US CVEs (Full Version)

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



Message

SgtSwanson -> US CVEs (7/7/2005 1:48:11 AM)

Ok guys don't beat me up too much on this subject, but I've been having a hard time understanding how to effectively use these. I know that they were primarily used to shuttle aircraft around faster, but how many squadrons can you put on them? And can you actually use them for flight ops as well? And if you can put Army squadrons on them, then how many at one time.

And while I'm on the subject of Army squadrons,

How many to a squadron and how many to a group?

Reason I'm asking is that while I'm waiting for the new ones to be built at the factories, when are they done enough to be moved into theater?

Thanks for the help.

BTW If you want to add in info on the CVLs then please be my guest.

In case you were wondering, I'm a 502nd Inf. Fanboy as that was my home for my 8 1/2 years in the Army.

4/502nd Inf (Berlin BDE) 6/87 - 10/90
5/502nd Inf (Berlin BDE) 10/90 - 7/93
2/502nd Inf 101st Airborne Div (AASLT) 7/93 - 12/95



Terminus -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 2:18:06 AM)

Let's see...

The CVE's were used for a number of roles: airplane ferry (as you said), close air support (to free up fleet carriers), ASW (primarily in the Atlantic) and replenishment.

There are two main types of USN CVE's in the game: the ones that carry squadrons designated VR-whatever and the ones that don't.

The VR CVE's are meant to be put into replenishment TF's to support your Air Combat TF's; don't use them for anything else, or you'll get some very weird results. The non-VR CVE's shouldn't be expected to go toe-to-toe with Japanese fleet CV's, as they're too slow and carry too few aircraft. Use them in groups of 4-6 to support amphibious landings with CAP and Ground Attack missions.

And no, you can't put Army aircraft on them, have to use AK's for that.

As for number of aircraft in any squadron, look in the top left corner of the Sqaudron display screen; you should see a designation (squadron, wing, whatever) with a number in brackets after it. That's the "TO&E" for that squadron.

Hope this helps...




SgtSwanson -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 4:46:25 AM)

Sure does. Thanks a lot.[:)]



Halsey -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 5:18:03 AM)

CVE's are not affected by the rule concerning CV's flying missions from base hexes.
You can fly transfer missions with Army aircraft from CVE's. Load them at the embarkation base.[;)]



Terminus -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 5:38:35 AM)

Seriously?!?!?



witpqs -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 5:50:57 AM)

CVE's do not suffer penalties from being in coast hexes at all, IIRC. CVE's are specifically exempt. Makes them great for close support of invasions.



bradfordkay -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 8:42:18 AM)

I've never seen that claim before. I tried looking in the manual, and it just said that aircraft carriers operating in a base hax are subject to the penalty. I didn't see any exception listed in the rule, so if it (the exception) exists, it is located in an obscure location.



SgtSwanson -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 12:30:06 PM)

You got me lost with that one. Please explain further. An example would be best. [:)]



Terminus -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 4:14:59 PM)

The point is, that fleet carriers (CV and CVL) have a penalty to the number of air sorties they can launch when in a base hex, i.e. when in a TF sailing in a hex that also contains land, for example an island. I believe the penalty is 50%. The solution, of course, is to have your fleet carriers deployed one hex away.

CVE's do not suffer from this penalty, and thus can be employed in the same hex, fly CAP over the hex, protecting amphibious forces and flying close air support missions.



rtrapasso -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 4:18:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

The point is, that fleet carriers (CV and CVL) have a penalty to the number of air sorties they can launch when in a base hex, i.e. when in a TF sailing in a hex that also contains land, for example an island. I believe the penalty is 50%. The solution, of course, is to have your fleet carriers deployed one hex away.

CVE's do not suffer from this penalty, and thus can be employed in the same hex, fly CAP over the hex, protecting amphibious forces and flying close air support missions.


Not sure about this. At least one one on one occasion (Mr. Frag, iirc) has stated that a carrier is a carrier, the rule applies to all of them. No one has been able to definitively clarify the rule, and debate continues (as in this thread, for instance.)



Terminus -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 4:21:02 PM)

Well, I probably should have written "CVE's do not SEEM to suffer this penalty".[;)] Hey Robert; haven't seen you in a while!



Sardaukar -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 4:24:07 PM)

What I've read on forum and seen in game, all "Air Combat TFs" suffer 50 % penalty being in base hex. However, "CVE Escort TFs" don't. That's exactly why there is a TF mission called "CVE Escort". They are great in doing what they did historically, supporting landings and escorting convoys.



Terminus -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 4:26:01 PM)

Ahh, that would seem to be logical, linking the penalty to the task force type, rather than the ship type.



rtrapasso -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 4:29:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Well, I probably should have written "CVE's do not SEEM to suffer this penalty".[;)] Hey Robert; haven't seen you in a while!


Yeah - mostly cause i was on vacation for a while ([:D]) with limited internet access ([:(]). Good to be back (on the forums, anyway!)


In reply to Sardaukar - i've never tried the CVE Escort mission - i'll have to check into this.



Sardaukar -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 4:32:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

In reply to Sardaukar - i've never tried the CVE Escort mission - i'll have to check into this.


I use it almost exclusively for air cover and air support of amphibious TFs. I don't want to risk fleet carriers. If I recall right one can put both CVLs and CVEs to CVE Escort TF.



sven6345789 -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 5:41:09 PM)

Is there a chance to resupply CVs or CVLs which have lost planes by adding CVEs to a replenishment TF to bring the squadrons back to full strength? This worked in good old pacwar, but i am not sure about this game.



Sardaukar -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 5:51:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

Is there a chance to resupply CVs or CVLs which have lost planes by adding CVEs to a replenishment TF to bring the squadrons back to full strength? This worked in good old pacwar, but i am not sure about this game.


Yes. If Replenishment TF has CVE with replacement air group (designated as VR). That's the about only use those CVEs with VR air groups.



sven6345789 -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 8:52:42 PM)

what exactly are the "weird results" you get when using VR CVE's for something else then replenishment?



witpqs -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 9:43:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

what exactly are the "weird results" you get when using VR CVE's for something else then replenishment?


Well, first of all they do not launch missions as far as I know. Second, if you move a VRx air group off a CVE, it grows too big to be transferred back, and you've just hosed your replacement air group for the duration.

Note that the VRx air groups will grow very large on board the CVE. Just leave them alone - use them for replenishment as intended and they will take care of themselves.

I did have a wierd occurance even 'following the rules'. I had one CVE (out of about 5) in a replenishment TF. The airgroup had still not grown large when the TF set out across the Pacific. So, replacement fragments of a torpedo group and a fighter group appeared at a land base. when I got the TF near the land base I transferred them on board the appropriate CVE (both were for the same one). Well, next turn the fragments were back on land. I tried again, same deal. Next I was able to transfer the fighter fragment to the CVE, but the torpedo group didn't list that CVE as an option. So I finally transferred the torpedo fragment to a different replenishment CVE in the same TF. After that, the fighter fragment on the CVE combined with its parent, and the torpedo fragment on board the other CVE transferred and combined with its parent. The problem hasn't reappeared. Wierd.



sven6345789 -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 9:52:19 PM)

missed that in the manual (It IS mentioned in the manual, isn't it?).



Terminus -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 9:59:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

missed that in the manual (It IS mentioned in the manual, isn't it?).


You're kidding, right?[;)]



sven6345789 -> RE: US CVEs (7/7/2005 10:13:00 PM)

oh, well...



Halsey -> RE: US CVEs (7/8/2005 1:47:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Halsey
You can fly transfer missions with Army aircraft from CVE's.
Load them at the embarkation base.[;)]


This is very handy to get those short legged P-39's forward.[;)]

They can then fly transfer range, 24 planes at a time.
This is what I use the Long Island for.[;)]



Terminus -> RE: US CVEs (7/8/2005 2:26:07 AM)

Well, you live and learn...



Gem35 -> RE: US CVEs (7/8/2005 2:46:11 AM)

Same here, Halsey. I used the Long Island to transfer my tomahawks from Tarawa to Guadacanal and Shortlands. I was in desperate need of fighters to help out when KB showed up in New Guniea and the Long Island was the perfect ship for the job so I could keep those fighter groups operational and not have to crate em up aboard the slow AK's.



Arstavidios -> RE: US CVEs (7/8/2005 3:20:35 AM)

It works wth all CVs.
It's very handy to move short legged fighter groups around.
CVs move faster than AKs and your aircraft don't have to uncrate. Moreover they can take off from the carrier and fly a rebase mission from there so that you can maintain your carriers at a safe distance from contested bases.



The Dude -> RE: US CVEs (7/8/2005 6:34:38 AM)

i just tried this.

KB has Lunga surrounded and i sent the LI in with s couple of Army squadrons. It was worked perfectly.



Halsey -> RE: US CVEs (7/8/2005 11:23:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: The Dude

i just tried this.

KB has Lunga surrounded and i sent the LI in with s couple of Army squadrons. It was worked perfectly.


[;)]



Terminus -> RE: US CVEs (7/8/2005 11:37:19 PM)

I did it with an Australian Kittyhawk squadron. Neat trick. Reminded me of the US fleet carriers ferrying Spitfires to Malta.



Halsey -> RE: US CVEs (7/8/2005 11:51:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I did it with an Australian Kittyhawk squadron. Neat trick. Reminded me of the US fleet carriers ferrying Spitfires to Malta.


New Allied secret weapon! The CVE Long Island.
Just don't get her too close to the real action.[:D]



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.90625