Matrix Games Forums

Thanks, NCForest. Of course, you are now on the record and will be held accountable for any mishaps. This is the case even though I determined my course of action, entered the orders, and sent the turn before you posted. I am a lawyer looking for a scapegoat. A wolf from the Wolfpack will do.



Seriously, thanks. I think that's what's going on. Let's see.

I am wondering what the range setting for each CAP squadron is. If you set them to a wide circle to cover more TFs, that will disperse the CAP around the circle's area and only a small % will be in position to engage.

I have CAP set at range 6, along with dive bombers and TBFs. This, of course, is to permit offensive strikes in the event of a carrier battle.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I have CAP set at range 6, along with dive bombers and TBFs. This, of course, is to permit offensive strikes in the event of a carrier battle.

I am not sure about this, but I think if you have CAP (set to escort duty, not sweep) set at a lower number than the strike aircraft, when the strike flies any fighters not busy as CAP will fly with the strike at whatever range. Can anyone confirm?

Oh, so you're saying if I have CAP set at 40% range zero, and the strike aircraft fly a sortie at range six, the remaining 60% of the fighters will fly escort (even though technically the fighters are set to less than range six)?

If that's so, it would allow me to minimize fatigue by setting CAP range to 0, knowing that the balance of the fighters would still escort the bombers.

Is that true? Does it make sense to do things that way?

When I've set CAP at 40% and range 0, I get 40% flying in that hex intercepting, and 60% that may scramble to intercept. I never get any of them to fly on escort for strikes at this setting.

Okay, I think that's always been my experience too. So I'll stick with the tried and true settings unless we get confirmation otherwise.

I've not noticed any comments/reports of your carriers flying ASW missions. Are you not using any of your carrier air in that role?

No, I don't. Only some of the cruiser floatplanes are flying ASW. I know the protocols for configuring SBDs to fly ASW missions, but I've always felt that following ASW TFs was the most effective strategy. I've been relying on CV TFs following ASW TFs to ward off enemy subs. It's worked pretty well in the game, though this might be due to pure chance rather than design. To this point, though, the only carriers I've lost to subs happened when the TFs weren't following ASW.

In these waters, where KB and LBA might team up, I want my strike aircraft available to strike.

I don't want to lose any ships, of course, but a handful, a dozen, a score of merchant vessels aren't the issue. I have lots of extra fuel, lots of extra supply, and I expect the targeted bases to be mostly undefended or lightly defended. So the issue here is the carriers (and of course combat ships, due to their value). If the capital ships manage to make it through these waters intact, everything will be fine. If fate is about to teach me a lesson, though, I'll divert to the secondary target and modify my methods.

I hope fate isn't cranky tonight.

Was your big CV stack at 131,100, or was that a nearby TF? That looks to me like bleeding CAP over a nearby TF.

Cheers,
CC

The range setting on your CAP is the "problem." The "diverted" planes tell me that they're really spread out. I never fly CAP at 6 hex range. I devote units entirely to CAP or entirely to escort if at all possible. Maybe once a game will I do a range 7-8 CAP on one unit. This produces a much more powerful CAP but comes at the cost of needing to have everything in the same hex or at least set LRCAP over TFs that you know will be in another hex.

Also, the reason 40% CAP on range 0 will not launch any escorts is because of the range 0 setting.

I think 40% CAP is an awfully low percentage since you're now within a handful of days of landing, and also note that 10% rest is redundant in almost every case here. I would remove the rest setting entirely if you reduce range to 0, because by default any plane/pilot not flying will be resting. By removing it, you allow for more planes to scramble if necessary. Back to the 40% rate, I would change it to at least 60% unless you are trying to deceive him on your carrier numbers for some reason, if he is not paying attention to unit counts. USN CV planes are all low SR so can easily sustain a 60% CAP rate indefinitely. Mine frequently sustain 80% with no problems, although altitude is also a factor.

In these waters, where KB and LBA might team up, I want my strike aircraft available to strike.

I see.

I've seen a lot of AARs where the authors write of a CV task force with ASW patrols deployed sailing through an area and sweeping it clean of any subs lurking about.

Usually to much gloating or gnashing of teeth, depending...

But, I understand your caution about moving into hostile waters and wanting your full complement of strike aircraft available for more important threats.

While KB is diminished, it's still a powerful force. All John would need to toss a wrench into your works is one lucky engagement.

You're right in that losing a few ships to subs isn't going to set you back appreciably, but a one sided carrier exchange would.

I'll keep my fingers crossed for you.

Only 12 minutes notice, not enough reaction time??

Us JFBs are weeping at the size of that fleet.

Its all a bit excessive for Marcus (my first guess) I think![;)]

Completely agree with Lokasenna regarding CAP settings. I also neglect using carrier aircraft for ASW duty as the allies but my opponent uses it as the IJN to great effect.

Commander Cody, Death Star was in the same hex (131,100).

Thanks, Loka, for the suggestions. I had already bumped up CAP to 50%. Next turn, I'll remove the 10% rest. Then I'll divide my fighters into two groups: some at a high percentage with range zero (CAP) only [this will include the Corsairs, as NYGiants suggested several days ago) the rest at 0% CAP with range 6 (these to escort bombers).

For what its worth, the settings during the Great Naval Battle were 50% CAP, no rest %, and range 6 for all fighter squadrons (except those few squadrons with lower ranges).

I also think your CAP is too high.

You really only need high CAP over land bases that can be swept at high altitude.

Your opponent can't sweep your carriers so you don't need to "out altitude" him to gain the dive advantage.

You already have an advantage over his escorts as they are hobbled by the escort role.

I would seek to get my CAP at altitudes no more than 2k above the expected altitudes of incoming raids.

20K appears to be too high to me.

Planes on search and ASW will find subs for the ASW ships. They should be used together

Wait a minute. Am I to understand that a carrier fighter squadron set to "escort" and let's say 40% CAP will NOT fly escort with the non-CAP planes of the squadron if the opportunity arises?
I don't think that is true. I think the AI assigns them to strike missions if it decides to go after a target. I am 99% sure I have seen a carrier with 1 fighter squadron perform both duties in the same turn.

Neither do I believe that the 40% CAP means that 40% of the squadron is up in the air with the other 60% waiting to scramble. My recollection is that the 40% is the maximum allotment to CAP with the planes cycled back to the AF or the carrier to refuel, rearm.

Lastly, I'm not sure I believe this business about "CAP range". The range setting is for strike/escort missions.

On the other hand, I have read about 2.5% of the manual. [:)]

There are quite a few things in AE that become a matter of faith when the "Good Book" is silent on the matter and nobody can compel Saint Michael to come out of his hermit cave and issue a gospel on the matter. As a consequence, the brotherhood of the AE seems to be splintering into sects. Thank God gay marriage is not modeled in the game.