|
tolsdorff -> RE: Is this a bug or WAD, follow TF order cause both two TFs remains on station (12/30/2021 10:55:03 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HansBolter
While apparently not common knowledge, this info is not hard to find.
All you have to do is read one of the umpteenth number of posts of mine regarding the need to create minesweeping TFs FIRST at Manila on December 8th, 1941.
What the OP has experienced is something I don't.
I learned a long time ago not to daisy chain follow orders.
I constantly work to lower the TF number of my air and surface combat TFs.
The result of the above action typically means my Death Star leading TF has a very low TF number and the same is true of any Surface Combat TF that may be leading.
Where things can get dicey for me is when I need the gaggle to follow a Minesweeping TF.
It can take a lot of disbanding and creating TFs to get an MSW TF with a low number to do the leading.
Establishing standardized methodologies for manipulating the TF number movement sequence mechanism goes a long way toward establishing standardized performance.
I never paid much attention to the entire 'low (or lesser(?) number TF discussions to be honest until today. Kind of skipped over it when it was mentioned somewhere.
Never quite realized how it could impact the game (WAD or not), as for instance in the context of the OP's problem or what you mentioned about Minesweeping TF's, either in Manila at the start of the war or leading a large collection of TF's through mine infestations.
Having read up on the topic today, everything about lesser numbered TF's and how they impact some aspects of the game, makes a bit more sense.
quote:
Establishing standardized methodologies for manipulating the TF number movement sequence mechanism goes a long way toward establishing standardized performance. Yes exactly, that concept seems very sensible to me now as well.
|
|
|
|
