TF sizes

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
vinnie71
Posts: 966
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 7:32 am

TF sizes

Post by vinnie71 »

I was reading again the rulebook on the size of task forces. It seems that transport and cargo TFs can be as large as 100 vessels (amphibous TF too).

Frankly I have never tried putting together that many vessels mainly for 2 reasons - a) few ports can actually handle them (if any) and b) large convoys seem to have a lot of collisions and whatnot. On the other hand, if such convoys are possible, it would cut down on the number of convoy escorts required and possibly avoid Jap subs altogether.

Does anyone run such huge convoys on a regular basis? Glad to hear your experiences!
User avatar
Roger Neilson II
Posts: 1419
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 11:16 am
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne. England

RE: TF sizes

Post by Roger Neilson II »

Not admitting to anything, but a tactic is to build a massive convoy, blast it through the enemy sub screen, then split it into smaller convoys with different speeds..... they will all arrive at their destination at different times - this eases the congestion at the port - not a good idea if you want anything to arrive as one coherent unit for fast use mind you, but as a away of staging in a quiet back area I have found it saves some effort.

Roger
Image
herwin
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:20 pm
Location: Sunderland, UK
Contact:

RE: TF sizes

Post by herwin »

The average convoy in the Atlantic was 40 MS and a half dozen escorts. It would come together at a waypoint, transit to a destination waypoint, and then split for the various destination ports. I suspect the same was true world-wide.

I usually size my convoys for the ports they transit between. I doubt I ever use a full 40 MS.

A naval TRANSDIV was usually 4 APs.
Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com
vinnie71
Posts: 966
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 7:32 am

RE: TF sizes

Post by vinnie71 »

Ok, so it is feasable to build large convoys. Faced with the relative limited number of escorts and CVEs until mid '43, compared to the number of merchantmen, it would be better to build large convoys. This would be especially beneficial for the British convoys arriving from the Indian Ocean to Australia and their American counterparts coming from the West Coast.

@Roger Nielsen II: BTW interesting tactic [;)]

User avatar
Roger Neilson II
Posts: 1419
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 11:16 am
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne. England

RE: TF sizes

Post by Roger Neilson II »

Once the huge convoy is out in the massive wastes of the ocean what you don't want is for a raider carrier group to find it, hence the added importance of dispersal and multiroutes once clear of the sub blockades. Enemy subs round a base can be beaten/confused by lots of targets, many of which are short ranged but ASW capable. As Allies you have little that has large endurance as escorts, and they can be better used this way.

Roger
Image
beppi
Posts: 382
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:23 am
Location: Austria

RE: TF sizes

Post by beppi »

ORIGINAL: Offworlder

Ok, so it is feasable to build large convoys. Faced with the relative limited number of escorts and CVEs until mid '43, compared to the number of merchantmen, it would be better to build large convoys. This would be especially beneficial for the British convoys arriving from the Indian Ocean to Australia and their American counterparts coming from the West Coast.

@Roger Nielsen II: BTW interesting tactic [;)]


Except TKs convoys there is no problem using 100 ship convoys. They load just fine in a few days even when not docked if enough Naval support is available (not TKs and AOs). I usually use 6 good quality escorts for a 100 ship convoy. Do not use Amphib TFS to ship supply/fuel between large ports with a lot of naval support as you lose efficiency. And always use the ultra safe and ultra long route for such large convoys. You do not want to meet KB or a surface TF.
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: TF sizes

Post by topeverest »

mega TF's have their uses in my mindset, though I'd agree limiting TF's to the size supported by the smaller of the destination and origination ports typically is the rule in booty hauling.

AMphib TF's can get very large as the game wears on.
Andy M
Sredni
Posts: 705
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 6:07 am
Location: Canada

RE: TF sizes

Post by Sredni »

I tend to end up using 100 ships for big invasions later in the war. Fill it with whatever escorts you want, the transports you need + enough extra to ensure 1 day unload, a bunch of AK's, AKA's or LST's for supply, and then fill the rest with surface combat ships and those utility amphibious ships (the rocket/gun/mortar lst's).

For normal transport and supply missions I tend to use the max size the port can handle. Later in the war I'll sometimes use big cargo TF's of 100 ships carrying purely supply, as a post above said supply will unload fast even undocked with enough nav support, but anything with fuel only goes to max port capacity.
User avatar
DeriKuk
Posts: 355
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 1:44 am
Location: Alberta
Contact:

RE: TF sizes

Post by DeriKuk »

As an article of faith - since I don't know the game's guts - I pay the political points for a good convoy commander for a large convoy . . . in the hopes of reducing collisions and speeding up port clearance.
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”