Carrier Air Group Restructing Problems

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, It IS in the manual.  And it has been pointed out (by me) in many threads that Air units form replacements based on proximity to assigned HQ.  (Ron experianced great problems by leaving groups outside HQ range set to receive replacements and fragments appearing AT THE HQ dispite the fact the HQ was thousands of miles from the parent.

I did a search of the game manual and couldn't find the reference to US carrier airgroups changing. Can you remember what rule number it is?

[Stvitus2002]

Hi, WO it is only because you know a group will upgrade on a certain date that you tie them to rear areas. Knowing this what is the problem with meeting all the other requirments for upgrade?

Mr. Mogami, My issue is that late war essex class CV's show up with too many AC to operate,
128 AC on a 90 AC capacity ship. In Shangi-La's case, it has been sitting in Frisco for 6 days,
waiting for 'adjustment'. Frisco has plenty of supply, and WEST coast HQ IS in San Fran. .
Aircraft totals have fluctuated from 128 to 114, then back up to 121(current). This is still too many
to allow Air OPS. How long does it have to stay there to adjust to a usable AC level?
I grew impatient with other CV's & just offloaded the DB squadrons to get down to a usable level(96 AC).
If it matters this game was started in August '04 under version 1.0, patched up to 1.8. Or am i doing something wrong?



Joe D.

[tabpub]

The only reference is in the Appendix p. 212 or so.

[Don Bowen]

ORIGINAL: Warrant officer 0/0

My issue is that late war essex class CV's show up with too many AC to operate,
128 AC on a 90 AC capacity ship. In Shangi-La's case, it has been sitting in Frisco for 6 days,
waiting for 'adjustment'. Frisco has plenty of supply, and WEST coast HQ IS in San Fran. .
Aircraft totals have fluctuated from 128 to 114, then back up to 121(current). This is still too many
to allow Air OPS. How long does it have to stay there to adjust to a usable AC level?
I grew impatient with other CV's & just offloaded the DB squadrons to get down to a usable level(96 AC).
If it matters this game was started in August '04 under version 1.0, patched up to 1.8. Or am i doing something wrong?

Joe D.

What you are describing here doesn't sound like adjustment. The reorganization only changes the maximum aircraft of the squadrons (27 fighters max, then 36 max, etc). Normal replacement then fills the squadrons out to that maximum.

I do not have any scenario data for version 1.0, but under the current version Shangri-La should arrive with 89 aircraft - right at full capacity. I do not know what might have happened.

Perhaps you should send me a save game. I'll PM my email address.

[Stvitus2002]

And the reorganizations represent changes in the composition of the airgroups. They were not at unusable levels before reorganization. Having 27 fighters instead of 36 does not render the carrier useless. Indeed, it is the circumstance in which it had been operating for some time.

To what are you objecting??

Mr. Bowen, only that, as delivered, with 128 AC total, is too many aircraft for the ship, overstuffed,
No strike missions, not even CAP. I don't have the manual in front of me but i thought the rule
was any carrier that has 10% more aircraft aboard than it's rated capacity(90)will not fly Air OPS.
Using this logic, the maximum operaple AC total would be 99.




Joe D.

[Stvitus2002]

I do not have any scenario data for version 1.0, but under the current version Shangri-La should arrive with 89 aircraft - right at full capacity. I do not know what might have happened.

Perhaps you should send me a save game. I'll PM my email address.

Thanks, i'll send it tommorow. [:)]







Joe D.

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: tabpub

The only reference is in the Appendix p. 212 or so.

Which lists what the carrier airgroups are by date. Nothing at all about the requirements for them to change or even a mention OF any requirements to change.

[mogami]

Hi, I think it is 15 percent so an essex can handle at least 103 ac and still fly ops.
I think we have 2 issues being discussed. The change in strength of groups assigned to CV and how groups get replacements.  The change in strength is hard coded. The CV only needs to be in port with supply while replacements if left on auto require the CV to be in range of the major HQ or fragments will appear.
The fragments are supposed to prevent the upgrade.

[Nomad]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, I think it is 15 percent so an essex can handle at least 103 ac and still fly ops.
I think we have 2 issues being discussed. The change in strength of groups assigned to CV and how groups get replacements.  The change in strength is hard coded. The CV only needs to be in port with supply while replacements if left on auto require the CV to be in range of the major HQ or fragments will appear.
The fragments are supposed to prevent the upgrade.

This is a problem Mogami. you are providing incorrect information and you have that Mod tag. Please read what Don
posted in the first post of this thread concerning air unit restructuring. You are the one who brought up replacements, no one else. [:(]

[Stvitus2002]

Perhaps you should send me a save game. I'll PM my email address.

Savegame sent[8D]




Also ,Mr Mogami, Can't you find a better photo of the IJN MOGAMI,
One where she is armed properly, not with those 6 inch Pop-guns?
Because everyone knows, a REAL cruiser has 8 inch guns[:'(][:'(]
[:'(]
[:'(][:'(][:'(][:'(][:'(][:D]






Joe D.

[DuckofTindalos]

Don't you know you can't teach an old Mog new tricks?[:'(]

[Nomad]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Don't you know you can't teach an old Mog new tricks?[:'(]

Just how old can "old Mog" be? They let him reenlist. [:(][:)][8|][X(][>:][:'(][:'(][:D]

[DuckofTindalos]

Just shows how desparate the US Army is...[:D]

[Stvitus2002]

Mr. Bowen, thanks for getting rid of my over-capacity CV problem.
It seems like VBF squadrons are for 45' only. It's great to see
Matrix give support to a product that has more than it's share of quirks.[:)]






Joe D.

[Don Bowen]

Right - the VBF squadrons are supposed to start appearing on U.S. Carriers in 1945. At the same time, the sizes of the other squadrons are adjusted to make room on the carriers. I seem to recall an old database bug that allowed some of the VBFs to arrive too early (with newly commissioned carriers in 1944). That was the circumstance in your game.

As soon as the calendar turns over to January, 1945 - park your CVs in rear-area ports with a command HQ and their air groups will reorganize. The VF squadron will drop to 36 and the VB and VT to 15. At the same time the VBF will appear with a maximum of 36 aircraft. This will stretch the Essex class to the limit - 102 aircraft on a capacity 90 ship. This is just under 115% of capacity, they are stuffed to the maximum. This represents the late war condition of most CVs - carrying an absolute maximum of aircraft with a large percentage of them being fighters.

Let us know how things go in 1945.

[timtom]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Just shows how desparate the US Army is...[:D]

Well lets just hope Don & Joe ain't next...

Would anyone miss Nik though? [;)]

[DuckofTindalos]

Nope, he's too big a target.

[dtravel]

Is rabbit kosher?

[DuckofTindalos]

Depends how it's prepared... Pork is the only thing that isn't, no matter what (I think, and don't want to offend any Jewish denizens by my ignorance)...

[dtravel]

I was thinking more Muslim/Islamic, but I know they share many of the same dietary restrictions.  Trying to determine if Nik would be a good distraction against terrorists/insurgents so friendly forces could avoid getting shot at.  [:D]