Help/Comments about AGC and CVEs in invasions

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers.

Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
Dereck
Posts: 3306
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: Romulus, MI

RE: Help/Comments about AGC and CVEs in invasions

Post by Dereck »

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

CVE aircraft fly in transport TF. I don't know what they do in escort TF. Also CVE operate at 100% in shallow waters, contrary to bigger CVL and CV.

I always have 6 DD per TF.

As for minesweeping, there are several ways to use minesweepers (or DMS):

_ sweeps in enemy waters, pre-invasion. Send them with orders 'retire' so they will operate at night and send at the same time bombardment TF with retire orders. If your bombard TF have orders 'escort don't bombard', they will stay farther from the target and be less exposed to mines.

_ sweeps in enemy waters, during invasion. You can either have the MSW in the transport TF or in a separate TF with orders 'do not retire' and following the invasion TF.

_ sweeps in friendly waters. Give orders to the MSW TF 'do not retire', 'do not refuel' and send them to the friendly base.

I will divide your transport TF differently.
1) an invasion TF, where I will include 2 cruisers for invasion suppressive fire, carrying the 2nd Marine Div, the tanks (loaded on AKs) and some combat engineers. You are missing them and they are really useful to destroy enemy forts.
2) a command TF with the ACG.
3) a reserve TF with the 33rd Div aboard and if possible another combat engineer unit.
4) a "second wave" TF with the Seabees and a base force aboard, and also tens of thousands of supplies.

Only TF 1) and 2) will sail into enemy waters while 3) and 4) will wait some hexes away. If necessary 3) will land troops also. 4) will only enter the Tarawa hex once the base is in US hands.

Another thing about your TF composition. To carry troops and especially unload them faster you should use first LST and LCI, then AP. Only tanks are better handled on AK than on AP. So the best here is to load takns on LST, marines on the remaining LSTs and the remaining grunts on AP. Then add some supply-laden AK to finish build the TF.
The best for loading invasion TF is to load every unit separatly, with orders 'do not unload'. Then merge them in "operationnal" TF, as you want them to sail. Don't forget to set orders back to 'unload' once they sail to the target.


I thought SeaBees WERE combat engineers. Having been a roommate with one in the Navy, from his talk you'd think they were capable of storming anything.
PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Help/Comments about AGC and CVEs in invasions

Post by witpqs »

SeaBees are the closest thing the Allies have to combat engineer units as far as I know. I do not bring separate engineer units (including SeaBees) because the Allied units seem to have the engineers organic to (within) the divisions.
anarchyintheuk
Posts: 3958
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 7:08 pm
Location: Dallas

RE: Help/Comments about AGC and CVEs in invasions

Post by anarchyintheuk »

Duke films aside, SeaBees were definately not combat engineers.
User avatar
CapAndGown
Posts: 3078
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Virginia, USA

RE: Help/Comments about AGC and CVEs in invasions

Post by CapAndGown »

Is your purpose here to have the V Phib HQ not unload? From my experience, anytime a transport carrying troops enters a coastal or enemy base hex, it will unload regardless of the "do not unload" setting. The only time "do not unload" seems to work for ground troops is when your transports are in a freindly base hex.
Arkan
Posts: 90
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:07 pm

RE: Help/Comments about AGC and CVEs in invasions

Post by Arkan »

SeaBees are the closest thing the Allies have to combat engineer units as far as I know.
As it was already said, SeaBees are pure construction engineers. But the Allies have 5 combat engineer regiments at the start of scen.15, one CentPac at PH, 3 West Coast and one in the Philippines. They get 3 more in India and as was also said before most allied divisions have some combat and normal engineers included.
User avatar
Dereck
Posts: 3306
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: Romulus, MI

RE: Help/Comments about AGC and CVEs in invasions

Post by Dereck »

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

Is your purpose here to have the V Phib HQ not unload? From my experience, anytime a transport carrying troops enters a coastal or enemy base hex, it will unload regardless of the "do not unload" setting. The only time "do not unload" seems to work for ground troops is when your transports are in a freindly base hex.

Yes I don't want Terrible Turner to land. Why I'm going to have the amphib HQ in it's AGC ship in a separate task force than forces that are going to be landing.
PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
User avatar
Dereck
Posts: 3306
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: Romulus, MI

RE: Help/Comments about AGC and CVEs in invasions

Post by Dereck »

ORIGINAL: Arkan
SeaBees are the closest thing the Allies have to combat engineer units as far as I know.
As it was already said, SeaBees are pure construction engineers. But the Allies have 5 combat engineer regiments at the start of scen.15, one CentPac at PH, 3 West Coast and one in the Philippines. They get 3 more in India and as was also said before most allied divisions have some combat and normal engineers included.

I see what you mean by checking combat strength in my screens. All SeaBees have 0 while a unit such as the 34th USA Engineer Regiment had a value in it.

I have over a month before my planned Tarawa invasion so I may be doing some reworking of my invasion task forces based on comments in this thread.
PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
User avatar
Dereck
Posts: 3306
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: Romulus, MI

RE: Help/Comments about AGC and CVEs in invasions

Post by Dereck »

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

CVE aircraft fly in transport TF. I don't know what they do in escort TF. Also CVE operate at 100% in shallow waters, contrary to bigger CVL and CV.

I always have 6 DD per TF.

As for minesweeping, there are several ways to use minesweepers (or DMS):

_ sweeps in enemy waters, pre-invasion. Send them with orders 'retire' so they will operate at night and send at the same time bombardment TF with retire orders. If your bombard TF have orders 'escort don't bombard', they will stay farther from the target and be less exposed to mines.

_ sweeps in enemy waters, during invasion. You can either have the MSW in the transport TF or in a separate TF with orders 'do not retire' and following the invasion TF.

_ sweeps in friendly waters. Give orders to the MSW TF 'do not retire', 'do not refuel' and send them to the friendly base.

I will divide your transport TF differently.
1) an invasion TF, where I will include 2 cruisers for invasion suppressive fire, carrying the 2nd Marine Div, the tanks (loaded on AKs) and some combat engineers. You are missing them and they are really useful to destroy enemy forts.
2) a command TF with the ACG.
3) a reserve TF with the 33rd Div aboard and if possible another combat engineer unit.
4) a "second wave" TF with the Seabees and a base force aboard, and also tens of thousands of supplies.

Only TF 1) and 2) will sail into enemy waters while 3) and 4) will wait some hexes away. If necessary 3) will land troops also. 4) will only enter the Tarawa hex once the base is in US hands.

Another thing about your TF composition. To carry troops and especially unload them faster you should use first LST and LCI, then AP. Only tanks are better handled on AK than on AP. So the best here is to load takns on LST, marines on the remaining LSTs and the remaining grunts on AP. Then add some supply-laden AK to finish build the TF.
The best for loading invasion TF is to load every unit separatly, with orders 'do not unload'. Then merge them in "operationnal" TF, as you want them to sail. Don't forget to set orders back to 'unload' once they sail to the target.


Based on your comments I've tentatively reorganized my transport task force(s):

Transport #1 - Primary Invasion Force
+-- V Amphibious Corps HQ (7 LST and 2 LCI)
+-- 2nd USMC Division (33 LST 4 CLI)
+-- 193rd USA Tank Battalion (1 LSD 1 LST 1 LCI)
+-- 640th USA Tank Destroyer Battalion (1 LST 1 LST 1 LCI)
2 CA
5 DD
2 AK (14,000 tons)

Transport #2 - Secondary Invasion Force
+-- 59th Naval Construction Battalion (2 AP [4000 tons])
+-- 62nd Naval Construction Battalion (2 AP [4000 tons])
+-- 76th Naval Construction Battalion (2 AP [4000 tons])
+-- 52nd Naval Base Force (3 AP [6000 tons])
5 DD

Transport #3 - Floating Reserve
+-- 33rd USA Division (?? LST ?? LCI **currently at sea and can't determine tonnage required**)
1 CA
5 DD
2 AK (14,000 tons)

Transport #4 - Amphibious Command Task Force
AGC (V Amphibious Force HQ)
2 CVE
5 DD

PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
User avatar
ADM Halsey
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 12:57 am
Location: Ohio

RE: Help/Comments about AGC and CVEs in invasions

Post by ADM Halsey »

Not a problem, I am a WWII naval history buff and read up on just about everything I can on the Pacific Theater.
USS Enterprise The Big-E Haul a## with Halsey
Image
User avatar
Dereck
Posts: 3306
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: Romulus, MI

RE: Help/Comments about AGC and CVEs in invasions

Post by Dereck »

ORIGINAL: ADM Halsey

Not a problem, I am a WWII naval history buff and read up on just about everything I can on the Pacific Theater.

Well it was embarassing for me because my notes specifically had the Enterprise as a Yorktown class carrier. That's what I get for doing cut and pasting to try to save time.

I'm surprised you just have yourself as an ADM instead of a FADM [:D]
PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
User avatar
ADM Halsey
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 12:57 am
Location: Ohio

RE: Help/Comments about AGC and CVEs in invasions

Post by ADM Halsey »

I'm surprised you just have yourself as an ADM instead of a FADM

Happy where I am.[:)]

In the campains I have going I am just up to 01/41. In both games I am allies (not really ready to tackle Japanese yet) and doing okay. I have been scanning through the posts and seeing what others have been doing in the game.

Very interesting topic here.
USS Enterprise The Big-E Haul a## with Halsey
Image
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Help/Comments about AGC and CVEs in invasions

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: Arkan
... the Allies have 5 combat engineer regiments at the start of scen.15, one CentPac at PH, 3 West Coast and one in the Philippines. They get 3 more in India and as was also said before most allied divisions have some combat and normal engineers included.

Well slap me silly! I looked at those units when I first started playing the game, and the absense of the word 'Combat' caused me to believe they were just a different type of construction unit. I've been using them like SeaBees, etc.

Thanks, Arkan.
User avatar
Dereck
Posts: 3306
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: Romulus, MI

Upgraded Invasion Force Composition

Post by Dereck »

Staging Base: Midway

----- Air Combat #1 (AC:300 AAA:9209 ASW:40)
------- RADM R.A. Spruance (69/66)
------- 3 CV, 1 CVL, 1 BB, 1 CLAA, 3 CL, 5 DD
------- ** Air suppression: Kwajalein

----- Air Combat #2 (AC:301 AAA:9089 ASW:40)
------- RADM J. Clark (55/63)
------- 3 CV, 1 CVL, 1 BB, 1 CLAA, 3 CL, 5 DD
------- ** Air suppression: Truk

----- Air Combat #3 (AC:300 AAA:8879 ASW:40)
------- VADM W.F. Halsey (71/82)
------- 3 CV, 1 CVL, 1 BB, 1 CLAA, 2 CL, 5 DD
------- ** Air suppression: Kwajalein and Truk

Staging Base: Canton Island

----- Air Combat #4 (AC:195 AAA:7862 ASW:40)
------- RADM P.N.L. Bellinger (64/64)
------- 1 CV, 4 CVL, 1 BB, 3 CLAA, 1 CL, 5 DD
------- ** Tarawa ground attack

----- Surface Combat #1 (Guns:22175 AAA:8222 ASW:40)
------- RADM F.W. Rockwell (62/68)
------- 4 BB, 2 CA, 1 CL, 5 DD
------- ** Tarawa shore bombardment

----- Surface Combat #2 (Guns:21407 AAA:7501 ASW:40)
------- RADM J.F. Shafroth (61/67)
------- 4 BB, 2 CA, 1 CL, 5 DD
------- ** Tarawa shore bombardment

----- Surface Combat #3 (Guns:21985 AAA:8233 ASW:40)
------- RADM W. Lee (60/65)
------- 4 BB, 3 CA, 1 CL, 5 DD
------- ** Tarawa shore bombardment

----- ASW Combat #1 (Guns:135 AAA:1581 ASW:165)
------- RADM C.H. Wright (62/64)
------- 15 DE
------- ** Anti-submarine patrol at Tarawa

----- Minesweeping #1 (AAA:1118 ASW:91)
------- RADM W.R. Furlong (68/69)
------- 13 MSW
------- ** Minsweeping at Tarawa

----- Minesweeping #2 (AAA:659 ASW:37)
------- RADM R.S. Homes (67/67)
------- 13 MSW
------- ** Minesweeping at Tarawa

----- Replenishment #1 (AAA:3315 ASW:40)
------- RADM D.M. Wilcken (52/60)
------- 2 CVE, 5 AO, 5 DD

----- Replenishment #2 (AAA:3116 ASW:40)
------- RADM T.I. Chudzik
------- 2 CVE, 5 AO, 5 DD

----- Replenishment #3 (AAA:3373 ASW:40)
------- RADM W.L. Friedell (64/69)
------- 2 CVE, 5 AO, 5 DD

----- Transport #1 - Primary Invasion Force
------- ** invasion force admiral **
------- 7 LST, 2 CLI - V Amphibious Corps HQ
------- 33 LST, 4 CLI - 2nd USMC Division
------- 1 LSD, 1 LST, 1 LCI - 193rd USA Tank Battalion
------- 1 LSD, 1 LST, 1 LCI - 640th USA Tank Destroyer Battalion
------- 2 CA, 5 DD, 2 AK

----- Transport #2 - Secondary Invasion Force
------- ** invasion force admiral **
------- 2 AP (4000 ton) - 59th Naval Construction Battalion
------- 2 AP (4000 ton) - 62nd Naval Construction Battalion
------- 2 AP (4000 ton) - 76th Naval Construction Battalion
------- 3 AP (6000 ton) - 52nd Naval Base Force
------- 5 DD

----- Transport #3 - Floating Reserve
------- ** invasion force admiral **
------- 4 AP (6000 ton) - 33rd USA Division
------- 1 CA, 5 DD, 2 AK

----- Transport #4 - Amphibious Command Task Force
------- ** invasion force admiral **
------- 1 AGC - V Amphibious Force HQ
------- 7 CVE, 5 DD
PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
User avatar
DuckofTindalos
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Upgraded Invasion Force Composition

Post by DuckofTindalos »

Transport TF # 4 should be split; put the CVE's in a seperate TF, otherwise they might stray into bombardment range of the shore defences. This happened to my Allied PBEM opponent last turn, and it's bitter to lose a CVE to coastal guns.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
Arkan
Posts: 90
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:07 pm

RE: Upgraded Invasion Force Composition

Post by Arkan »

Did your opponent use it in a TF that tried to unload? Since Transport TF #4 is not supposed to unload I think all ships are safe from shore defences. Only the guns at Bataan are allowed to fire at every ship in the hex.
User avatar
DuckofTindalos
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Upgraded Invasion Force Composition

Post by DuckofTindalos »

You know, that actually occurred to me as I was writing the post. He had plunked it down into a landing force. If the CVE's are only attached to the amphibious command TF, then there should indeed be no problem. Might still be vulnerable to mines, though...
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Dereck
Posts: 3306
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: Romulus, MI

RE: Upgraded Invasion Force Composition

Post by Dereck »

ORIGINAL: Terminus

You know, that actually occurred to me as I was writing the post. He had plunked it down into a landing force. If the CVE's are only attached to the amphibious command TF, then there should indeed be no problem. Might still be vulnerable to mines, though...

Sorry for the confustion. The Transport TF #4 will not be landing any forces. It's there for the command bonus from the AGC and also to provide air cover (though my fleet carriers are going to pull a Marc Mitscher and trash Japanese air fields in the Marshall's and maybe even Truk if it has planes that have the range to hit Tarawa).

And, as far as mines, I have two minesweeping task forces which I'll be sending in with my bombardment task forces. And I intend at least 5 or more days of continuous shore bombardment before I invade.
PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
User avatar
CapAndGown
Posts: 3078
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Virginia, USA

RE: Upgraded Invasion Force Composition

Post by CapAndGown »

Let me warn you one more time: I very much doubt that you are going to be able to prevent your troops from unloading. Troops loaded on ships will unload regardless of the unload setting if they are in a coastal or enemy base hex. You might be able to get around this if you change the mission from transport to escort, though I haven't experimented with that to know.
User avatar
Dereck
Posts: 3306
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: Romulus, MI

RE: Upgraded Invasion Force Composition

Post by Dereck »

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

Let me warn you one more time: I very much doubt that you are going to be able to prevent your troops from unloading. Troops loaded on ships will unload regardless of the unload setting if they are in a coastal or enemy base hex. You might be able to get around this if you change the mission from transport to escort, though I haven't experimented with that to know.

Well Nimitz made mistakes when HE invaded Tarawa so I'll leave my AGC task group as it is and be the guinea pig to test this out.

Maybe someone who knows the answer could post it here for people to know?
PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
User avatar
Dereck
Posts: 3306
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: Romulus, MI

RE: Upgraded Invasion Force Composition

Post by Dereck »

I DO have another question and this time concerns my 4 "invasion" task forces. I know the one that will actually land forces should have an Admiral well suited to command invasion task forces and that the floating reserve should have one too.

How about my other two? Will the command bonus for the command ship only count the Amphib HQ CO or would it also take into consideration the Admiral in charge of the actual TF?
PO2 US Navy (1980-1986);
USS Midway CV-41 (1981-1984)
Whidbey Island, WA (1984-1986)
Naval Reserve (1986-1992)
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”