Originally posted by pasternakski
"I think the main problem is REALLY STUPID target selection, like the "3 Hudsons sent to attack MSW vessels in Rabaul harbor only to be shot down by CAP - and my commander at PM sends three more Hudsons the next day, and the next, and so on - although there are easier, more important and more rewarding targets nearby en masse".
You have the tools to stop this from happening, and there's no reason it shouldn't have happened in the first place. Obviously, there's a squadron of Hudsons out there within range of Rabaul. Obviously, there are no long-range fighters available for escort. Obviously, the squadron is set for naval attack. Obviously, this Hudson squadron is launching only three aircraft for a reason, possibly lack of supply, lack of air support, lack of an air HQ nearby, lack of morale, lack of rest, or some other lack. So three Hudsons were lost on the first day. Before the second day dawned, it was time to make a change. I don't have all the facts here, but it looks to me like this poor bunch of suckers needed to be taken off of naval attack before more of 'em got their butts shot off. I find that Hudsons are much better used as search or ASW aircraft than as naval strike planes, anyway. What gets 'em into trouble here, apparently, is their range. So put 'em to work doing something they won't get murdered at.
They wouldn't have get murdered if my AI-commander didn't insist on sending them unescorted to CAP-covered Rabaul - instead of attacking the Jap APs off Buna, for example.
This happens to me all the time in the early days of the #16 and #17 scenarios when the AI (or human opponent) tries to grab Buna and Gili-Gili. The Hudson squadron in question starts at PM, supplies and air support there are at least ample, long-range escorts and air HQs are not yet available, morale and rest is not an issue because they are set to naval attack with no secondary mission and thus only fly those suicide mission to Rabaul, and even with the losses over Rabaul morale remains high and fatigue low (since only a fraction of the squadron actually flies).
The Hudson is a mediocre bomber (a militarized civilian plane) and shouldn't be used for attack missions if possible, especially not outside escort range against defended targets - agreed. But in my case
- they are close to where they are needed (basing them in Northern Australia would keep them out of Rabaul, but bomb load, morale and fatigue would suffer when attacking targets in PNG)
- they are the bomber unit with the highest experience available (and experience matters in obtaining hits, the B-25 & 26 in Australia have low experience and btw would suffer fatigue upon transfer to PM, making them even less effective)
- and despite the limits of the Hudson these planes should be able to attack those APs (which are themselves no big threat to the planes flak-wise, but the troops they carry make them high- value targets).
Instead, my AI-commander on the spot decides to ignore the easy and important targets nearby and sends those Hudsons to their demise over Rabaul for some low-value targets (unescorted raids into Rabaul would be acceptable for me if they try to attack an important target like a CV - no risk, no fun - but daily strikes for some MSWs are unacceptable).
I would expect that the AI-commander knows (or at least learns from experience) about the capabilites and limitations of the units under his command and use them accordingly. But I have to act in his place and have take the Hudsons out of the fight to avoid pointless losses far away - when they are needed most nearby (I don't expect that those Hudsons will save Buna and GG, but if you try to hold those places, you need every help you can get).
So, in the end I cannot use an air asset in a crucial situation for a mission of which it is well capable - because of stupid AI target selection.
I don't even ask for player taget selection, I just ask for more intelligent AI target selection.
UV is a great game and I enjoy every minute playing it - but sometimes I wish I could court-martial my AI-subordinates...
LST
Wery annoying... Tools for effective way of playing have been provided but there is no way to stear those tools ´way you like... 
. Even the most ignorant of Naval commanders wouldnt fail to provide adequate CAP knowing full well that Jap CV's were around. If anyone cares, fatigue for 2 squadrons was in the 20's and the other 2 was in the teens. I agree that some sort of fix should be considered. Not so much total micro-management, but maybe more intelligent AI and some control over target priority.
