RE: CV TF - Ideal Mix of Ships (Full Version)

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



Message

Feinder -> RE: CV TF - Ideal Mix of Ships (7/5/2007 4:53:50 PM)

And your choice of DDs should be those with the best endurace (7000+ and the 8000 are golden).  With any less endurance, you stunt your over-all speed because you have to keep re-fueling your escorts.

-F-



castor troy -> RE: CV TF - Ideal Mix of Ships (7/5/2007 5:08:54 PM)

holy crap, this thread is 2,5 years old. Who dug that one out? [:D]



Grotius -> RE: CV TF - Ideal Mix of Ships (7/5/2007 5:35:25 PM)

I have a related question. Is it generally advisable to put one's three IJN CV "divisions" into one hex, with one TF following the other two? I guess some players have house rules that prohibit this practice, or maybe prohibit it after the Pearl Harbor strike?



Feinder -> RE: CV TF - Ideal Mix of Ships (7/5/2007 6:21:26 PM)

"Stacking" your CVs means that your CAP from all your TFs in the hex, will intercept.

-F-



KDonovan -> RE: CV TF - Ideal Mix of Ships (7/6/2007 12:15:30 AM)

i like to avoid BB's in CV TF's, as i need all the BB's i can get for shore bombardments.....

so my TF's (in all years)...look like this

CV/CVLs
2 CA's
2 CL's
2 CLAA's
enough DD's to get me above 60 ASW value



ctangus -> RE: CV TF - Ideal Mix of Ships (7/6/2007 12:42:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KDonovan

i like to avoid BB's in CV TF's, as i need all the BB's i can get for shore bombardments.....

so my TF's (in all years)...look like this

CV/CVLs
2 CA's
2 CL's
2 CLAA's
enough DD's to get me above 60 ASW value


But you've largely gotten rid of the threat of KB. I'm not so fortunate! [:D] I want as much AA as I can get if there's any chance of running into enemy carriers. Depending on availability I add 1-2 fast BBs to each CV TF. TF 38/58 also sails with a surface combat TF, under a good Admiral (Lee if he's not dead) composed of 2-3 CLs and a division or two (4-8) DDs.

It gives me better AA for my CV TFs while I can still transfer battleships into TF 34 if there's a need for a bombardment or surface action is likely.



jwilkerson -> RE: CV TF - Ideal Mix of Ships (7/6/2007 2:56:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: KDonovan

i like to avoid BB's in CV TF's, as i need all the BB's i can get for shore bombardments.....

so my TF's (in all years)...look like this

CV/CVLs
2 CA's
2 CL's
2 CLAA's
enough DD's to get me above 60 ASW value


Unfortunately it has been shown and confirmed, that in the game, BB in CVTF attracts significant bomber attacks away from the CV/L and hence is almost mandatory ITG (in the game).

Also 1 CV/L in TF with many TF all stacked in one hex allows all AC still to join up to hit enemy TF (thus bypassing the Allied CV strike restriction) .. biggest trade off is there are not enough escorts to maximize flak for all TF if only 1 CV/L in each.

So, ITG fundamental tactical decision is how many CV/L per TF ... and I also assume 1 BB per TF ...

If you have enough flak to defeat the attack the smaller number of larger TFs are better, but otherwise larger number of smaller TFs are better. Also depends on possible opposition. If facing main enemy CV force then CV/ TF size of under about 12 is not recommended. Size 25 is ideal, but not always possible, especially for IJN.

All this is based on my experience anyway.




Halsey -> RE: CV TF - Ideal Mix of Ships (7/6/2007 3:19:28 AM)

I never ever place more CV/CVL's in a TF that places it over the coordination roll.

Hence, the worst I've ever had in a CV vs CV action is a draw.[;)]



bradfordkay -> RE: CV TF - Ideal Mix of Ships (7/6/2007 8:35:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Halsey

I never ever place more CV/CVL's in a TF that places it over the coordination roll.

Hence, the worst I've ever had in a CV vs CV action is a draw.[;)]


I have always faithfully followed statement number 1. Unfortunately, in my experience, statement number 2 has not always faithfully followed statement 1.



Halsey -> RE: CV TF - Ideal Mix of Ships (7/6/2007 11:20:46 PM)

You still have to play smart.
It is the prerequisite for number 2 happening.[:D]



bradfordkay -> resurrected thread - CV coordination question (2/26/2008 1:51:10 AM)

My PBEM game is now in early '43.

I was looking in the manual, but could not find the information on the CV TF coordination penalty.

Could somebody post the various coordination penalty limits and the dates at which they change?

Thanks in advance...



Gem35 -> RE: resurrected thread - CV coordination question (2/26/2008 2:10:53 AM)

Airstrikes from different bases/ships flying to the same target hex will approach the target together if the the range to the target hex is the same. This allows aircraft carriers to coordinate their attacks. However, before the attacks are made, there is a chance that some of the units will become seperated from each other and this may result in piecemeal attacks on the target. in addition, a unit may escort attacks originating at another base/ship if the escorting unit has a target that matches the target being attacked and the escorting fighter is closer to the targett than the aircraft being escorted. occasionally this can occur even if no priority target is set for the escorting unit,


Acording to the original manual on page 130 coordination of airstirkes is affected by how many carrier aircraft are based in the TF launching a strike. the chance of uncoordination is doubled under the following circumstances:

Allied TF in 1942 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 100+rnd(100).
Allied TF in 1943 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 150+rnd(150).
Allied TF in 1944 or later or a Japanese TF at any time and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 200+rnd(200).
Also, in 1942 Allied coordination is generally not as good as the japanese.



ctangus -> RE: resurrected thread - CV coordination question (2/26/2008 2:19:25 AM)

Search in the manual for the term "coordination". Section 17.2.2.11 I tried to copy/paste, but it didn't work. In short, the chance of not coordinating doubles if plane strength reaches the following limits:

- 1942: 100 planes (+ rnd 100) So best keep it to single CVs
- 1943: 150 planes (+ rnd 150) 2 CVs will only have a 20% chance of not coordinating. But better yet 1 CV & 2 CVLs which gives you about 150 planes.
- 1944+: 200 planes (+ rnd 200) 2 CVs + CVL = @ 210 planes so not much of a chance of not coordinating at that strength.

Edit: looks like Gem beat me too it...



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.75