composer99 -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (11/22/2016 4:43:00 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rkr1958 quote:
ORIGINAL: ashkpa quote:
ORIGINAL: composer99 Might I make some suggestions with respect to the tactics of naval positioning? (It looks like both sides could do with it based on the screenshots I've seen.) I am open to it. Ronnie? Sure. Okay. Both the Axis and Allies could do with consolidating their fleets when they're at sea in contested sea areas. I've noticed many screenshots where both sides have strings of ships and planes scattered over three or four boxes. This can be tactically unsound, since it lets opponents who surprise your forces destroy them in detail. You usually want your forces to be in as few sea boxes as possible in a sea area - a single box if you can manage - so your enemy has to fight them all. Usually, this will be a sea box that your planes can react to. The exceptions are: (1) convoy defences in sea areas reachable only by subs or raiders - it's best to have SCS in the 0, 1, and 4 box of convoy pipelines; you don't want to do this in areas in which enemy NAV can get up into high boxes (2) when you have to be in a higher box than some of your air can reach (for shore bombardment or invasions) - in this case you have your fleet as high as you can get it, hopefully with at least some air cover, and then maybe some ships and your airpower in the highest box it can reach (3) when you have to carry supply through the 0 box (with a convoy) - in that case you send out a picket to the 4 box and defend with everything else in the 0 box, including FTR (If both (2) and (3) are true in the same sea area, then your two boxes will be your invasion/support box and the 0 box.) The side that has air superiority in theatre is less concerned with consolidating, but it's still worthwhile.
|
|
|
|