Are there any tips for finessing strikes?

[Adam Parker]

To set a strike a player basically clicks on squadron icons for a carrier/air base and adjusts the timing/cohesion of the raid. Just a single button for cohesion. The rulebook doesn't discuss it but in scenarios where operational tempo is up, the pressure will be on to keep strikes in the air as quickly and as much as possible.

So I'm wondering how people manage their air assets in this task?

Is there a way for the player to keep an eye on refits/re arms/squadron turnaround and coordinate these efforts?

Is there an easy way to tell for a carrier or airbase what is in the air, what can still fly and what is being readied + how long the latter will take?

Thanks.

[tedhealy]

I'm assuming you know about the carrier/airbase screen that shows you planes arming/refueling, on cap, on missions, landing/taking off. You can also look at the squadron info in the missions/conditions screen. That should show you what every individual plane in the squadron is currently doing.

As far as managing planes, if I'm preparing for a 2+ strike day, I make sure to get that first strike off asap after dawn. I've been experimenting with the artificial sighting. If you guess right and send a strike out to your artificial sighting and carriers are there, you can get a huge jump on the enemy and sometimes deliver a knockout blow. If you guess wrong, well you just wasted at least 2 hours and left yourself open to a knockout blow.

When a strike group is coming back and landing, I advance time in 5 minute increments and watch the carrier/airbase screen to see when they land and are ready to go again.

I haven't seen an easy way to determine how long the different stages take though.

[Adam Parker]

Cool Ted, thanks.

[Adam Parker]

Is there a pop-up dialog to tell a player when his squadrons are armed and ready?
 
I'm finding it hard coordinating the interface and it seems that if I click re-arm say at 3am, nothing is ready to fly at dawn. Is there an expiry date as to when the re-arm/refit button needs to be re-clicked?
 
Is there a way to launch half a carrier's squadrons in one strike and then set up another to launch straight after?
 
Also I'm going crazy seeing the Jap AI always target my flat tops with good hits but if I come across a TG with a flat top or two, my flyboys go after the destroyers.

[alexs]

Hi Adam,

After giving an Arm/Fuel order, your planes should be ready around about 15-30 mins later (depending on the number of planes given the order, and the spot number of the carrier). Arm/fuel orders should reset at midnight, and the planes should be located in the arming/fuelling section of the carrier screen. Clicking on a squadron should show the number of planes that are available, armed and fuelled, damaged and KIA in the bottom right of the squadron profile.

Yes you can only send half a carriers squadrons away on a strike, and then in the same 5 minute period, create another strike and assign the other squadrons. There is no way for a squad to only send half its planes on different missions though, as this isnt how squadrons at the time operated.

Its always heartbreaking to see that. Generally speaking, the japanese had better trained pilots (the key ingredient in choosing the best target), but there are several factors involved when pilots are choosing a target (weather, number of other valid targets etc). This is somewhat mitigated by the fact that you only generally need one or two hits on the japanese carriers to put them out of commission though (as they have poor fire control).

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker
my flyboys go after the destroyers.

Actually, this door swings both ways. I've seen my computer opponent's aircraft do it also, quite often in fact.

Strike a/c that are sent after a carrier group ought to bomb a carrier unless

a) there are none left to bomb when it's the flights turn at bat,

or

b) a carrier can't be found because of some other consideration, weather for instance.

I'm not sure how the game's internals handle item b), so that may not even be a possibility.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[TheHellPatrol]

[8D]Here's a little tip i discovered trying in vain to retaliate at the Japs: After sending out a Carrier strike...when the planes are on their way back slown down the time to 5 min intervals(as someone stated previously) and as soon as all planes are landed i move the speed slider to full steam and get my TG away into a storm. I noticed the ai TG's zipping away after nailing me so i surmise that is what the speed(knots) slider is there for.

[AVisme]

American carrier onstation + japanese searchplane = a bad day !

[Gregor_SSG]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl




Strike a/c that are sent after a carrier group ought to bomb a carrier unless

a) there are none left to bomb when it's the flights turn at bat,

or

b) a carrier can't be found because of some other consideration, weather for instance.

I'm not sure how the game's internals handle item b), so that may not even be a possibility.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

They should only attack the carriers, but historically they attacked all sorts of ships, so that's what the game recreates. As Alex said, the better trained your pilots are the better they are at attacking the right target.

As for not finding the carriers, if a strike can't find a sighting at its reported location, then the squadrons start searching - they can find targets quite a few hexes away. However if they are on their way to a sighting and they come across another TG, then some will be tempted to attack the ships they can see rather than continue on to find ships that they can't yet see.

Gregor

[Caltone]

ORIGINAL: Gregor_SSG

They should only attack the carriers, but historically they attacked all sorts of ships, so that's what the game recreates. As Alex said, the better trained your pilots are the better they are at attacking the right target.

As for not finding the carriers, if a strike can't find a sighting at its reported location, then the squadrons start searching - they can find targets quite a few hexes away. However if they are on their way to a sighting and they come across another TG, then some will be tempted to attack the ships they can see rather than continue on to find ships that they can't yet see.

Gregor

Awesome Gregor, just what you'd expect and nice to have it modeled in the game.

[&o]

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Gregor_SSG

They should only attack the carriers, but historically they attacked all sorts of ships, so that's what the game recreates. As Alex said, the better trained your pilots are the better they are at attacking the right target.

Hi Gregor,

Thanks for your comments. I wouldn't characterize the behavior as being "unfair" on any level because it affects both nationalities and types of player (human and AI). Still, the frequency of misdirected bombings seems excessive.

Tonight, I played Coral Sea again and lost because the AI player occupied Port Moresby. I scored four hits on Zuikaku and two on Shokaku, while taking only two to the Yorktown. But, when the invasion fleet showed up, I had no aircraft left with which to stop them. The Japanese carriers were also spent. Both sides air-groups had been attrited to the point of ineffectiveness by virtue of their having repeatedly bombed non-CV targets within the same TG.

While my comments in this regard are but an anecdote, I hope that you'll keep an open mind about the issue should a significant portion of players voice similar concerns.

Thanks,

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[NefariousKoel]

I like the occasional random attack on different targets. 

I would not like carriers being the only targets attacked.  While carriers were preferred targets, it didn't always happen that way historically and I don't wouldn't want to play a game where the carriers got aced any faster than they do now.

I like it how it is, thank you.[:-]

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: NefariousKoel
While carriers were preferred targets, it didn't always happen that way historically and I don't wouldn't want to play a game where the carriers got aced any faster than they do now.

As far as USN carrier aviation was concerned, enemy carriers weren't just the preferred target, they were the only target. American dive-bombers went into combat with large GP bombs rather the smaller AP variety in spite of the fact that the former were pretty much worthless against cruisers and battleships. They did so, because the 1000lb variety offered better prospects for setting off catastrophic fires on the flight and hangar-deck(s) of IJN carriers.

I like the game. I enjoy playing it. Again, I've only had the game for a couple of days. But watching flight after flight of strike aircraft bomb destroyers and cruisers while carriers, the actual focus of the entire endeavor escape destruction by both sides, regardless of the pilot's skill level, is really kind of a stretch. And, no that's not the way that it happened in "real life." Carriers were magnets for inbound assailants and, subsequently, drew overwhelming attention from enemy aircrew.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[JoeBobShaw]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

ORIGINAL: NefariousKoel
While carriers were preferred targets, it didn't always happen that way historically and I don't wouldn't want to play a game where the carriers got aced any faster than they do now.

As far as USN carrier aviation was concerned, enemy carriers weren't just the preferred target, they were the only target. American dive-bombers went into combat with large GP bombs rather the smaller AP variety in spite of the fact that the former were pretty much worthless against cruisers and battleships. They did so, because the 1000lb variety offered better prospects for setting off catastrophic fires on the flight and hangar-deck(s) of IJN carriers.

I like the game. I enjoy playing it. Again, I've only had the game for a couple of days. But watching flight after flight of strike aircraft bomb destroyers and cruisers while carriers, the actual focus of the entire endeavor escape destruction by both sides, regardless of the pilot's skill level, is really kind of a stretch. And, no that's not the way that it happened in "real life." Carriers were magnets for inbound assailants and, subsequently, drew overwhelming attention from enemy aircrew.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

I'm quite sure you're correct in that carriers were the ultimate target. But I have to wonder if, in real life, an SBD pilot ... scared to death ... flak bursting ... plane bouncing around ... clouds and smoke and, oh yeah, ZEROS swarming ... would take the time to find the perfect target over "A" target, any target, to dump that bomb and get the hell out of Dodge. It would probably be worse for a torpedo bomber. Coming in at low level limits your options and the longer you stay low and slow the more likely it is that flak is going to nail you. The temptation to just drop the damn thing would have to have been overwhelming. While there were no clouds of black powder smoke obscuring the battlefield, the fog of war is still very much a factor.

And I think I've noticed that they tend to go after ships on fire. It's far easier to see a ship with a cloud of smoke pouring out of it than one without, and as large as carriers are, they're still damned hard to pick it out from the fromation at altitude. Remember the number of sighting reports, in real life, that were WAY off the mark, even to the point of missing carriers in the formation.

I don't know what the ratio of carrier attacks to "other" attacks was but I suspect that it wasn't anywhere near as high as we, sitting in our easy chairs in front of our computers would like it to be.

I agree, it's frustrating as hell ... but I wonder if it isn't accurate at the same time.

Just a thought, I'm no expert. [:)]

Joe

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: JoeBobShaw

I'm quite sure you're correct in that carriers were the ultimate target. But I have to wonder if, in real life, an SBD pilot ... scared to death ... flak bursting ... plane bouncing around ... clouds and smoke and, oh yeah, ZEROS swarming ... would take the time to find the perfect target over "A" target, any target, to dump that bomb and get the hell out of Dodge.

That's all quite true, but the SBD didn't approach alone. He was normally led by a squadron commander that was just as proficient as his IJN counterpart. Unless it was communicated (or miscommunicated) that a flight bomb something else, the rest of the squadron were gonna do as their leader directed, and those Annapolis guys darn sure knew a carrier from a destroyer.

I'd also note that the ZEROS didn't particularly enjoy attacking a Dauntless formation. Once the fighters sixty rounds of 20mm were expended, it was rather worse than even-steven for a pilot flying into the teeth of fifteen to thirty .30 caliber machine guns. The SBD gave the Japanese fits.

It would probably be worse for a torpedo bomber. Coming in at low level limits your options and the longer you stay low and slow the more likely it is that flak is going to nail you. The temptation to just drop the damn thing would have to have been overwhelming. While there were no clouds of black powder smoke obscuring the battlefield, the fog of war is still very much a factor.

I've posted to this thread knowing full well that what you've written directly above is both factual and accurate. The TBD situation was unique among the strike types deployed in these battles in that it was so vulnerable to enemy CAP. Because of that, it wasn't uncommon for their pilots to let loose a torpedo at a screening cruiser or battleship, the pilots no doubt believing that it was better to take a shot at something, rather than have the weapon go down with the a/c.

And I think I've noticed that they tend to go after ships on fire. It's far easier to see a ship with a cloud of smoke pouring out of it than one without, and as large as carriers are, they're still damned hard to pick it out from the fromation at altitude. Remember the number of sighting reports, in real life, that were WAY off the mark, even to the point of missing carriers in the formation.

Do you remember those photos of IJN carriers careening wildly about as they evaded bombers at Midway? Those photos were taken from twenty-thousand feet. Inaccurate sighting reports were partially a product of inexperienced search crew, but the real culprit was distance. Patrol a/c operated on the absolute periphery of the enemy formation. If a PBY or Mavis found itself directly over a carrier, it likely wouldn't be there very long. Squadron and flight leaders of The First Team, or the Kido Butai suffered no such inhibitions. They were there to get hits on carriers, not to snoop about ten miles (or more) from the core of the task group.

I don't know what the ratio of carrier attacks to "other" attacks was but I suspect that it wasn't anywhere near as high as we, sitting in our easy chairs in front of our computers would like it to be.

Actually, it was extraordinarily high at Midway. Of the three squadrons of SBD that set upon the KB in the morning attack, the only planes that didn't bomb a carrier were ones that had already dropped their payloads because of a faulty arming mechanism. Three a/c eschewed an attack on the Kaga, seeing that she was already a wreck, and flew over and blew up the Akagi, yet another one of those hard-to-find aircraft carriers.

I agree, it's frustrating as hell ... but I wonder if it isn't accurate at the same time.

Actually, I've begun to find it kind of a relief. Further up a thread, I cited a game experience in which BOTH sides attacked screening vessels so frequently that neither fleet was able to sink a carrier before its stable of aircraft was exhausted. It got to the point where that awful feeling in the pit of my stomach began to go away, because I really expected the enemy to attack the surrounding destroyers and cruisers, rather than the big-ticket item at the middle of the display. And it's important to note that there's no sort of AI "cheat" involved here. My only concern is that the behavior undermines the authenticity of the game.

Just a thought, I'm no expert. [:)]

Me neither. I've read a lot lately, Shattered Sword, The First Team and The First Team and the Guadalcanal Campaign, but I wasn't exactly, there, either. I like the game and hope that SSG continues to improve upon its many excellent qualities.

Thank you for your comments, [:)]

PoE (aka ivanmoe)