My first go at this game, very enjoyable!

[RangerJoe]

The TF at Tulagi just invaded there, recall them and give them air cover. These are the ships that the Yorktown actually attacked.

The Claudes are not that good but are better than nothing as a defense. Those Kates can Naval Search and do ASW as well.

Maybe save your Betties for anti-ship duties. Don't forget to Naval Search. Search at night as well.

You know what happened in real life I presume and you have seen what the other side has. Now get it so your Kates can have an escort and attack his carriers at an eight hex range . . . [X(][X(][X(]

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

I know that; I should've used emoticons to convey that it wasn't a serious post.

I wonder about policies with respect to splitting up close relations in combat units. In WWI the British deployed "pals" battalions, units of men drafted or volunteered from local areas. On one hand it facilitated very close bonds that boosted morale but at the same time made the effects of large casualties more demoralizing both at the front and at home as the casualty lists were published.

They broke them up later.

Four brothers were in the same Army unit but they were separated later. One died on Utah; one died on Omaha; a week before the Normandy invasion, one was believed to have died in Burma where he was a gunner on a shot down B-24; the other one was in the 506th PIR of the US 101st Airborne Division and he did parachute into Normandy. He received orders to go back to the states without having to have people look for him. His brother that was shot down in Burma, came home from a Japanese run POW camp.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

Extremely so, Joe. I learned more in one turn as the IJN than the Allies in two full scenario plays!

So, some observations from simply loading the game as IJN turn 1, with no actions plotted, just snooping:

TF5 is at Tulagi, mission: amphibious. It has no troops or cargo loaded. The base is too small for much. Looking around the map I am wondering what is the purpose of this empty TF? Am I supposed to send it to Truk or Rabaul and load it up with supplies for Port Moresby? Send it back to home port? There are virtually no troops on the map I can find except for a few engineers and base forces. Am I to load the engineers and use them to take empty Allied bases? Seems pointless, but then again I am a cherry rookie fumbling with the buttons of his first date.

TF4 is in the Solomon Islands chain, near Rakata Bay. It is labelled as MO Close Cover Force. I did nothing with it but the arrogant American decadent running dog capitalist imperialists [just ran out of epithets] had the effrontery to attack it and sank a few of the Emperor's much needed ships. Lesson to rookies: Look at TF labels; the scenario designer is giving you a clue as to what it should be used for. Next replay I shall send it west to cover the MO landing forces, probably what they were intended to do.

Although it would be a nice reinforcement for the fighter groups of the carriers, the splitting of the 27 plane Zero unit at Rabaul seems to weaken Rabaul. I am not a wise man yet, but I would think leaving them there would make my strikes on PM more effective. The Zeros at Lae I will not set to sweep, at least not until I get better at assigning bombers. When I watch the AI I see Bettys [?] from Rabaul hitting PM with escort from Lae and Rabaul. I can do better in this area.

Lastly, is it really good advice to send the 6 Kates from Shoho over to the main fleet? Yes, it gives that fleet more punch, but then what is the point of Shoho's TF with only fighters aboard? I tried to set her Claude's to naval search but could not. Are they any good in air to air? Or, never mind and I shall learn the harder, but more memorable way.

Prioritize! Hitting the enemy's carriers is first priority because it practically ensures the transports will make it to Port Moresby. Shoho should keep some punch and move close to the big CVs to share CAP while striking at enemy carriers or surface warships.
Rabaul must support the carriers. If Rabaul gets attacked it will be damaged but can recover from that - your carriers might not.
Don't be afraid to countermarch your transports to keep them out of range of US naval bombers until you have dealt with their carriers. Better to delay an invasion than have nothing to invade with. Yes, time is an issue, but the VPs you get for smashing the US carriers should give you victory (if you do not lose yours too!).
US subs will be pretty ineffective in torpedo attacks but they can boost your detection level so avoid their hexes if possible but don't waste a lot of effort trying to sink them. You need AA cover more than ASW cover.

[RangerJoe]

The US has S Boats there which have torpedoes that work, if I remember correctly about the subs.

[BBfanboy]

Good point RJ. Even after considering that, their experience is low and the MK 10 torp is not so powerful, so the chances of a devastating sub attack are not huge. A judgement call for the player to make.

[Dili]

Check the LCU's list and what target they are prepared to. That will tell those to use for Port Moresby invasion.

[Randy Stead]

Just finished Coral Sea as Japan.

Allied decisive victory. 1237 points to my 678.

I managed to get the assault ashore, but I let them rest one turn too long. My first assault was a 1-2, next was a 1-1 and I knocked the fortification down to 0. One more assault would have taken it. The scenario description is correct, time is the enemy to the IJN.

I was able to shield the landing force by moving my carriers south of PM. It was crazy; I had set my secondary targeting to airfields, so I lost a few planes by attacking PM and Darwin! I then made sure my only attack mode was naval after that. I had one weak attack at just outside American range. I had a whole wing of Kates wiped out due to poor escort. Lesson learned there. I made the mistake of moving closer, so that we hit each other the next day. Each side hit two carriers. On the way back to Noumea a sub sank Yorktown. I got my fleet back to Rabaul in decent shape, but not good enough for air ops. I sent a surface combat TF out from Rabaul and hit three Allied ships, sinking Australia and Hobart and damaged the DD with them. Some small satisfaction in getting off a successful surface combat. I should have done it earlier. Lesson learned.

A sub also sank the AO Tippecanoe. A blow to the Allies. I lost a ship or two to the coastal guns at PM. I need to do more shore bombardment. I realized that too late. By the time I got a decent TF there it was the last turn. Too late the hero, as the movie title says. I also muffed the Zeros from Lae. I had them set for two turns in a row to do a 100' attack on PM just for learning, but it didn't happen for some unknown, to me, reason.

I transferred those long range bombers from Truk to Rabaul, Bettys. They did an attack on the carriers but all I got was a black eye for it. I then set them to hitting PM.

Is there a way of specifically attacking the Allied land forces in PM? I had a few hits on them, minor results, was wondering if there is a way to specify the ground units, or the shore guns?

It was fun while it lasted, frustrating as hell not knowing what damage I had done to the carriers, but since they skedaddled I figured they were hurt.

My subs did very well, torpedoed but did not sink a couple of things, but did manage three hits on Yorktown. That was most satisfying.

I see why it was recommended to me by others to play this from both sides. I have learned that the IJN can be a lethal force if handled well. I did not handle them well, but I am a cadet. I realized the AI was afraid of getting too close to my land bombers. I made the mistake of closing in on them, and not having a properly coordinated strike when I did. Setting land targets as secondary could have cost me much worse against a good player, with my guys blowing their position with those futile land attacks whilst the carriers were still out there. I think the purpose of the carriers is to shield the transports. If the Allies wish to stop them, they must come to you.

[Randy Stead]

Any advice for how to split the ratio between CAP and escort? I had one raid get jumped by 48 Wildcats.

[Randy Stead]

Whilst eating dinner just now, I realized that I had forgotten to comment on the weather... I don't know what it is with me and weather in this game. Now that I am IJN the clouds are tethered to my ships. I must send crew up top with axes and cutting torches to cut the cables anchoring them to my ships. Made one strike, the first one I think it was, where my Kates got nailed. Crap weather. And again when I hit the American carriers. They came after me with the instruction to pack an umbrella for light rain, but also to bring their sunscreen lotion.

I don't want to sound like I am blaming the weather, but as a born and raised Toronto Maple Leafs fan [the refs hosed us!] I must have something to complain about.

[cblattmann]

Thank you BBfanboy. What you describe in your first paragraph is what I saw and wondered if that was a function of the type of TF and how or if that applied to other types of TFs. Especially after I read that bombardment TF are essentially surface combat TF that have the ability to bombard the shore. So I thought that there is an inherent ability to all the different TF types and choosing the right one would determine the functionality at my disposal.

[rustysi]

I did split the 27 Zeroes at Rabaul, sending 9 each to Zuikaku and Shokaku.

Not a bad 'get' for a 'cherry rookie'.[:D]

The last 9 may fit on the Shoho.

Although it would be a nice reinforcement for the fighter groups of the carriers, the splitting of the 27 plane Zero unit at Rabaul seems to weaken Rabaul. I am not a wise man yet, but I would think leaving them there would make my strikes on PM more effective.

Think of playing a CG. Your first and last idea should be the safety of your CV's. Especially as Japan.

Lastly, is it really good advice to send the 6 Kates from Shoho over to the main fleet? Yes, it gives that fleet more punch, but then what is the point of Shoho's TF with only fighters aboard?

Eh, just keep in mind that CV's have limited torp ops available. Keeping Shoho separate is one of Japans' plan complications IMHO. I prefer to attach it to the main fleet. Concentration of force.

I tried to set her Claude's to naval search but could not. Are they any good in air to air?

No, but you have to use what you get. They're not much of an aircraft at this point, but set them to CAP=100%, range=0, and they'll stay over your TF and fly interference. That is once they're included in your main TF.

[rustysi]

I don't want to sound like I am blaming the weather

A lot of people don't like the weather model in the game. I say it is what it is, both sides have to deal with it.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: cblattmann

Thank you BBfanboy. What you describe in your first paragraph is what I saw and wondered if that was a function of the type of TF and how or if that applied to other types of TFs. Especially after I read that bombardment TF are essentially surface combat TF that have the ability to bombard the shore. So I thought that there is an inherent ability to all the different TF types and choosing the right one would determine the functionality at my disposal.

Bombardment is a mission, so is surface combat. Different ships can be capable of multiple mission types. AMs are designed for minesweeping but can be assigned to the ASW mission. APDs can do amphibious, troop transport, supply transport, surface combat and ASW missions and maybe minesweeping as well. There is a chart in the appendix area of the manual that shows the missions each ship type can participate in.

There is a quirk you need to know about Air Combat TFs - you can only have such a TF if you have a CV/CVL/CVE type (not sure about CS seaplane tenders) in the TF. But if you bring your ACTF to port and transfer the carrier to the port for repairs, the TF becomes Surface Combat. When the carrier completes repairs, you cannot transfer it back into your SCTF because a carrier cannot be part of one. Fortunately, Escort TFs (for damaged ships) can have most any type of ship so you just change your SCTF to an Escort TF, transfer the carrier in, and then change it to an ACTF again!

[Ambassador]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: cblattmann

Thank you BBfanboy. What you describe in your first paragraph is what I saw and wondered if that was a function of the type of TF and how or if that applied to other types of TFs. Especially after I read that bombardment TF are essentially surface combat TF that have the ability to bombard the shore. So I thought that there is an inherent ability to all the different TF types and choosing the right one would determine the functionality at my disposal.

Bombardment is a mission, so is surface combat. Different ships can be capable of multiple mission types. AMs are designed for minesweeping but can be assigned to the ASW mission. APDs can do amphibious, troop transport, supply transport, surface combat and ASW missions and maybe minesweeping as well. There is a chart in the appendix area of the manual that shows the missions each ship type can participate in.

There is a quirk you need to know about Air Combat TFs - you can only have such a TF if you have a CV/CVL/CVE type (not sure about CS seaplane tenders) in the TF. But if you bring your ACTF to port and transfer the carrier to the port for repairs, the TF becomes Surface Combat. When the carrier completes repairs, you cannot transfer it back into your SCTF because a carrier cannot be part of one. Fortunately, Escort TFs (for damaged ships) can have most any type of ship so you just change your SCTF to an Escort TF, transfer the carrier in, and then change it to an ACTF again!

And if someone wonders why you would do that rather than create a new TF, the answer is : leader and political points.

Assigning a leader of your choosing costs some PP (sometimes a lot, depending on the leader), and in a carrier task force assigning an adequate leader matters the most, as the Air skill of the TF leader acts like an Air HQ (thereby improving the air group’s number of planes flying, and coordination). If you can keep a task force with a very good leader assigned, you’ll avoid having to spend PPs several times.

[Ambassador]

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

Whilst eating dinner just now, I realized that I had forgotten to comment on the weather... I don't know what it is with me and weather in this game. Now that I am IJN the clouds are tethered to my ships. I must send crew up top with axes and cutting torches to cut the cables anchoring them to my ships. Made one strike, the first one I think it was, where my Kates got nailed. Crap weather. And again when I hit the American carriers. They came after me with the instruction to pack an umbrella for light rain, but also to bring their sunscreen lotion.

I don't want to sound like I am blaming the weather, but as a born and raised Toronto Maple Leafs fan [the refs hosed us!] I must have something to complain about.

Blame the weather, you’re welcome.

As in RL, weather plays a big part in the effectiveness of an air attack, and checking the forecast for rain or thunderstorm every day is among the first things to do in a day. If forecast is bad, better ground the bombers for their R&R day then, rather than having to let them rest when it’s sunny over the target.

Many players think the Advanced Weather Effect On leads to worse overall weather than Off, but I believe the split over using either option is close to 50/50, and I don’t remember seeing a Dev (or Alfred) comment on it. But you can still get bad weather in the option Off (but with no warning in the forecast).

[Ambassador]

ORIGINAL: Randy Stead

Just finished Coral Sea as Japan.

Allied decisive victory. 1237 points to my 678.

I managed to get the assault ashore, but I let them rest one turn too long. My first assault was a 1-2, next was a 1-1 and I knocked the fortification down to 0. One more assault would have taken it. The scenario description is correct, time is the enemy to the IJN.

In a campaign, you probably would have taken PM, just a few days later. But the scenario timetable takes into account the proximity of RL of Operation MI.

I was able to shield the landing force by moving my carriers south of PM. It was crazy; I had set my secondary targeting to airfields, so I lost a few planes by attacking PM and Darwin! I then made sure my only attack mode was naval after that. I had one weak attack at just outside American range. I had a whole wing of Kates wiped out due to poor escort. Lesson learned there. I made the mistake of moving closer, so that we hit each other the next day. Each side hit two carriers. On the way back to Noumea a sub sank Yorktown. I got my fleet back to Rabaul in decent shape, but not good enough for air ops. I sent a surface combat TF out from Rabaul and hit three Allied ships, sinking Australia and Hobart and damaged the DD with them. Some small satisfaction in getting off a successful surface combat. I should have done it earlier. Lesson learned.

Attacking a base to support troops is tempting, but when an enemy CV TF is known to be around (or even only suspected to be around), it’s dangerous. Pilots accumulate fatigue, planes accumulate plane fatigue or take damage, stores are depleted... and if you use torpedoes against nearby shipping, that’s your best anti-CV weapon becoming unavailable.

A sub also sank the AO Tippecanoe. A blow to the Allies. I lost a ship or two to the coastal guns at PM. I need to do more shore bombardment. I realized that too late. By the time I got a decent TF there it was the last turn. Too late the hero, as the movie title says. I also muffed the Zeros from Lae. I had them set for two turns in a row to do a 100' attack on PM just for learning, but it didn't happen for some unknown, to me, reason.

I transferred those long range bombers from Truk to Rabaul, Bettys. They did an attack on the carriers but all I got was a black eye for it. I then set them to hitting PM.

Is there a way of specifically attacking the Allied land forces in PM? I had a few hits on them, minor results, was wondering if there is a way to specify the ground units, or the shore guns?

Ground attack mission will attack the units, but there’s no way to choose which unit in the hex is attacked. Also, any ground attack mission in the jungle, woods, rough, etc, is, I won’t say wasted, but not quite as effective as attacking an LCU on strat movement on a road in a clear hex.

It was fun while it lasted, frustrating as hell not knowing what damage I had done to the carriers, but since they skedaddled I figured they were hurt.

My subs did very well, torpedoed but did not sink a couple of things, but did manage three hits on Yorktown. That was most satisfying.

I see why it was recommended to me by others to play this from both sides. I have learned that the IJN can be a lethal force if handled well. I did not handle them well, but I am a cadet. I realized the AI was afraid of getting too close to my land bombers. I made the mistake of closing in on them, and not having a properly coordinated strike when I did. Setting land targets as secondary could have cost me much worse against a good player, with my guys blowing their position with those futile land attacks whilst the carriers were still out there. I think the purpose of the carriers is to shield the transports. If the Allies wish to stop them, they must come to you.

As you say, the IJN has a notable advantage in quality in the first year, but it must be used with caution, ‘cause the replacement ships are few.


As for CAP, the ratio will depend on many factors, including how many squadrons you have in the TF, the quality and numbers of the opposition you’re likely to face, the overall situation, etc.

For my part, in an ideal situation with several CV being regrouped, I’ll try to specialize my fighter squadrons. Some will be assigned as Escort 0% CAP, at an altitude maximizing coordination with the bombers, while others will be put to Escort 50% CAP 0 range, to provide CAP for the TF without leaving the hex, but with different altitudes for a layered CAP.

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: Ambassador


... Many players think the Advanced Weather Effect On leads to worse overall weather than Off, but I believe the split over using either option is close to 50/50, and I don’t remember seeing a Dev (or Alfred) comment on it. But you can still get bad weather in the option Off (but with no warning in the forecast).

Can't be many AE topics I haven't visited.[:)]

Try these threads.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... r&#4052261

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... n&#4822673

Then there is post #1604 in this thread: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... n&#3032154

Alfred

[Ambassador]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: Ambassador


... Many players think the Advanced Weather Effect On leads to worse overall weather than Off, but I believe the split over using either option is close to 50/50, and I don’t remember seeing a Dev (or Alfred) comment on it. But you can still get bad weather in the option Off (but with no warning in the forecast).

Can't be many AE topics I haven't visited.[:)]

Try these threads.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... her�

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... ain�

Then there is post #1604 in this thread: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... ain�

Alfred

You’re everywhere, but are not be allowed to speak about everything.[;)]

I meant about the claim that AWE On leads to worse weather overall. I’ve seen claims that thunderstorms and rain occurred too often and that weather globally worsened to reach a nigh-permanent bad weather (but that’s not really my experience). Or about the probabilities of each weather for a given forecast.

And pardon my inexperience, as I don’t remember every playing with AWE Off, but does michaem’s post #1604 mean that a « partial cloud » forecast will then only lead to « partial cloud » or « heavy cloud » ? I would understand then why people would « complain » about worse weather...

[Randy Stead]

My three attacks had: heavy thunderstorms, heavy rain, severe weather. The two American attacks had light rain, clear.

I agree there are a few things I have to tighten up. I have been completely ignoring weather forecasts and weather in any particular hex of interest. I have not set any searches to night.

How does one go about keeping an enemy TF at just outside of their range to hit you? I am sure there is a subtle tactical feel to it, I just have not yet discovered it. Other than vaguely holding back.

Another thing I noticed was a couple of Allied surface units sitting in the same hex for several turns. At first I did not believe it, then I sent some subs and a surface combat TF into the hex. I had them outnumbered 7 to 2, achieved surprise, night engagement. They still managed to slip away after a few hits on them.

In one attack on the CVs my Zeros were getting dived on by Wildcats. I've read a lot about setting escorting fighters to the same altitude as the bombers to enhance coordination. That led to me getting dived on. What would be my odds if I sent the Zeros in at 20K, the dive bombers at 15K and the torpedo bombers at 10K?

This is not a gripe, just an observational question. Since what we are doing as overall commanders is sending groups here and there, why must we be immersed in tactical minutiae such as setting the altitudes and ranges of various planes? I would think a carrier air wing commander would be best suited to doing that. We have such little control over certain aspects of operations but detailed control over others. We don't seem to have such micromanagement of LCUs, or surface combats. Not a complaint, just commenting. I know this is how the game was designed so I will live with it.

One last question. What is the best means of attacking shore guns; can they be targeted in particular? I know shore bombardment can hit them, suppress them. If aircraft attack the port in the hex, can the shore guns be damaged in that type of attack? I sent a bomber group to attack the port at Port Moresby and it knocked out fuel and reduced port capacity. I was hoping they might knock down the shore guns.

Comment about rerouting the invasion force. I did that in the preceding game. That was why I lost by one day. My first attack was a 1-2, the seconde was a 1-1 which reduced the fort to 0. I was sure the next one would do it. In my second go, the same happened and the third time was the charm. Related to this; in a campaign style game, would anything be gained by going after the retreating Aussie units hightailing toward Buna? In the scenario I was simply content to hold the hex. I was pondering the benefits and consequences of attacking that retreating unit immediately. In real life it might be the thing to do, but in game terms? The unit just landed was set to PM, would it get mauled going straight after Buna?

[Randy Stead]

Just finished another round as Japanese in Coral Sea. Much better naval results, but somehow I messed up the PM invasion. I did lose one ship on the way in to a U.S. sub. Not sure what was aboard, perhaps it was the margin. First attack went in at 1-5, then 1-3, 1-2, 1-1 but ran out of time.

I need to do more reading on shore bombardments; specifically what the range settings do.

I lost one transport to a sub on the way in, one on the way back and four to those nasty Oz coastal gunners.

I had Shokaku take one bomb hit, but she repaired it down to only 3 or 4 major damage points. I was able to get one hit in first, a small raid that did some damaged to Yorktown. I guess I am figuring out the range hold off thing. The next day I got a few more licks in and clobbered Lexington, more on Yorktown. I got greedy and moved a bit closer and got some damage on Shokaku. My fliers worked over some surface units.

Total Allied losses, 12 ships:

CV Lexington
CV Yorktown
CA Australia
CA Minneapolis
CA Portland
CA Chester
CA New Orleans
DD Perkins
DD Worden
DD Aylwin
AO Tippecanoe

After one of the low odds attacks I gave my land units an extra day of rest. Perhaps it cost me the victory. I need to learn more about ground combat.

Also, any advice on how to deal with shore guns when unloading TFs? I am thinkng it may have to do with my shore bombardment settings. I left them at default but during the animations it shows my CLs firing from 15,00 or more away. Is that useless? I also still do not know if I set my bombers to port attack if that will help to suppress shore guns.

I also forgot to mention that Shoho got hit, with some mid level system and floation damage. I sent a cruiser and two DDs back with her. By game's end she was still floating and seemed not in danger of sinking.