Damage TF`s

[Black Cat]

While overstaying my time harrassing the Japanese supply TF`s up around the "Canal" I managed to get the Yorktown torpedoed by a Sub. The damage was not bad enough to cause the AI to split it off as a damaged TF.

I formed a new TF with the Yorktown in it and sent it to Brisbane, on the way a sub nailed her again, this time the AI split it out as a damaged TF.

I want it to go to Brisbane for repair, however when I set the new course the AI on the next turn resets it for Noumera. It has done this twice. I have the TF orders set at " no reaction" and "no retirement" Any help, or references to the manual appreciated.

[siRkid]

Make its home port Brisbane then tell it to return to its home port.

[Ron Saueracker]

Set the home base to Brisbane and hit the return to Brisbane button. Try to stick escorts with it to protect the CV from further subs. I dislike what happens. The TF is too slow for escorts and they just leave the CV to die. This speed requirement has to go.

[Spooky]

Originally posted by Ron Saueracker
I dislike what happens. The TF is too slow for escorts and they just leave the CV to die. This speed requirement has to go.

Sorry Ron but the case is unfortunately not that simple ... In some cases, a TF commander would rather leave behind a damaged capital ship (with a DD as escort) and try to escape in order to save the other ships in the TF rather than being slowed down by a damaged ship ... leading to the probable annihilation of the complete TF the next day.

I think it should stay an AI decision mainly based on the TF commander ratings.

Spooky

[Ron Saueracker]

It's not a "decision" but a part of the game mechanics. It works the same for system damaged ships that have had their flotation damaged shored up. The mechanics of the game do not permit faster ships to stay in formation with a slower ship....period. What idiot TF commander would release his escorts because they were not operating at optimum speed? Except of course Adm Giffen.

[NorthStar]

Originally posted by Spooky


Sorry Ron but the case is unfortunately not that simple ... In some cases, a TF commander would rather leave behind a damaged capital ship (with a DD as escort) and try to escape in order to save the other ships in the TF rather than being slowed down by a damaged ship ... leading to the probable annihilation of the complete TF the next day.

I think it should stay an AI decision mainly based on the TF commander ratings.

Spooky

The problem here is that the game insists on allowing only one escort. Agreed, I may not want to risk additional capital ships to protect a hevily damaged ship, but in dangerous waters (due to subs or LBA) I might want to risk a few destroys to save one.

It would be nice (I won't say should -- that implies everyone thinks the way I do :p ) if there was a way to override the splitting so as to maintain a larger escort. Maybe a new mission type: Escort.

Although on further reflection, I suppose you could get the same effect by creating a SC TF and having it follow the damaged ship.

[U2]

Hi

I agree with Ron that a screen of 2-3 DDs must stay with a damaged CV. If the enemy was close they would try to schuttle the CV and run for it. UV is however a game and its impossible to recreate history sometimes. Unfortunately this is hard for a large number of people to understand BUT some DDs must stay behind and that should not be hard to fix.
Dan

[Spooky]

It is not a simple design decision

For instance : if you had a bombing TF intercepted during its run to PM or Lunga by a ennemy surface combat TF ... and with a few capital ships slowed to 10 knots after the naval fight.

Would you rather keep the whole bombing TF together (at 10 knots) and so highly vulnerable to LBA ... or split the TF with only the damaged ships (with a few escorts) in LBA range as it is now ?

Since it all happens in the same game pulse, we cannot get any input from the player so it must be decided by the AI ... The game mechanics is not ideal ... but I don't see any better solution (at least for the same pulse split).

Spooky

[Ron Saueracker]

Maybe this is another instance where TF leader ratings come into play as Spooky mentioned. Would a cautious leader abandon a damaged ship due to caution or would he try to save the damaged ship by escorting it with his TF, not wanting to make a decisive decision? In any case, one DD seems a little on the light side.(Not enough to even rescue the ship's crew!) When the Hornet was crippled, there were at least two DDs with her, even as the IJN was fast approaching.

Anyway, has anyone really noticed the effect leader ratings have on game play? It's very abstract to say the least.

[Spooky]

Originally posted by Ron Saueracker


Anyway, has anyone really noticed the effect leader ratings have on game play? It's very abstract to say the least.

I think it is in UV 1.11 a decision based only on the speed of the ships ... and no leader ratings came into play

However, I would think that a cautious leader would rather retreat ... and leave a damaged capital ship behind (with probably more than 1 DD as escort !) while an over offensive one would rather gamble ... and keep the TF together ...

It is probably too late for UV but maybe such things could be introduced in WITP ?

Spooky

[Paul Goodman]

I don't know about a Jp. task force, but putting destroyers with a highly damaged U.S. carrier will do nothing to help the carrier if a sub arrives and will probably cost you a destroyer or two. In fact, I no longer put destroyers in any task forces except destroyer squadrons (all destroyers) as they are essentially useless against subs unless used in groups of 8 or more. Furthermore, destroyers slow down all task forces which contain ships capable of refueling destroyers.

Paul

[Mike Wood]

Hello...

In the case where a carrier is badly damaged and it splits from the task force, with a destroyer, and you want to offer more protection for the ship, do the following:

Form a new surface combat task force of destroyers and give that task force orders to follow the first one. It will then stay in the hex with the wounded carrier, offering some anti-submarine screening, naval surface screening and incoming air attacks will stand a substantial chance of hitting it.

This second task force will actually be the second task group of the task force. All naval forces in the game with orders to follow another task force are actually task groups of that force.

Hope this Helps...

Michael Wood

[Ron Saueracker]

Did not know that. So I place my CV's and cruisers in one TF and DDs in another, with orders to follow. Will this not generate two attacks when, let's say a sub attacks the CVs. Is there a chance that the sub will fire on the destroyers because they are "part" of the same TF, or would it get a shot at both TFs because that's what they are according to the TF screen? Or, a surface combat group with CA/CLs in one TF with DDs in another with orders to follow. Will both benefit from each other or will they be decimated in detail in two separate engagements, despite being "part" of the same TF?