newbie Coral Sea experience japanese side

[archita]

I noted that US dauntless kills amphibious TFs everywhere, its possible merge amphibious TF to Air Combat TF under a sort of air umbrella of Zero aircrafts ?

[jwolf]

You can provide CAP for your amph units via your carriers. They don't have to be in the same TF or even in the same hex, and probably shouldn't be. You can set some or all of the carrier Zeros squadrons to LRCAP and then set the range for what you need to cover the critical landing site.

[archita]

Its possibile set cap corridors to cover travel of amp Tf until landing destination ? In coral sea scenario the air combat and amp tfs are scattered, the allied AI first turn attack amp tfs with 20 more dauntless wave, the shogo air combat has not enough zeros against US air rush of first turn. It seems impossible to avoid heavy losses of amp tfs.

[cohimbra]

ORIGINAL: archita

Its possibile set cap corridors to cover travel of amp Tf until landing destination ? In coral sea scenario the air combat and amp tfs are scattered, the allied AI first turn attack amp tfs with 20 more dauntless wave, the shogo air combat has not enough zeros against US air rush of first turn. It seems impossible to avoid heavy losses of amp tfs.

You can utilize all your figther forces in range (IJArmy & IJNavy, land & naval based) to cover the AmphTF for his trip simply using LRCAP mission and then selecting the TF as mission target.

[archita]

Tnx you ! A other little question, an air combat tf can defend amphibious tf with escort mode task force + lrcap and follow route ? the DD in task force perform automatic Asw protection for escort tf and escorted tf ?

[alimentary]

ORIGINAL: archita
A other little question, an air combat tf can defend amphibious tf with escort mode task force + lrcap and follow route ? the DD in task force perform automatic Asw protection for escort tf and escorted tf ?

There is no such thing as an "escort mode" task force in the sense I think you mean. Designating a task force as "escort" has no in-game effect of making this TF good for escorting. Instead, it allows the TF to contain any class of ship. That is the primary purpose of the designation. Such TF's are intended for use in moving ships of dissimilar classes from one place to another. In the words of the manual:

" » Escort. These are general purpose “ship movement” TFs. They are used to evacuate damaged ships from the battle area, and to move ships between bases. They cannot load or unload, or perform any other function, and will flee all enemy forces. They may include any type of surface ship, including those too badly damaged to fight. Maximum TF size is 100 ships."

The penalty you pay for using an escort TF is that the TF runs away from anything (which makes it a rather poor "escort") and that it cannot do anything (can't launch air strikes, can't load or unload). I've never tested whether they can operate CAP or LRCAP. A TF of type escort that contains at least one carrier and contains no ships ineligible for forming an Air Combat TF will automatically convert to an Air Combat TF.

Actually... [and this is clearly an abuse of the game engine] I just now loaded up scenario 1, went to San Diego and created an Air Combat TF. I redesignated it as "escort" and (without leaving the TF page) transferred in an AVD and an AO. It still shows as an Air Combat TF even though it contains ineligible ships. This stupid pet trick does not allow amphibious transports containing loaded passengers to be added to an air combat TF, however.

[archita]

A question, fort level of Moresby is 0, quality of JP troops is superior, moral 80. The garrisons of Moresby must have low moral ( - ), low preparation and experience. The bonus is terrain only.

assault value is 124, defense value 71

the odd is "1" but the odd result can cause so heavy casualties ?

[Yaab]

In WITP:AE, you need to think about losses in terms of "destroyed" squads - these squads are lost for good. "Disabled" squads are a non-issue - they can repair later on and fight again.

In this battle, losses were light.

BTW, I would dig up the TOE of the 30th Australian Brigade in Tracker. Chance is, the brigade has some nasty field guns (25-pounders?) that hit you twice during your shock attack, while your 144th regiment uses some light 75mm guns, whose stats are equal to Chinese 81mm mortars.

[crsutton]

Yeah, devices matter but in this case terrain is probably the factor. You will need to soften the defenders with air attacks. This will disrupt them and lower their AV. If you have the ships to spare a surface bombardment right before an attack helps as well.

[archita]

how many moral and experience affects the combat result ? when a defending unit decide to surrender ?

a question, what means "x10+" ?

[Yaab]

See if you can kill squads with artillery bombardment. Both sides are spent right now.

[archita]

final rush with naval bombardment and air attack

victory to last turn of scenario!!

the result is DRAW because I lost the CV Shokaku and Zuikaku heavily damaged by stubborn dauntless waves, I noted that Shoko has been ignored for all game, all main waves were against Shokaku TF. Off course a Human allied player deploy more effort to annihilate the 7th amph TF that is main objective of scenario.

I will replaty the scenario like training again, its very nice scenario for balance and lenght

[wdolson]

ORIGINAL: archita
A other little question, an air combat tf can defend amphibious tf with escort mode task force + lrcap and follow route ? the DD in task force perform automatic Asw protection for escort tf and escorted tf ?

ORIGINAL: alimentary
There is no such thing as an "escort mode" task force in the sense I think you mean. Designating a task force as "escort" has no in-game effect of making this TF good for escorting. Instead, it allows the TF to contain any class of ship. That is the primary purpose of the designation. Such TF's are intended for use in moving ships of dissimilar classes from one place to another. In the words of the manual:

" » Escort. These are general purpose “ship movement” TFs. They are used to evacuate damaged ships from the battle area, and to move ships between bases. They cannot load or unload, or perform any other function, and will flee all enemy forces. They may include any type of surface ship, including those too badly damaged to fight. Maximum TF size is 100 ships."

The penalty you pay for using an escort TF is that the TF runs away from anything (which makes it a rather poor "escort") and that it cannot do anything (can't launch air strikes, can't load or unload). I've never tested whether they can operate CAP or LRCAP. A TF of type escort that contains at least one carrier and contains no ships ineligible for forming an Air Combat TF will automatically convert to an Air Combat TF.

Actually... [and this is clearly an abuse of the game engine] I just now loaded up scenario 1, went to San Diego and created an Air Combat TF. I redesignated it as "escort" and (without leaving the TF page) transferred in an AVD and an AO. It still shows as an Air Combat TF even though it contains ineligible ships. This stupid pet trick does not allow amphibious transports containing loaded passengers to be added to an air combat TF, however.

He may have been asking about Carrier Escort TFs, which operate much the same way as regular Carrier TFs, but with a couple of differences:

1) The only carrier you can put in these is a CVE

2) They can operate in coastal hexes without penalties

Bill

[rustysi]

a question, what means "x10+" ?

The 'x10' means there are 10 of that device in the unit. The '+' means the unit is not at full strength and devices are available in the replacement pool.

They can operate in coastal hexes without penalties

Bill, I've seen this bandied about in several threads here in the forum, yes/no ad nauseam. I've searched for a definitive answer and not found anything in the manual that indicated this, and as of the last discussion I had on this subject I kinda decided it was just 'forum lore'. I haven't had empirical results that allow me to say one way or the other either, although I did try. Now this doesn't make me right, just confused. Can anyone please put this to rest one way or the other?

[archita]

Can I ask if there are conditions to achieve the surrender of enemy units instead retreat ? the vehicles and guns of enemy LCUs can be captured and used ? If I occupy an harbour exe, the enemy ships in dock can be captured ? when an airfield is gained, there is chance to capture planes ?

[rustysi]

the vehicles and guns of enemy LCUs can be captured and used ? If I occupy an harbour exe, the enemy ships in dock can be captured ? when an airfield is gained, there is chance to capture planes ?

No, no, and no.

Can I ask if there are conditions to achieve the surrender of enemy units instead retreat ?

Keep in mind this is from the Japanese side, as that's all I've played thus far. Unless an enemy is surrounded he will generally retreat as long as there's a base in the area for him to fall back on, and my experience is its a very big area. If the unit is surrounded it will generally fight to the death, unless in a base and you can get what is needed to capture the base. If the unit is badly reduced it can be destroyed.

[archita]

ORIGINAL: rustysi

the vehicles and guns of enemy LCUs can be captured and used ? If I occupy an harbour exe, the enemy ships in dock can be captured ? when an airfield is gained, there is chance to capture planes ?

No, no, and no.

Can I ask if there are conditions to achieve the surrender of enemy units instead retreat ?

Keep in mind this is from the Japanese side, as that's all I've played thus far. Unless an enemy is surrounded he will generally retreat as long as there's a base in the area for him to fall back on, and my experience is its a very big area. If the unit is surrounded it will generally fight to the death, unless in a base and you can get what is needed to capture the base. If the unit is badly reduced it can be destroyed.

I suppose a limit of engine because axis used captured vehicles and guns ( especially germans ), planes and ships leave captured exe automatically ( to random basis ? ) or considered destroyed ?

the absence of surrender condition seems antihistorical, a good example is Singapore. I think that a low moral must be a key factor for surrender ( my opinion ).

[alimentary]

ORIGINAL: rustysi
Unless an enemy is surrounded he will generally retreat as long as there's a base in the area for him to fall back on, and my experience is its a very big area.

Yes. The unit can only retreat on a valid movement path. From a hex containing enemy units, the only valid movement paths are those leading to friendly bases without traversing any uncontested enemy-occupied hexes. In addition, hex-side ownership rules can prevent the use of some hex sides for this purpose. If an enemy unit was the last to traverse a hex-side into the combat hex then that hex-side becomes enemy-owned and is unavailable for movement or retreat by friendly forces.

Japanese units will often fight to the death. Allied units are far more prone to surrender and sometimes even do so when a valid retreat path is available.

[archita]

Its possible simulate something like the surrender of whole garrison force of Singapore? If enemy allied LCUs have dropped morale ( under 30-40 ) a surrender chance event can be a feature to avoid prolonged fight until death that can be unrealistic. Many wargames consider morale a key feature of victory and Japanese player can't waste time to wipe out garrison forces that decide rugged defence no matter if experience and morale are twice inferior. Off course surrender is no choice for jp LCUs.

[Alfred]

Instead of continuously, both in this thread and other threads, bringing in your own assumptions and asking for explanations of how to get them to work in this game, why don't you just try to read the manual and the considerable in game information which is provided.
 
This game is not going  to be altered to meet your own expectations.
 
Alfred