rkr1958
Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Courtenay Two comments on minor tactical details: In the Hawaiian Islands the US had a choice of an air or a surface action. With an air action, the US was ensured of no loss, while inflicting an A. With a surface action, the US would inflict a D on Mogami at the cost of 2As. (As near as I can tell, neither side had any surprise points in this battle.) I would have picked the surface action. Even trades of damage favor the Americans. Here, they have a chance to inflict damage to the Japanese while suffering no loss themselves. The aborts are inconsequential. The US should grab all such opportunities that they can. Another point is that the composition of the US task force is not optimal. It seems to be designed to fight air (or sub) battles, as it has a lot of AA strength. The third cruiser, however, adds nothing to the US surface combat ability (10 points and 13 points are the same column), while making the US more vulnerable to Japanese fire. Three ships are usually the wrong number to have in a sea box. MWiF rewards having two, four, or seven ships in a naval battle. Thanks! I've got to remember 2, 4, 7 ... Also, to pick surface instead of always, or mostly, picking air. I just love carrier air battles in the Pacific ...
_____________________________
Ronnie
|