Task Force command

[malthaussen]

Does it make any difference in the game code if a Task Force is commanded by a separate leader, or the senior captain of the force? I'm thinking specifically of guys like Fred Sherman and Marc Mitscher, who command carriers early in the war and have later iterations as admirals. Seems like there would be no point in spending PP to appoint an admiral if the guy you want already commands the carrier.

-- Mal

[dr.hal]

TF commanders are interesting. To your specific question, NO, the TF commander is just that, based upon that person's characteristics so there's no differentiation if it's selected by the game or by you the player. If you don't select one upon the creation of the TF, the game chooses the "senior" captain (who might be senior or not) as the new TF commander. If you don't like this choice (and I always look at who is chosen because the auto choice might be HORRID) then you can send that ship back into port (disbanding the whole TF or simply sending that particular ship back to port), change the captain of that particular ship to a more suitable one for your needs and then have that ship return to the TF (or recreate the TF with the same ships). Now it has a NEW TF commander (the computer will chose the same ship and thus your "new" captain). HOWEVER, if you have an admiral that is particularly effective (such as, for the Japanese, Tanaka) then you can appoint him as commander. While the TF is still active simply click on the current TF command (as in my case here, a "senior" captain of one of the TF's ships) then select the new TF commander and the "senior" captain reverts back to simply the CO of the ship. You will have to pay PPs for this (just like changing the CO of any ship). BUT, and here's the but, if you DISBAND that TF, the TF commander that you paid points for, is sent back into the pool and the points are lost. The key here if you want to retrain Tanaka or whoever, is to NEVER disband the TF completely. Leave at least ONE ship in it and you will retain your expensive TF commander. You can add/subtract ships as needed as long as ONE ship stays in the TF all the time. Does this help?

[BBfanboy]

To clarify Dr. Hal's points a bit:

The AI will decide which of the TF ships is the biggest, most important one and the captain of that one will be TF commander unless there is a similar ship that could be most important. In that case, it is the last important big ship added to the TF whose captain becomes TF commander. So by looking at the important ships you are putting in the TF you can choose the best captain among them to be TF commander by leaving that ship until last.

So what makes a ship important? Military vessels outrank civilian vessels - a single DD will be TF flag even if there are much larger civilian vessels in the TF. CAs outrank CLs - so even if you have a 10,000 ton Cleveland CL in the TF, a CA of 9,050 tons will outrank it.

Select your commander for the type of mission and TF makeup. An entirely civilian TF should have a low aggression commander unless you are in a Malta Convoy situation where heavy losses are acceptable to get some goods through. An Air Combat TF needs good Leadership, high Naval skill and good Air skill. Aggression depends on whether you expect to chase the enemy or hit and run. I give my old BBs commanders with 60s level Naval skill and high 50s aggression. They are too slow to chase anything!

[Sardaukar]

To add, sometimes mixed nationalities TF can cause you slight problem with TF leaders.

If game-determined most important ship is different nationality than leader you want to command TF, you cannot select him. Happens often with mixed RN/USN/Dutch TFs.

It is easy to remedy though, remove that biggest ship, repeat if necessary until desired nationality is the flagship, appoint overall TF commander and then add those removed ships to TF again.

[malthaussen]

@ Sardauker: Yeah, I already experienced that when a US carrier TF commanded by Ray Spruance merged with HMS Formidable and Formidable became the flagship. (Like Formidable is really a more important a ship than Yorktown). Weirdly enough, the game allowed Spruance to shift his flag to the British CV even though every other ship in the TF was American.
(Before anyone points out that merging those two ships might have caused air strikes to be disorganized, by that time Yorktown had already suffered enough air group attrition that the two carriers had less than 100 a/c between them)

My particular wonder was if it made a difference if the TF CO was also commanding a ship or not, and it appears this does not make a difference. That's a good thing, in fact, since most of the US CV skippers are better leaders than the admirals that commanded TFs historically (Spruance and Halsey excepted).

This game does some really weird things with the leaders. I don't know how many of my ship reinforcements came with the wrong commander and the right guy was in the pool. For many DDs from Desron 2 on, the skippers are all wrong, yet are added to the pool in the middle of the next month, which makes no sense at all. It's like the team that researched the leaders and the team that set up the reinforcements didn't talk to each other at all.

-- Mal

[dr.hal]

This game does some really weird things with the leaders. I don't know how many of my ship reinforcements came with the wrong commander and the right guy was in the pool. For many DDs from Desron 2 on, the skippers are all wrong, yet are added to the pool in the middle of the next month, which makes no sense at all. It's like the team that researched the leaders and the team that set up the reinforcements didn't talk to each other at all.

-- Mal

The most egregious example of misplace captains is at the start of the game with the two New Zealand CLs, both of which have ENSIGNS as their COs, forcing the Allied player to replace them with the "real" COs early on using precious political points in doing so. Of course you could leave the Ensigns in charge and by the end of the war they might have been promoted to Lieutenants!!!!

[malthaussen]

That's pretty egregious, yes. But I'll vote for Elliot Buckmaster not being in command of Yorktown when she arrives. A fleet carrier should not have some generic twit running things.

It's certainly weird about the NZ cruisers, though, as both Barnes and Roskill are in the pool from the start, and Mansergh comes right on schedule in April of '42.

-- Mal

[malthaussen]

That's pretty egregious, yes. But I'll vote for Elliot Buckmaster not being in command of Yorktown when she arrives. A fleet carrier should not have some generic twit running things.

It's certainly weird about the NZ cruisers, though, as both Barnes and Roskill are in the pool from the start, and Mansergh comes right on schedule in April of '42.

One of the reasons the first modification I made to the database was giving the Allies more PP so they could deal with things like this, as one could spend days matching up the right man with the right ship (or squadron, or whatever).

-- Mal