Carrier Task Force Composition

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers here.

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

jakla1027
Posts: 189
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 11:01 pm
Location: Idaho

Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by jakla1027 »

Hello,

I was wondering if someone could poimt me to a certain thread or explain/show me what a good carrier task force formation should look like through out the war as the allies. I've read somewhere that during the early war you only want carrier task forces to contain only one carrier. Is this true? Has something to do with poor coordination between air groups early in the war if you put more than one carrier in a carrier task force? It's better to create 2 or 3 single carrier task forces & set them to follow the first task force? Is this all true & could someone please explain a good carrier task force & what it's composed of?

Thank you,

P.S. I'm m playing against the AI if that makes a difference
setloz
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:13 am
Location: Romania
Contact:

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by setloz »



LoBaron has a very detailed guide here: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3219921

All the answers are there, just read that thread several times.
“The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other guy die for his.”
Gen. George S. Patton
rms1pa
Posts: 370
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 6:32 am

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by rms1pa »

how many carriers can dance on the head of a pin? allied only advice not valid for ijn.

i use rough guidelines for mine. in dec 41 fifteen ships ,one cv,four top aaa ca/cls(no omahas) 2 porter class dds,
and 8 dds of the same class.

in early 42 i shift to 10 ship tfs' by this time you need ships/ escorts everywhere and ships are going into their upgrade cycles. now 2 cvs 4 ca's or cls(don't mix) one porter the rest the same class of dds

do not use the wicks/clemsons farraguts or omahas as cv escort the limited speed and endurance with miserable AAA of these classes hurt.

as you go through 42 you will get CLAA add one to each TF. or if 2 or 3 carriers are all you have operating use them all in one . btw its always nice to have a surface action group acompanying the carriers or even 1 or 2 hexes ahead with the cv's following.

just my bit ymmv.

rms/pa
there is a technical term for those who confuse the opinions of an author's characters for the opinions of the author.
the term is IDIOT.
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9303
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by Lokasenna »

I tend to do 2-CV TFs in 1942. The added flexibility that 2-CV TFs have over 1-CV, no-penalty TFs is big. Once, I even combined 4 into one big TF (OK, of 15 ships because of the AAA diminishing returns after 15 ships).

Typically, it will be 2 CV, 1 BB if I have fast BBs available, 2 CA, 2 CLAA, and 6-8 DDs, depending on what's available. I may drop down to 1 CLAA as well (note that the CLAAs have ASW capability). I'm also not shy about breaking off the CAs and a couple of DDs for surface actions, and if I think that could occur on any given mission I will bump up the original size of the TF, if I can - even exceeding the 15-ship point.

These are all just habits I picked up from several years of play, however. You'll develop your own, regardless of what anybody here says to help you get started [;)].
rms1pa
Posts: 370
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 6:32 am

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by rms1pa »

You'll develop your own, regardless of what anybody here says to help you get started

truth.

rms/pa
there is a technical term for those who confuse the opinions of an author's characters for the opinions of the author.
the term is IDIOT.
User avatar
CaptBeefheart
Posts: 2513
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 2:42 am
Location: Seoul, Korea

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by CaptBeefheart »

Somebody once stated that if your CV TF has at least 8 DD you'll be almost immune from SS strikes. That's been borne out in my experience, key word being "almost."

Cheers,
CC
Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.
User avatar
rook749
Posts: 1175
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 3:41 am

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by rook749 »

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody

Somebody once stated that if your CV TF has at least 8 DD you'll be almost immune from SS strikes. That's been borne out in my experience, key word being "almost."

Cheers,
CC

I am not sure if its the 8 DDs or a combined ASW value over 34, I have found with the value over 34 I am almost free of sub attacks on my big ships.
User avatar
pontiouspilot
Posts: 1131
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 7:09 pm

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by pontiouspilot »

For later game Allied composition (ie. when they actually have sufficient carriers) what are the thoughts on having 2 or more Air TFs in same hex? If not what is preferable proximity??
rockmedic109
Posts: 2414
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 11:02 am
Location: Citrus Heights, CA

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by rockmedic109 »

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

For later game Allied composition (ie. when they actually have sufficient carriers) what are the thoughts on having 2 or more Air TFs in same hex? If not what is preferable proximity??
One or two carriers per TF and multiple carrier TF in the same hex. Each strike comes in and attacks only one tf while the CAP of all carriers in the same hex will attack all air strikes coming in.

I've had good results with carrier tf CAP providing cover one hex out, but the size of the incoming raids are never more than a dozen planes and are likely low on exp.
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9303
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: rockmedic109

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

For later game Allied composition (ie. when they actually have sufficient carriers) what are the thoughts on having 2 or more Air TFs in same hex? If not what is preferable proximity??
One or two carriers per TF and multiple carrier TF in the same hex. Each strike comes in and attacks only one tf while the CAP of all carriers in the same hex will attack all air strikes coming in.

I've had good results with carrier tf CAP providing cover one hex out, but the size of the incoming raids are never more than a dozen planes and are likely low on exp.

I no longer believe this to be true. In my games, there have been recent strikes against some TFs under CAP and LRCAP...and ships from multiple TFs were attacked by the same raid.

I actually preferred this, as it kept my opponent guessing...
rockmedic109
Posts: 2414
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 11:02 am
Location: Citrus Heights, CA

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by rockmedic109 »

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: rockmedic109

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

For later game Allied composition (ie. when they actually have sufficient carriers) what are the thoughts on having 2 or more Air TFs in same hex? If not what is preferable proximity??
One or two carriers per TF and multiple carrier TF in the same hex. Each strike comes in and attacks only one tf while the CAP of all carriers in the same hex will attack all air strikes coming in.

I've had good results with carrier tf CAP providing cover one hex out, but the size of the incoming raids are never more than a dozen planes and are likely low on exp.

I no longer believe this to be true. In my games, there have been recent strikes against some TFs under CAP and LRCAP...and ships from multiple TFs were attacked by the same raid.

I actually preferred this, as it kept my opponent guessing...
If so, it might be more accurate and thus better. I haven't seen it or heard it {but I also haven't got the beta updates}.
User avatar
msieving1
Posts: 526
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:24 am
Location: Missouri

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by msieving1 »

This article reviews the evolution of USN carrier doctrine in WW2, including the debates over the proper size of carrier task forces.
-- Mark Sieving
rms1pa
Posts: 370
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 6:32 am

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by rms1pa »

excellent , thx

rms/pa
there is a technical term for those who confuse the opinions of an author's characters for the opinions of the author.
the term is IDIOT.
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by rustysi »

All of the above is good and true advice, but keep in mind the answer is as always in this game... It depends (kinda holds true IRL too). It depends on which side you're playing. What time it is in the war? What's the strategic/tactical situation? What are you attempting to achieve?

IRL US carriers often operated in small seperate task groups, early on at least. Hence USS Enterprise gets away scott free (under a rain squall) and her companion gets slammed (don't recall the battle or companion vessel).
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
wdolson
Posts: 7648
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:56 pm
Location: Near Portland, OR

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by wdolson »

Was this late war? I don't recall such a thing happening in 1942.

Bill
WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer
Image
User avatar
AW1Steve
Posts: 14518
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:32 am
Location: Mordor Illlinois

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by AW1Steve »

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Was this late war? I don't recall such a thing happening in 1942.

Bill
26 October 1942 Battle of Santa Cruz

Enterprise was under a rain squall, Hornet got mauled.
User avatar
Gaspote
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:12 am
Location: France

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by Gaspote »

ORIGINAL: rustysi

All of the above is good and true advice, but keep in mind the answer is as always in this game... It depends (kinda holds true IRL too). It depends on which side you're playing. What time it is in the war? What's the strategic/tactical situation? What are you attempting to achieve?

IRL US carriers often operated in small seperate task groups, early on at least. Hence USS Enterprise gets away scott free (under a rain squall) and her companion gets slammed (don't recall the battle or companion vessel).

In the begining of the war, using less fighters for CAP, separating task force making them harder to find is better than making one big which won't stop the raid anyway.

Especially considering they didn't got good air search at this time.

User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by rustysi »

It was during the Solomons campaigns IIRC, maybe Santa Cruz. Enterprise was with maybe Hornet, ten miles apart. Hey TBH I got it from that program 'Enterprise 360', pretty good show. I could look it up when I have a little extra time. Same thing in the Midway campaign, but for different reason, right? Yorktown operated separately, but because she was delayed for repairs. BTW when I say separately I mean geographically and by just a number of miles (ie 10 or so). They would be 'in the same hex' game wise.
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by rustysi »

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve
ORIGINAL: wdolson

Was this late war? I don't recall such a thing happening in 1942.

Bill
26 October 1942 Battle of Santa Cruz

Enterprise was under a rain squall, Hornet got mauled.

Hey, he got me.
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: Carrier Task Force Composition

Post by rustysi »

ORIGINAL: Gaspote

ORIGINAL: rustysi

All of the above is good and true advice, but keep in mind the answer is as always in this game... It depends (kinda holds true IRL too). It depends on which side you're playing. What time it is in the war? What's the strategic/tactical situation? What are you attempting to achieve?

IRL US carriers often operated in small seperate task groups, early on at least. Hence USS Enterprise gets away scott free (under a rain squall) and her companion gets slammed (don't recall the battle or companion vessel).

In the begining of the war, using less fighters for CAP, separating task force making them harder to find is better than making one big which won't stop the raid anyway.

Especially considering they didn't got good air search at this time.

Agreed.

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”