Kill CD Guns

[Saso]

Which is the best method to nullify the CD guns?

I think air attack, but which one?

[Mike Solli]

Hit the port with air attack.

[Saso]

Ok, but if there are ships inside the port the air attack don't hit only them?

[Nikademus]

no.

Like airfield attacks, you can't specify specific targets. All are fair game. So a port attack will target both ships in port and the port facilities. You can also try Ground Attack but the routines will single out the LCU with the highest AV. If there's only 1 or 2 LCU's (including the one with the CD guns) that might not matter as much.

Either way it will take time. CD's tend to be difficult to take out by air.

[Saso]

You can also try Ground Attack but the routines will single out the LCU with the highest AV.

Interesting, I don't know this.
If in the base there's a division (more other LCU's but less AV), with a ground attack it will be hit for first.
Therefore if I want to preserve a division from ground attack is better divide it for decrease the damage, correct?

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: Saso

You can also try Ground Attack but the routines will single out the LCU with the highest AV.

Interesting, I don't know this.
If in the base there's a division (more other LCU's but less AV), with a ground attack it will be hit for first.
Therefore if I want to preserve a division from ground attack is better divide it for decrease the damage, correct?

I don't believe dividing units actually decreases damage "overall" but some players like to do it hoping it will. They also like to do it for the Intel effect.

[tsimmonds]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: Saso

You can also try Ground Attack but the routines will single out the LCU with the highest AV.

Interesting, I don't know this.
If in the base there's a division (more other LCU's but less AV), with a ground attack it will be hit for first.
Therefore if I want to preserve a division from ground attack is better divide it for decrease the damage, correct?

I don't believe dividing units actually decreases damage "overall" but some players like to do it hoping it will. They also like to do it for the Intel effect.

It does to the extent that there are now (for example) three regiments where there was one division, and a given air attack will only hit one unit. The fatigue and disruption will apply to a single regiment (assuming that unit is hit and not some other unit) not the whole division.

Is the disruption and fatigue inflicted by an air strike on a single regiment 3X what the same airstrike would inflict on the intact division? I doubt it.

[Shark7]

In my experience, bombardments seem to do a good job of it, but you will have to suffer the return fire from those CD batteries.  If you use the bombard method, I'd go for 4-6 BBs and a handfull of destroyers and NO ESCORT BOMBARD so that at least the BBs are the only ones getting hit in return.

[engineer]

Shark 7:
In my experience, bombardments seem to do a good job of it, but you will have to suffer the return fire from those CD batteries.  If you use the bombard method, I'd go for 4-6 BBs and a handfull of destroyers and NO ESCORT BOMBARD so that at least the BBs are the only ones getting hit in return.

 
I concur. The BB bombardments usually do a wicked job on devastating supply dumps so any subsequent sieges can be over more quickly.  However, I don't like to risk putting the BBs into too much yard time for repairing that return fire unless I really see the need to move quickly so I usually take the defenses into account, too.  BB Bombardment TF's are good for bases defended by up to the 9.2 in guns, but if there are 14" or up rifles ashore, then I'd rather use air power first. Also watch out for mines and be sure to include some MSW TF in front of your bombardment groups or you may get a rude surprise.

[Saso]

The fatigue and disruption will apply to a single regiment (assuming that unit is hit and not some other unit) not the whole division.

Yes, I mean this. Anyhow this work for the first air strike I believe, because after the airstrike loss the next target will be another regiment.

In my experience, bombardments seem to do a good job of it

Also for naval bombardments will be hit the unit with highest AV?

Also watch out for mines and be sure to include some MSW TF in front of your bombardment groups or you may get a rude surprise.

How did you do it?  Did you use the Follow TF command?

[Rob Brennan UK]

ORIGINAL: engineer

Shark 7:
In my experience, bombardments seem to do a good job of it, but you will have to suffer the return fire from those CD batteries. If you use the bombard method, I'd go for 4-6 BBs and a handfull of destroyers and NO ESCORT BOMBARD so that at least the BBs are the only ones getting hit in return.

I concur. The BB bombardments usually do a wicked job on devastating supply dumps so any subsequent sieges can be over more quickly. However, I don't like to risk putting the BBs into too much yard time for repairing that return fire unless I really see the need to move quickly so I usually take the defenses into account, too. BB Bombardment TF's are good for bases defended by up to the 9.2 in guns, but if there are 14" or up rifles ashore, then I'd rather use air power first. Also watch out for mines and be sure to include some MSW TF in front of your bombardment groups or you may get a rude surprise.

Sadly Msw's will get pummeled by CD units , imo they are best reserved for escorting the invasion group/s, not a lot is doable against enemy mine fields covered by CD guns.

[rockmedic109]

If allied, add a pair of DMS to the bombardment group.  Only drawback is short legs.  You'll need a nearby replenishment task force.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

It does to the extent that there are now (for example) three regiments where there was one division, and a given air attack will only hit one unit. The fatigue and disruption will apply to a single regiment (assuming that unit is hit and not some other unit) not the whole division.

Yes, but it won't alter the actual loss/disablement rate.

Is the disruption and fatigue inflicted by an air strike on a single regiment 3X what the same airstrike would inflict on the intact division? I doubt it.

Not sure to be honest, but I suspect the code is smarter about this than might be suspected as i've often hit a whole division hard by air....gaining lots of disruption and fatigue and still seen my attacks fail due to the large collection of troopage.

[engineer]

I thought you could minesweep from an adjacent hex (or is that a WPO-only feature)? 
 
Probably the biggest disadvantage with MSW is bogging down the attack and adding to the complexity of your own operatons.  You can conduct independent MSW in the hex and take shell-fire.  I am pretty sure you can sweep from the adjacent hex.  You can also use the "follow" command, but then your bombardment force will have all the disadvantages of slow movement since most purpose-built or converted trawler MSW only travel at 12 to 16 knots. On the plus side, most of the CD fire will usually fall on the bombardment TF so your MSWs will be better off than in independent in-hex sweeping operations. Rockmedic109 is right that the Allied DMS ships are a nice exception to that rule if you're on the Allied side. 
 
The disadvantage is that you need air superiority to cover your minesweepers with the "patrol/don't retire" toggle to sweep for mines, give up surprise, and take more time since there seems to be a capacity of about 20 +/- a randomization factor for minesweeping capacity per MSW per day.  You are also likely to lose some minesweepers against dense minefields. 
 
It's a trade-off:  are there minefields or not?, do I risk my high-value ships or not?, do I have the MSW assets and supporting assets to run a MSW mission or not?, does the MSW mission give my opponent an opportunity to set an ambush (or can I use the MSW mission as a feint) or not?     

[John Lansford]

In the books I've read on Pacific amphibious operations, after, say, Guadalcanal, the operations always started with minesweeping operations.  The bombardment mission may have started simultaneously with MS, but the bombarding ships stayed out at sea while the MS's came closer in.  I know at Tarawa there weren't any naval mines, but later on, at Saipan and other invasions there were, yet I'm not sure how the sweepers managed to avoid getting shot up by the coast defense guns.  Did they wait until the bombardment had silenced the guns (hard to do, can't get them all if they don't shoot back aka Iwo Jima), or did they just not get hit?

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

In my experience, bombardments seem to do a good job of it, but you will have to suffer the return fire from those CD batteries. If you use the bombard method, I'd go for 4-6 BBs and a handfull of destroyers and NO ESCORT BOMBARD so that at least the BBs are the only ones getting hit in return.

I agree, bombardment is more effective than air attack. Naval bombardment with BBs is best if the CD guns are 6" or smaller. If the CD guns are big then Port Attack by air is much safer.

One thing players often don't realize is that CD gun effectiveness is very much a function of supply. CD guns at bases low on supply operate at greatly reduced effectiveness...of course there's still such a thing as a lucky die roll.

[Mistmatz]

ORIGINAL: John Lansford

In the books I've read on Pacific amphibious operations, after, say, Guadalcanal, the operations always started with minesweeping operations. The bombardment mission may have started simultaneously with MS, but the bombarding ships stayed out at sea while the MS's came closer in. I know at Tarawa there weren't any naval mines, but later on, at Saipan and other invasions there were, yet I'm not sure how the sweepers managed to avoid getting shot up by the coast defense guns. Did they wait until the bombardment had silenced the guns (hard to do, can't get them all if they don't shoot back aka Iwo Jima), or did they just not get hit?

I'd assume that MSWs are relatively difficult to hit due to maneuverability and small size. Also you might not want to give away intel on your gun positions for such a minor target. The code of course is something completetly different... [;)]

[Cuttlefish]

After an admittedly quick check it looks like the US Navy lost only two minesweepers to coastal fire during landing in the Pacific campaign (YMS-48 at Manila and YMS-481 at Tarakan). On the other hand around 12 minesweepers were lost to mine hits in the Pacific (and a similar number in the Atlantic/Mediterranean theaters), a very rare event indeed in WitP.

[Gem35]

Disruption and disablement of the CD guns themselves is the key, you can achieve this alot safer by using air power set to attack the port.
as stated earlier, Sure, a TF of 8 BBs can do the job alot faster but you may get slapped around by those CD guns where by using airpower you won't.
Pick your poison.[:)]

[tabpub]

I dunno, I use everything; ground attack, port attack, bombard w/escorts, several MSW groups (3-6 in each).
A mob of DD puts out plenty of hurt for the few that get beat up by the counter fire; including the ones in close escort of the landing craft.