Gamey or not?

[rlc27]

I think the biggest gamey thing about this tactic is that no RL allied commander would have risked being caught with no CAP *at all* if 2 zekes and a Jap dinghy wandered by. To me it would make sense to offload some planes, ie that might be justified as cautious; since so many Jap carries were in the area the navy might have been concerned about losing all of its air wings at once due to a lucky strike. But offloading all of them seems a little drastic, not to mention the fleet is nearly blind with out planes and no CV skipper would want to be blind *and* lacking pants. Landing a buncha planes on a nearby island could be considered prudent if they were lining up for a big knockout strike, especially if the brass was concerned the CV's' wouldn't survive in an exchange due to being outnumbered.

My vote is mildly gamey with some modifications, but not outside the realm of possibility during the war when you consider some of the crazy stuff that went on.

[CynicAl]

I have to agree with the 'gamey' camp here. True, both sides occasionally flew off their carrier-based squadrons to operate from shore in critical situations - but in almost every case, it was after their home CVs had been damaged and had to get out of Dodge. IMO, several previous posters called it correctly - the Allied CVs might have buggered off (there's no point risking a confrontation with a superior force unless 1) assured of favorable circumstances or 2) something really vital is on the line), but they would not have flown off their air groups first. This falls into the same category as players disembarking their attack squadrons to load up the decks with fighters, putting up an Impenetrable Wall O'CAP, then rotating the air groups back to hit the opposing CVs once they've been denuded of their offensive capability.

Still - as long as you're playing the AI, nobody's going to complain if you use any and all tactics the game engine allows.

[BoerWar]

Extremely gamey.

1. You should have had a revolt on your hands.[:@] (see Revolt of the Admirals - 1949?) No BG commander would give these assets away without a fight. Transfer from ship to shore should result in morale hit. Extremely significant if the airfield is isolated due to concern about being left behind.[:(]
2. Less fighters should be available from airfield for cap purposes since you've gone from 5 decks to one.
3. Spare parts, you just left behind all your spare parts and the maintainers who know how to keep navy aircraft running. Airbase support (except Marines) should be significantly less able to support navy aircraft due to the lack of compatible spare parts.
4. Strike planning support - CV's have personnel onboard who's sole job is finding and planning strikes against enemy shipping. Army airfields aren't geared to fight the same war. The navy pilots wouldn't even know where to go to get a brief when they first arrived. Contacts found by CV TF search assets wouldn't be available to aircraft on the ground as quickly as it would if they were on the CV. (i.e. different radio freqs, reporting channels, bureaucracy). These squadrons should take a significant training hit.
5. Unless the airbase is huge these aircraft should become sitting ducks since there wouldn't be sufficient revetments and/or parking spots. They would likely end up parked all over the ramp awaiting compatable support equipment and spare parts.