Task force screen addition for WITP?

[pry]

I am not sure if this has been discussed or not before. I could find no reference to this after searching this forum. One thing I sure would like to see is the Task Force AA Rating included on the Task Force screen, Something like the attached image. It sure would make life better to be able to just glance at the main window to see if your task force has enough AA to enter contested areas instead of of having to scroll through each ship and add it up manually. This feature existed in PacWar so I am sure it could be included with out much additional work. I woulld also like to see this retro-fitted into UV.

Paul

[Fred98]

Yes I agree this would be useful

Having said that, I can never tell what is a good flak rating. I only know that some ships have a better rating than others.

Perhaps an expert player could enlighten us.

[Snigbert]

The Lexington and Saratoga have something like 2180 for AAA which I think is the best carriers in the game. Essex might be higher...but the Jap CVs are around 1100 or so.

Yorktown classes are 1480 or something like that. Most refitted US Cruisers are around 1410. US BBs are 1900 or so. CLAAs are higher than CAs but not as high as BBs, I think. US DDs are 400 or 320 with refit.

Dont play the Japs much so I cant say how their flak is...

I would also love to see the TF flak rating on the TF screen. Not sure what a good TF flak rating is, I just try to put as many ships with high flaks in a carrier tf. CLAAs and BBs are ideal.

[caine]

Yes, I agree on having a flak total rating as information.I think that having a flak, an ASW (which I think is alredy put) and a gunnery rating should be helpful.

[Fred98]

In the "List All Screens" I suggested adding a few columns to make info easier to find.

In the List All Ships screen, a column with AA rating would be useful.

[Sonny]

A flak rating would be quite useful - unless you are playing the Japanese and see what a pitiful total flak you have. Same for ASW.

Seriously though, the more infomation you have the better, as long as you don't have access to data which commanders of that period do not have. Flak rating is right on the border between those situations. I can understand that a commander could assess the number and types of AA guns and get a relative feel for the effectiveness - exact numbers like we have in UV might be a little much - maybe just too fine a detail.

Easy access to what information we do have is a key factor. The example of flak is a good one. The original poster (pry) has a good idea - as long as we have the data make it easily accessible. Not that I am pushing for a spreadsheet game

[Mr.Frag]

Does it actually mean anything though. In the end it still comes down to 1 plane atacking 1 ship, with guns of 1-3 ships being able to draw a proper angle to fire.

A TF in line ahead formation getting attacked from the rear is certainly not going to do much AA gun'wise ... Yes, the ships would turn to protect themselves, but the planes are faster then the ships so they will generally always have the position advantage in this.

I always look at the ship, if it's 1.1"/.5's, send it back until it's 40mm/20mm, the numbers don't mean much if it is a useless weapon.

[pry]

It does come down to 1 ship against 1 plane but having said that I am not going to send a ship armed with spitballs into an area that has heavy air cover unless it has a fighting chance to defend itself. What sparked this idea was playing UV Scen 17, I have just started playing from the Japanese side after playing Allied for the last 5 months or so and I am not aware of the Japanese equipment and abilities. I had just gotten my 2nd group of carriers Akagi Et-all along with escorts. I was not aware that the escorts arrived with no AA assets to speak of. CL's with AA of 27 DD's with AA of 70. I wrongfully "ASSUMED" they were comparatable to my AA assets already in theature so I formed them up and sent them off to do battle and they promptly "Died" in short order and nearly taking the carriers with them. Had I been aware of their "Awful" AA from the Task force screen I would not have sent them into battle. I had a surface group with 6 DD's with 270 AA sitting in Shortland and would have swapped the DD's to Beef Up the carrier screen before commiting them to battle. It is a real chore to physically have to look at each arriving ship to determine it's AA rating and then decide future uses and plans after this time consuming process.

Paul

[Drongo]

I could live without the TF rating summary for AA and ASW. As Mr. Frag mentioned, it really doesn't mean a lot since the TF doesn't use it's weapons en masse. A high TF AA rating could just mean that you have a few really good AA ships in the TF and a lot of dud ones.

I would prefer this change -

Add a AA rating column and ASW rating column (for individual ships) to the TF Ship List screen, the List All Active Ships screen and the Ships In Port screen.

Having those individual ratings showing on the TF Ship Screen will allow you to spot any inappropriate ships for the TF mission at a glance.

Having the ratings added to the List All Active Ships screen would give you a theatre view of which ships are good at what and where they are.

Having the ratings added to the Ships in Port screen would help in a lot of ways, especially for a quick check of the latest arrivals at Truk or Noumea.

Posted by pry

I wrongfully "ASSUMED" they were comparatable to my AA assets already in theature so I formed them up and sent them off to do battle and they promptly "Died" in short order and nearly taking the carriers with them. Had I been aware of their "Awful" AA from the Task force screen I would not have sent them into battle. I had a surface group with 6 DD's with 270 AA sitting in Shortland and would have swapped the DD's to Beef Up the carrier screen before commiting them to battle. It is a real chore to physically have to look at each arriving ship to determine it's AA rating and then decide future uses and plans after this time consuming process.

Are you aware that when you are in the Ship Selection Screen (creating a new TF), you can tell the main batteries, no of torps, AA and ASW ratings of a ship by right clicking on its entry in the list? This will then produce a summary line of the ships capabilities without the need to leave the Ship Selection Screen.

This would have shown you at a glance that the ship you were about to select for inclusion in the TF had a very low AA rating.

I use it all the time to select the best available ship for the job without having to go into the individual ships detail screen. I just right click through the list of ships and left click to select as I come across the ones I want.

Or is this what you were describing as tedious?

Posted by Mr. Frag

A TF in line ahead formation getting attacked from the rear is certainly not going to do much AA gun'wise ... Yes, the ships would turn to protect themselves, but the planes are faster then the ships so they will generally always have the position advantage in this.

AFAIK, this isn't modelled in UV. All AA and DP guns on a selected ship will fire at an aircraft (except for the IJN DDs with the 5").

I always look at the ship, if it's 1.1"/.5's, send it back until it's 40mm/20mm, the numbers don't mean much if it is a useless weapon.

That's probably the best rule of thumb to use for the USN.

[pry]

Posted by Drongo

Are you aware that when you are in the Ship Selection Screen (creating a new TF), you can tell the main batteries, no of torps, AA and ASW ratings of a ship by right clicking on its entry in the list? This will then produce a summary line of the ships capabilities without the need to leave the Ship Selection Screen.

Looks at feet takes a deep breath and sighs...
(This is something hard for a Texan to admit)
No I did not know it did that !

Thanks Drongo that helps allot....

I still think it is a good idea for informational purposes but now not for the reason I 1st thought of it.

Paul

[Drongo]

Posted by Pry

(This is something hard for a Texan to admit)