General Rule questions

[El_Rojo]

I have two questions about the general rules of the game.

My first question is about CAP. And the manual is unclear about this. How do you maximize the CAP flown by your Land Based Aircraft forces. Do they only fly CAP on the basis they are stationed. Are there certain orders you can give them which increase the amount of CAP they fly, and certain orders you should not give them. (like training).

My second question was based on a war I saw written out, where it seems a surface TF attack a air combatr TF. In the rule book it is written that surface TF do not react to air combat TF. Is that still true? Or was the possible case that an Air Combat TF had the ackwardness to sail straight over a stationary surface TF? Are there any tricks or tips I am not aware of how to get surface ships to engage a Air Combat TF?

[AdmNelson]

1.)The answer to the first question is cap will be flown over its own base and up to 1/2 the range of the fighter over another base or TF. That is why at times bases next to or near will have fighters damaged or destoried. Cap will be flown in Day Combat or NI mode but not Sa(Kamakize) mode. Though fighters in SA mode on airstrikes will serve as escourt for the airstrike.But, cap can depend on supplies and fuel to the amount of cap that is flown. You need to those bases stocked with fuel. I don't know if leadership effects this---- I do know leadership effects airstrike themselves.

2.) The second question surface TFs will not react to aircombat TFs as far as I know. Surface TFs seam only to react within friendly air zones or no air zones. Remember aircombat TFs have their own airzones. Surface TFs will at times engage enemy carrier TFs, but only if they are both set to the target the same base at zero stand off. Why would you set the carriers to zero stand off? To lend air support (CAP) for other TFs. That is why you want to reduce enemy air bases, it keeps from having to risk the carriers in close.

[El_Rojo]

Thanks

1) Darn they should have put that in the manual. Very useful knowledge. When will they learn to put ALL game rule information in a manual or aditional doc file.

2) This gives ground to the hypotheses that surface ships engages air combat TF if they enter the same hex, which virtually never happens unless they are heading to the same destination with standoff range zero If that is true perfect knowledge of the shipping lines and a bit of crafty orders can give you the ability to try and set up some nasty suprises for the enemy. (I didn't like WitP at all for there decision to make the orders simpeler to give, which in the end resulted in a whole lot more complexity than if you can just clearly type in your own orders. Not only for this situation, but the game is a bit a wasp nest to learn because of that)

The manual says that a surface TF simple will not react to an aircombat TF. Maybe the airzone control they leave in there wake will make a search very difficult. Surface TF leave a wake after which no other Surface TF can attack. But technically (for what the manual says) a air combat TF should not protect a landing force against surface combat. You need a surface TF for that.

1+2) This must then only be true for LBA cap. Because else you could give your carriers a standoff range of 1 or more, since you fighters would fly CAP farther . The idea for using your carriers as CAP for other taskforces, has occured to me before. Technically it should also work for sharing the CAP of multiply carriere groups, without having the penalty for only half strikes. (instead two half strikes instead of one full). However again different shipping lanes, different speeds and all that makes it very difficult to manage. The individual who made that unnecassery decision should get sacked . There is a difference between strategic compared to tactical control, and just ackward control of your units even on strategic level :/.

[AdmNelson]

To answer the question of cap from carriers---- they will fly if your have a stand off of one. Two things to remember is that one most if not all carrier fighter ranges are 2 or 3 ( except the A6M2which is 6),then 1/2 that for range on cap. Which means only a stand off of one will work for most fighters. Another thing which is not in the rules that for every hex out from the base or carrier the cap decreases in %. I have no idea how the formula works in this regard.

At times sending different carrier TFs one will get intercept by land based bombers or a reacting enemy carrier TF. You to be careful on much you want to set your reaction setting. You have carriers reacting to a point where you don't want them.

[Capt. Harlock]

LST has just achieved a spectacular intercept of an Allied CV TF with a surface combat force. Check out the "Need More Beer" thread. Possibly version 3.2 now allows Surface Combat TF's to react to Carrier TF's?

[LargeSlowTarget]

No reaction move - Strawb sent his CVs to protect Tarawa and I sent a surface TF on a bombardment run, so it was a meeting engagement. Apparently neither of us expected the other side to be there.

[El_Rojo]

And as expected the results where marvelous. I can only say to bad they hardcoded the impossibility of air combat TF in the game. Though the sudden believe after pearl harbor the CV's where god, and I have heard the explanations why it is difficult. The greatest challenge for alternative history is to discover if you can find a way to take down the CV's with your surface forces. Anyways, still concratulations that it worked LST. Maybe it was a lucky accident, but had you known I am not sure if you would not have done it, the price of failure being worth the risk.

But does this mean if you strongly suspect the enemy is sending a Air Combat TF towards a friendly base to defend (with standoff range 0)....or if he will be covering his assault landing, it might be worth it to try to send something true to see if you can hit them?

Forgive me if I make a standoff error......I still spend some time, having serious fits because I can't get my TF to do what I want them to do. The latest was a bombaring force who went bombarding the airfield, instead of the supplies. Though I will probably use the editor to find out if that is the only thing that can be bombarded or that it was just closeminded programing. The big fit before that was battleships not being able to bombared the shipyard .

ps. I am writing this partially down, in the hope that somebody says.....you stupid, you gave the wrong orders .

[crusher]

well i believe that when you bombard a base there is a chance to hit supplies planes or troops or any combo of the three. it is luck to what you hit.

[El_Rojo]

Aaaargh, that makes certain missions not worth taking comparing the cost, with the effectiveness. Effectiveness seriously reduced because you can't give them proper orders

You said, supplies, planes, troops. Does that mean ships in port is definitly out of the question?

Trick question to check the programming. Is there a chance you bombared the airfield if there are no airplanes? (If that is not the case, and having airplanes reduces the chance that for example supplies get hit, than it is just lousy programming and not a game choice).

[Capt. Harlock]

As far as I know, the only way to attack ships in harbor is with aircraft. Bombardment from surface TF's never touch them. The good news is that it seems to be possible to attack ships in a harbor with LBA set to Naval Interdiction, even if the originating airfield has not been specifically instructed to attack the harbor.

A further possibililty is that the four types of tac-bombers that use torpedoes, and therefore attack ships without needing Naval Interdiction orders, will also attack ships in a harbor within range. This means the Allied player needs to defend Calcutta with fighters if the Japanese have an airfield within Betty range.