31 PM)

Yep totally agree. BB in a carrier TF are a must. I would much rather have them eat torpedoes than a first class carrier.




Lecivius -> RE: Better formation? (11/4/2011 11:28:37 PM)

Ok, related question.  Do you guys also agree on putting a fast BB in an Allied CVTF, for the same reasons?  Or do you put them in a SAG with the carriers following?  I've seen both options posted, so I'm a might confused.



Mike Solli -> RE: Better formation? (11/4/2011 11:47:36 PM)

I'd put the CVLs (along with Junyo and Hiyo) in a separate TF than the original 6 CVs. They slow down the fast CVs.



Puhis -> RE: Better formation? (11/5/2011 7:53:25 AM)

Remember, japanese CVLs (except Ryuho) are as fast as Kaga, so Kaga too slows down rest of the original 6.



inqistor -> RE: Better formation? (11/5/2011 8:51:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kriegmarine

Today is August 42 , now I have 8 CV and 3 CVL, What would be the ideal training?
The KB is forming in 3 TF:
- 3 CV, 1 CVL, 1 BB, 1CA, 1CL, 6DD.
- 3 CV, 1 CVL, 1 BB, 1CA, 1CL, 6DD.
- 2 CV, 1 CVL, 2 CA, 2 CL, 6 DD.
Would you be good, or better distributed differently?

BBs are great targets for enemy DBs, so you should keep them. DDs are your ASW weapon, but what is purpose of Cruisers? When CVTF gets attacked in the surface combat, it will immediately try to retreat, so not much use of combat ships, except for screening.

You can eventually look into AAA statistics (and use CLAAs), or number of search planes on board (so CS are perfect), to relieve your CAGs from search duties.



LoBaron -> RE: Better formation? (11/5/2011 10:00:13 AM)

Just in case this went unnoticed:

Contrary to the original WitP, in AE naval attacks will target shipps in a hex, not in a TF.
This implies that the BBs donīt have to be in the same TF, only in the same hex. Depends on how your plans look like
on a tactical scale.



Sardaukar -> RE: Better formation? (11/5/2011 11:13:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

Ok, related question.  Do you guys also agree on putting a fast BB in an Allied CVTF, for the same reasons?  Or do you put them in a SAG with the carriers following?  I've seen both options posted, so I'm a might confused.


I usually put fast BB into CV TF. But as been said, one can do it both ways.

Just that Allies do not have really fast BBs before Iowas, SoDak/NoDaks have max. speed of 28 knots and that can slow down CV TF, since other ships often have max. speed of 32+ knots. That 5 knots can make difference sometimes.



Chickenboy -> RE: Better formation? (11/5/2011 2:46:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kriegmarine

Today is August 42 , now I have 8 CV and 3 CVL, What would be the ideal training?
The KB is forming in 3 TF:
- 3 CV, 1 CVL, 1 BB, 1CA, 1CL, 6DD.
- 3 CV, 1 CVL, 1 BB, 1CA, 1CL, 6DD.
- 2 CV, 1 CVL, 2 CA, 2 CL, 6 DD.
Would you be good, or better distributed differently?

That's a pretty good start, IMO. I agree with the others re: clustering slower CV and CVLs together. Also agree about the benefits of putting a battleship in with the CVTF for AAA and soaking up damage.

If you're fighting defensively, I'm not adamantly opposed to using some of your CVEs for CAP or search too, they'd need to be linked with your slower groups.

IMO, the most important criterion is the number of airplanes in your CVTF. Tread very carefully on exceeding the CVTF air numbers / year, lest your strikes be uncoordinated. These values may be found in the manual.



Wirraway_Ace -> RE: Better formation? (11/7/2011 4:20:20 AM)

Shokaku and Zuikaku get airsearch radar in their june 42 upgrade. After the upgrade, I tend to split them between KB1 and KB2. In august, a number of your APDs also get good airsearch radar. They have short legs and cannot be added to a CV TF, but I use them when possible as radar pickets (in the same hex) as the CVs.

I generally don't put CAs in the KB. The fast BBs are much more useful in attracting the attention away from the CVs and the CAs are one of the IJNs most potent surface threats in night actions. Of course, the Kongo's are very useful ships too, but...



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.5