Carrier Air Attack

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Carrier Air Attack

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> Carrier Air Attack

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Carrier Air Attack - 2/24/2017 9:22:23 PM

AnimalAl

Posts: 55
Joined: 2/18/2004
From: Washington DC
Status: offline

Okay. Having trouble figuring out how to attack using carriers against other naval targets. Assuming this is switch mode to naval/tactical but still doesn't want to attack ships. Please assist

_____________________________

"Military strategy is the diplomacy of violence" (Thomas Schnelling).

Post #: 1

RE: Carrier Air Attack - 2/24/2017 9:39:55 PM

AnimalAl

Posts: 55
Joined: 2/18/2004
From: Washington DC
Status: offline

Just realized, maybe it was raining in the North Sea :(

_____________________________

"Military strategy is the diplomacy of violence" (Thomas Schnelling).

(in reply to AnimalAl)

Post #: 2

RE: Carrier Air Attack - 2/25/2017 7:51:58 AM

The Land

Posts: 857
Joined: 2/19/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AnimalAl

Just realized, maybe it was raining in the North Sea :(

Very probably :) Think it needs to be not raining in either the origin or target hexes.

(in reply to AnimalAl)

Post #: 3

RE: Carrier Air Attack - 2/25/2017 2:38:54 PM

Toby42

Posts: 1626
Joined: 8/10/2003
From: Central Florida
Status: offline

for me carriers are useless. I always sustain more damage than they cause. Even Subs are monsters with AA fire. I don't how many times I've attacked a sub and didn't do any damage and I'v taken one or two hits?

_____________________________

Tony

(in reply to The Land)

Post #: 4

RE: Carrier Air Attack - 2/25/2017 4:31:28 PM

James Taylor

Posts: 638
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Corpus Christi, Texas
Status: offline

There does seem to be some inconsistencies in the use of carriers, I'll admit. At first, I could never get one to do damage against ground combat units, but then, all of a sudden I took out a German corps unit with two sequential strikes from the same carrier with no losses.

I try to use them to strategically attack ports with largely no results when this is something I would think they would excel at, and that, along with no damage to the the occupying naval vessels also, "Remember Pearl Harbor"?

Another one of my favorite uses prior to SC3 was to swoop in and destroy enemy fighter units that had been decimated and spotted due to intercepts using my high tech level "Advanced Aircraft" CAGs.
That also seems to no avail with the current model.

One thing they do seem to be decently efficient at is sub strikes, but indeed Treale is correct the operational losses seem inordinantly high for such a mission.

I don't know what the answer is, obviously they're good at taking out surface forces, again with the high loss rate, you'll have to take them back to port and repair the CAG losing all the experience you just gained.

Whatever happened to those experienced CAGs that use to rain havoc upon enemy naval units and shore facilities?

Maybe I just THOUGHT I read about these marauding CAGs in my WW2 history books?

< Message edited by James Taylor -- 2/25/2017 4:37:10 PM >

_____________________________

SeaMonkey

(in reply to Toby42)

Post #: 5

RE: Carrier Air Attack - 2/25/2017 9:25:29 PM

Ironclad

Posts: 1924
Joined: 11/22/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: James Taylor

Whatever happened to those experienced CAGs that use to rain havoc upon enemy naval units and shore facilities?

Maybe I just THOUGHT I read about these marauding CAGs in my WW2 history books?

Weren't those maurading carriers all in the Pacific, where there were far more threats and targets necessitating powerful carrier involvement and usually far better equipped ones? Apart from Taranto and the occasional single target attacks such as against Bismarck and Tirpitz, did fleet carriers really have much aggressive impact in the Atlantic/Mediterranean. Obviously their air protection role remained important for sea going operations but growing allied land air supremacy impacted there too.

Of course there was assisting amphibious landings particularly where land air was unavailable or more limited which I guess mainly applied to Med operations.

< Message edited by Ironclad -- 2/25/2017 9:33:29 PM >

(in reply to James Taylor)

Post #: 6

RE: Carrier Air Attack - 2/25/2017 11:14:20 PM

James Taylor

Posts: 638
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Corpus Christi, Texas
Status: offline

Correct you are Ironclad, but the obvious proximity of land based aircraft pretty much negated the need for those aggressive CV taskforce missions and the subsequent risk of their loss. While there were a few examples in the ETO of which you've referred to, doesn't mean the ability shouldn't be implemented in the game.

_____________________________

SeaMonkey

(in reply to Ironclad)

Post #: 7

RE: Carrier Air Attack - 2/26/2017 12:30:47 AM

gravyface_

Posts: 148
Joined: 4/21/2007
Status: offline

Carriers seem fine to me; I only really use them as Escort backup in the channel or attacking warships and transports mid-atlantic.

If they were too powerful, we'd be all complaining about that too.

(in reply to James Taylor)

Post #: 8

RE: Carrier Air Attack - 2/26/2017 12:50:34 AM

James Taylor

Posts: 638
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Corpus Christi, Texas
Status: offline

Yeah, I know, but I'm not advocating them to be TAC. Just want to see them more effective in their traditional role.

Port attacks(strategic-supply reducing) and the naval units occupying is fine. There is the anti-air counter.

Occasional tactical air support in the higher advanced air tech levels seems appropriate but by far my biggest beef is with their loss ratio.

If they're not going to be as effective as the larger SC air units, fair enough, but they shouldn't take as many casualties either, given an equality of tech levels with anti-air or interceptors.

_____________________________

SeaMonkey

(in reply to gravyface_)

Post #: 9