RE: Holding the line
Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:15 pm
.


What's your Strategy?
https://forums.matrixgames.com:443/

Just a question from left field . . .
ORIGINAL: Nemo121
Bullwinkle,
Just a question from left field . . .
Left field? No, the unseen fulcrum ( or at least it will be at some temporal remove ).
SoliInvictus202,
Alfred presents commentary without mollycoddling or the lubrication of praise which Western societies have become used to utilising to make every truthful comment seem saccharine sweet. It may seem to some that this rejection of the current attempt to make all critique positive is akin to being rude but that isn't really the case at all. It is simply neither unjustifiedly saccharine nor rude. It simply is an untempered analysis of the objective reality of the situation.
You are, of course, more than welcome to view it in a different light. I would never try to interfere with that but I do think there is some merit in explaining to you the why of the manner of the saying as I think:
a) you're reasonable and
b) I believe you honestly didn't view it in that way.
You may still believe his approach was wrong but I do hope you'll see the honest integrity behind it.
Re: Melpomeneanism...
It has also come to my attention that some have interpreted my "greek tragedy" line to refer to Greyjoy. This isn't correct, I do not believe this AAR qualifies as a greek tragedy. The greek tragedy line was simply a joke aimed at Alfred referring to Melpomene - the muse of tragedy ( I refer here to her later association and not the initial association with singing and dancing etc ) and also, in the ancient world, the muse of good things well said.
So, translation, I was merely conveying to Alfred in a jokey way that I thought what he said was well said ( in other words, Melpomenean ) and then referencing another well known Greek piece of mythos in which those who speak the truth are doomed not to be listened to - I refer her to such simple things as the gross errors in valuation of garrison requirements and Alfred's highlighting of the use of supposition rather than analysis as the basis for far-reaching strategic conclusions etc etc etc.
So, a simple classical in joke, nothing more. Certainly not some sort of jibe at Greyjoy - which some seem to have thought it was. Unfortunately I've ruined the joke by having to explain it now though in order to avoid running the risk of it being misrepresented.
And with that said I'll leave you to your AAR again.
My CVs are ready at Suva by now. The Hornet has joined the party and i have now all my 6 fleet carriers, divided in 3 Air TFs, each of them with 20 ships in it (2CVs, 1 fast BB, 2 CLAAs, 3 CAs and 12 DDs) and at least 90 ASW value.
The CVs will follow an ASW TF composed of 4 of my best DDs, with aggressive leaders.
They will stay there for the moment, under a HUGE umbrella of air ASW, with Catalinas, PB4Ys and the newly arrived Conrados searching for any possible naval raid, while dedicated air ASW missions will be performed by Kingfishers, B-25s and Hudsons (LR). Cannot do better than that.
ORIGINAL: ny59giants
My CVs are ready at Suva by now. The Hornet has joined the party and i have now all my 6 fleet carriers, divided in 3 Air TFs, each of them with 20 ships in it (2CVs, 1 fast BB, 2 CLAAs, 3 CAs and 12 DDs) and at least 90 ASW value.
The CVs will follow an ASW TF composed of 4 of my best DDs, with aggressive leaders.
They will stay there for the moment, under a HUGE umbrella of air ASW, with Catalinas, PB4Ys and the newly arrived Conrados searching for any possible naval raid, while dedicated air ASW missions will be performed by Kingfishers, B-25s and Hudsons (LR). Cannot do better than that.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but you will suffer air coordination penalties at this stage in the war for having over 100 aircraft operating from a single CV TF. Also, you get no AA benefits from having more than 15 ships in a single TF (only 15 ships will contribute to your AA/TF). I would have a single CV, 8 to 10 DDs, 3 and CLAA, CA and/or BB per CV TF.
ORIGINAL: ny59giants
I edited my post as the manual states you get air coordination penalty for having over 150 aircraft per CV TF in 43. My understanding is you need 8 DDs to do well in sub suppression in your CV TF. Anything less and your risk factors go up (not in the manual, but from what I've read). DD allocation goes first to CVs and then AOs as you need them more than anything else, IMO.
You get an AA benefit but it's just reducedORIGINAL: GreyJoy
ORIGINAL: ny59giants
My CVs are ready at Suva by now. The Hornet has joined the party and i have now all my 6 fleet carriers, divided in 3 Air TFs, each of them with 20 ships in it (2CVs, 1 fast BB, 2 CLAAs, 3 CAs and 12 DDs) and at least 90 ASW value.
The CVs will follow an ASW TF composed of 4 of my best DDs, with aggressive leaders.
They will stay there for the moment, under a HUGE umbrella of air ASW, with Catalinas, PB4Ys and the newly arrived Conrados searching for any possible naval raid, while dedicated air ASW missions will be performed by Kingfishers, B-25s and Hudsons (LR). Cannot do better than that.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but you will suffer air coordination penalties at this stage in the war for having over 100 aircraft operating from a single CV TF. Also, you get no AA benefits from having more than 15 ships in a single TF (only 15 ships will contribute to your AA/TF). I would have a single CV, 8 to 10 DDs, 3 and CLAA, CA and/or BB per CV TF.
Oh...but it takes 60 DDs for 6 CVs so...[:(] And no AA benefit? Ok mate, that was surely usefull, i'll change the disposition ASAP and see what i can do for those DDs...i'd need hundreds of them!
ORIGINAL: FatR
I find air coordination penalties to large CVTFs negligible, as long as the TF itself and every ship in it have good commanders. Case in point: as far as I can judge, the majority of Japanese players operate the Pearl Harbor Six in a single TF for most of 1942, sometimes detaching one carrier division. Raid miscoordination seems to be relatively uncommon, and generally caused by many targets in radius.

overall a good engagement. We were not lucky with those damned torps of his CLs...but we exchanged 1 CL for 1 CL and 2 DDs...which is a good result imho...and, above all, we gave Rader the message that there is no more walk in the park for him against my ships...we're growing stronger!!
ORIGINAL: pws1225
overall a good engagement. We were not lucky with those damned torps of his CLs...but we exchanged 1 CL for 1 CL and 2 DDs...which is a good result imho...and, above all, we gave Rader the message that there is no more walk in the park for him against my ships...we're growing stronger!!
First Karachi holds, and now no free ride in the Solomons. Could this be the 'end of the beginning'? Perhaps so.
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
Ah, I see GreyJoy has developed the super-secret "Conrado" long-range patrol/transport airplane. He needs to base some of them at Scoodra.
[:'(]
