Page 1 of 1

SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 12:36 pm
by cverbrug
Hi Guys,

Is the SE Area Fleet HQ in the game a "Command HQ" or a "Naval HQ"?
-When you open the data record of the unit, it says top left, at its designation: "Command HQ".
-When you scroll to it via the unit list, and filter on HQ's, then there is a HQ type mentioned for each HQ, there it says "HQn", and at the mouse-over tooltip it also says "naval HQ"...

My question: how is the game engine treating this unit? Would like to know to find out if I need to give it good "command HQ type of leader (good admin/land values..etc)?
(on a side note, probably this is as well a small bug to be posted in the technical forum, but before I do we should know what of the two it "should" be to be correct as well....)

Best regards,
Christophe

RE: SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 1:45 pm
by ckammp
The Southeast Area Fleet HQ is a Naval HQ, and is treated as such by the game engine.

The reason for the "Command HQ" designation in the data record is because the unit is it's own HQ - ie. it is not subordinate to any Command HQ.

In game, LCUs that are Naval HQs have an anchor as their unit symbol; LCUs that are Command HQs have a flag as their unit symbol.

Hope this helps.

RE: SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 4:47 pm
by Cribtop
I don't know about that because I have been able to use SE Fleet HQ to "torpedo enable" a base in game, which is an attribute of command HQs.

RE: SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2011 6:32 pm
by bigred
What benefit is the Fleet HQ to the ships attached?

Does a fleet HQ help the ships in range w/ combat?

I did read fleet HQs help w/ port maintenance.

RE: SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2011 6:41 am
by Chris21wen
ORIGINAL: bigred

What benefit is the Fleet HQ to the ships attached?

Does a fleet HQ help the ships in range w/ combat?

I did read fleet HQs help w/ port maintenance.

Last one only.

RE: SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2012 1:22 pm
by cverbrug
When you would use the SE Area Fleet and 4th Fleet HQ to 'torpedo enable" a base, does that only mean naval torpedoes, or also air torpedos? (i mean, do you then have torpedo ordnance for your naval bombers, without need for an air HQ?

RE: SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2012 1:36 pm
by Walloc
In this case im pretty sure that they mean air torpedoes. As Air HQs and Command HQs have ability too supply air torps. Note u can have like 5th Fleet a HQ with name Fleet in it that functions as a command HQ.
Fleet type HQ doesnt per say have any thing to do with naval torp reloading capabilites. Naval torpedo reload capabilties is a function of port size, naval support squads and/or specialized resupply ships as AKE, AD and so on type. Fleet HQs tend to have naval support squad so in that sense they can have a factor but its "indirect".

Kind regards,

Rasmus

RE: SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2012 2:03 pm
by ilovestrategy
ORIGINAL: cverbrug

When you would use the SE Area Fleet and 4th Fleet HQ to 'torpedo enable" a base, does that only mean naval torpedoes, or also air torpedos? (i mean, do you then have torpedo ordnance for your naval bombers, without need for an air HQ?

What is the difference between air and naval torpedoes? I'm guessing one is launched from a ship and one is launched from a torpedo plane? But aren't the planes Naval planes?

Or is it just a matter of designation?

RE: SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 12:34 am
by Cribtop
Air torps. Command HQs can draw supply to "create" the torps as needed. Cool stuff.


RE: SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 1:34 am
by michaelm75au
Naval torpedo re-arming of ships is dependent on the rearm level of the port. See the table in the manual for more.

RE: SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:17 am
by jmalter
ships depend on the port for torp re-arms, but some ship-types benefit from a supply-loaded support-type ship disbanded in the port. say, an AGP can re-load PT-boat torps, and an AD can reload DD torps, in a port that would otherwise be too small to provide torps to ships seeking re-arm.

as best i can tell, HQ-type LCUs can only supply aerial torps.

RE: SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 10:46 am
by Q-Ball
It should be noted that the Japanese have 3 Naval HQs that are Command HQs, and therefore CAN dispense torpedos to land-based planes.

These are: 4th Fleet, 5th Fleet, and Southeast Area Fleet. If you open those HQs and look at the title, they will say "4th Fleet, Command HQ"

I also am 99% sure they can re-arm CV TFs with torpedos. This is pretty critical in Dec 1941, because KB can re-arm at Truk after PH strike (or Kwaj, but aside from those, you have to sail back to Japan)


RE: SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 11:00 am
by sj80
Command HQs also provide half of their range to Base Administration. This is also an useful effect.
But I have one question regarding Command HQs: Do they also prevent the 25% penalty for LBA when positioned outside HQ range and flying an attack mission? Or is this done only by Air HQ?

Sebastian

RE: SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 1:16 pm
by Dan Nichols
HQs can not arm CVs with torpedoes. Truck is a size 6 port with more than the required 160 Naval Support. You can not rearm at Kwajalein Island unless you increase the port size, add Naval Support, or bring an AKE in.

RE: SE Area Fleet: Command HQ or Naval HQ?

Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 1:25 pm
by witpqs
ORIGINAL: Dan Nichols

HQs can not arm CVs with torpedoes. Truck is a size 6 port with more than the required 160 Naval Support. You can not rearm at Kwajalein Island unless you increase the port size, add Naval Support, or bring an AKE in.
Just to amplify this point, Naval HQs only help with arming ships by virtue of the Naval Support squads they contain. They provide no inherent benefit for that.