Many CVs = uncoordination?

[undercovergeek]

I know if you have a certain number of CVs in a TF - attacks become uncoordinated - does this apply to IJN also - my KB is huge - 680 planes but dont want to split it

[anarchyintheuk]

>200 planes can result in the penalty. Same as the USN in 44 or 45.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

I know if you have a certain number of CVs in a TF - attacks become uncoordinated - does this apply to IJN also - my KB is huge - 680 planes but dont want to split it

There is a co-ordination penalty if the number of aircraft in the IJN TF is greater than 200 + rnd (200).

[Japan]

But you can have multiple Taskforces in same hex, with every taskforce having less then 200 planes ^^
 
[:)]

[undercovergeek]

wha are the consequences of uncoordinated strikes? does everything take off in bits or do they suffer an accuracy penalty or is it worse?

[FeurerKrieg]

Take off in bits - sometimes bad - sometimes good

[Panther Bait]

You seem unevenly weighted strike packages.  So one strike might have most of the divebombers and some of the fighters, and the next has all the torpedo bombers and no fighters, the next has a few divebombers and most of the fighters.  If they attack in that order, most likely all 3 strikes will get plastered by the enemy CAP.  If they attack in the reverse order, you might actually be better off than a coordinated strike, since the first fighter-heavy strike will "soak up" the enemy CAP and the 2nd and/or 3rd with all the bombers might get through relatively unscathed. 
 
More, smaller strikes due to non-coordination might also hit multiple TFs in the target hex rather than a single coordinated strike that only hits (and wipes out) a single TF leaving the others untouched.  Very frustrating when you see multiple "unable to find target" messages in the replay when you know there are several more CVs in the hex, just in other TFs.

[undercovergeek]

so you're recommending uncoordination?

if i split the TFs but keep them all in the same hex do all the new TFs still need a bb/ca/cl escort?

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Japan

But you can have multiple Taskforces in same hex, with every taskforce having less then 200 planes ^^

[:)]

Also, the more planes in the CVTF, the bigger the signals footprint. You can track a 6-CV KB clear across the map.

[Grotius]

if i split the TFs but keep them all in the same hex do all the new TFs still need a bb/ca/cl escort?

I certainly always give the new CV TFs BB/CA/CL *and* DD escorts.

I'm not sure about your original question myself. I think coordination is better, but there is a tradeoff -- it can be a challenge to keep 2 or 3 TFs together, for example.

[Admiral DadMan]

As with everything there is good and bad. A coordinated strike is essentially a single pulse wave that forces CAP to either split its resources or concentrate on one dimension.

An un-coordinated strike (multiple waves) can have the effect of drawing off CAP of other attacking elements at the expense of higher casualtiles in the attacking group, while another group is unmolested.

The Battle of Midway is a fairly decent example of both extremes, where Hornet and Enterprise TBD's were slaughtered with no escort and Yorktown TBD's to a lesser extent with escort.

[undercovergeek]

thanks for all advice - is 'uncoordination' guaranteed over a certain number or is it a chance thing everytime? im going to go out hunting and see what happens

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: undercovergeek

thanks for all advice - is 'uncoordination' guaranteed over a certain number or is it a chance thing everytime? im going to go out hunting and see what happens

It's guaranteed.

[rtrapasso]

An un-coordinated strike (multiple waves) can have the effect of drawing off CAP of other attacking elements at the expense of higher casualtiles in the attacking group, while another group is unmolested.

While this happened in reality, the game engine limits the chance of anything like this happening in WITP - usually attacking in dribs and drabs means a poor result for the attacker, not one group getting through unmolested.

[Panther Bait]

Unfortunately the uber-CAP problem (Japanese early and US later) does tend to cut back on any "benefit" to un-coordinated strikes.  If you have enough CVs, I think your best bet is multiple TFs traveling in a hex, each with as close to 200 planes as you can get while not going over 200 in any TF.  That way you have a good chance of having several, coordinated strikes.  You also have a better chance at hitting multiple enemy TFs.
 
Uncoordinated strikes are most useful to attack multiple enemy TFs (e.g. large transport TFs that "scatter" when the KB shows up or a bunch of smaller TFs) which have generally ineffective CAP over them.  Of course, sometimes in those situations you are better off playing it safe and saying in "coordinated" mode in case an unspotted enemy CV TF suddenly shows up.

[undercovergeek]

have split kb into 3 seperate TFs - 196, 198 and 225 planes - theres now where to hide the Junyo i think with 30 planes on board - leave her in her own tf or make up a job for her elsewhere?

[Mike Solli]

The Junyo (and Hiyo) carry 53 planes each.  Their slow speed make them the perfect flag for CVL/CVE TFs.

[undercovergeek]

ooo, my fault - who carries 30 then? ill make the original TF1 a little smaller and add some more to the other - its going to be a bit steep on the escorts though - actually that gives me a thought - i will now have 4 combat TFs - if i keep them all in the same hex, the 3 fastest following the slowest do i need to add a few bbs, cas, cls and dds to each tf or can i have just a single 'escort' tf also sat in the hex to perform the role of escort and torp magnet?

[Panther Bait]

CAP is hex-wide, but I think AAA is TF specific.  So you'd want to spread the AA support around.  I am less sure about ASW support. 
 
As far as BB torp magnets, I think that they will draw strike towards whatever TF they are in, so counterintuitively, you probably want to put the BBs in with the worst CVs (Junyo, Hiyo, etc.), not the best (Shokaku/Zuikaku).  Replace them with high AA cruisers in the "good" CV TFs.

[Admiral DadMan]

ORIGINAL: Panther Bait

CAP is hex-wide, but I think AAA is TF specific.  So you'd want to spread the AA support around.  I am less sure about ASW support. 

As far as BB torp magnets, I think that they will draw strike towards whatever TF they are in, so counterintuitively, you probably want to put the BBs in with the worst CVs (Junyo, Hiyo, etc.), not the best (Shokaku/Zuikaku).  Replace them with high AA cruisers in the "good" CV TFs.

You are correct on AA being related to the TF only. The same is true for ASW, which is what all the bruhaha is about limiting ASW TF's to 4 or 6 ships.

As to BB torp magnets, I don't subscribe to that theory if there are CV's in the TF. but I also I don't make a habit of including IJN BB's in a CV TF unless they are the Kongo class.