Resizing Squadrons

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
LeeChard
Posts: 1116
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:24 pm
Location: Michigan

Resizing Squadrons

Post by LeeChard »

My CV has 18F 27DB 27TB for a total of 72 aircraft, the green limit.
Is there some way to reduce the DB or TB squadrons so I can increase my fighters?
Also, as I understand it I can overload the carrier by 10% without penalty. Is that true?
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 19744
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Resizing Squadrons

Post by BBfanboy »

Your standard naval squadrons have a small window of time in early 1943 when they may re-size. Keep clicking on the resize option and after a few clicks it should open up a box that asks what size you would like to set. Type that in and close the box. It will take AT LEAST one turn for the resizing to take effect and only then can you start taking on more aircraft or sending the ones on reserve to the pools. I think your CV must be in a decent sized port for this as well.

Your Marine "carrier capable" squadrons can resize at any time but with the same rules about the CV staying in a good port for a few days.

I have always understood the max load to be the CV capacity + 10% for no operating penalty, and up to 15% with some operating penalty. I resize my squadrons to the max+10% figure. Where there is a fraction, I round it DOWN to ensure I do not exceed the limit and cause penalties.

Note that putting max load on your CVs inhibits their opportunity to take on aircraft from damaged carriers or to act as stepping stones for an air bridge to move naval squadrons across stretches of water, or as air transports for land squadrons loaded in port.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9303
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Resizing Squadrons

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: Ranger5355

My CV has 18F 27DB 27TB for a total of 72 aircraft, the green limit.
Is there some way to reduce the DB or TB squadrons so I can increase my fighters?
Also, as I understand it I can overload the carrier by 10% without penalty. Is that true?

You can overload to 115%, actually.

Up near the unit size in the air unit screen, in the top left, there is a resize option. Sometimes, there is a scheduled resize, in which case you can't resize the unit until after all scheduled resizes. If there is no scheduled resize, you can change the size of the unit to anything between 1 and the maximum size of the carrier. You must also be in port to do this, and I think there might be airfield size requirements to it as well (can't remember).
LeeChard
Posts: 1116
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:24 pm
Location: Michigan

RE: Resizing Squadrons

Post by LeeChard »

Very helpful, thanks guys.
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: Resizing Squadrons

Post by HansBolter »

The best way to maximize your carrier capacity prior to the ability to resize is to add a Marine squadron.

Carriers can operate a maximum of 5 squadrons.

Many players add a fighter squadron in '42.
Hans

jmalter
Posts: 1673
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 5:41 pm

RE: Resizing Squadrons

Post by jmalter »

While I can understand the urge to maximize carrier airgroup size, I'd advise you don't get carried away.

Let's say you've upsized a carrier's groups to 115%, & all groups are wearing the max # of planes + 3 in reserve. That's fine, you're sailing out from port & looking for trouble. Problem is, carrier capacity includes active planes + repair/maintenence planes (reserve planes don't count against carrier capacity). After a combat phase, some few planes will need repair, & reserve planes will auto-transfer to the active category. So there's a real risk that a CV that sailed from port w/ an orange plane-load is now in the red, it's at a disadvantage until the damaged planes are repaired.

So I'd be careful, mebbe you could increase one of a CV's airgroups, to 105% of capacity (or more, if you expect that your airgroups will suffer heavy losses), but understand that CV airgroup overload isn't always advantageous.
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: Resizing Squadrons

Post by HansBolter »

ORIGINAL: jmalter

While I can understand the urge to maximize carrier airgroup size, I'd advise you don't get carried away.

Let's say you've upsized a carrier's groups to 115%, & all groups are wearing the max # of planes + 3 in reserve. That's fine, you're sailing out from port & looking for trouble. Problem is, carrier capacity includes active planes + repair/maintenence planes (reserve planes don't count against carrier capacity). After a combat phase, some few planes will need repair, & reserve planes will auto-transfer to the active category. So there's a real risk that a CV that sailed from port w/ an orange plane-load is now in the red, it's at a disadvantage until the damaged planes are repaired.

So I'd be careful, mebbe you could increase one of a CV's airgroups, to 105% of capacity (or more, if you expect that your airgroups will suffer heavy losses), but understand that CV airgroup overload isn't always advantageous.


Adding an 18 plane Marine squadron to the at start air strength of the US CVs gets them to around the 105-110% mark so there is a margin for error.

Once the 27 plane carrier fighter squadrons upsize to 36 you will either have to remove the Marine squadron or break it down into fragments and retain only what can fit.

Another nice touch is squeezing one of the F4F recon squadrons on board.

Some later Essex class CV enter with an F4F recon aboard a standard complement.
Hans

User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 19744
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Resizing Squadrons

Post by BBfanboy »

To avoid the problem with reserve aircraft being taken into operation and overloading the CV, I just include any reserve aircraft in my calculation of the 110% load.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
jmalter
Posts: 1673
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 5:41 pm

RE: Resizing Squadrons

Post by jmalter »

ORIGINAL: HansBolter
Another nice touch is squeezing one of the F4F recon squadrons on board.
I really like your idea of having a recon element on a CV. My game is in late '43, & my AirCombat TFs are looking for land targets.
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 19744
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Resizing Squadrons

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: jmalter
ORIGINAL: HansBolter
Another nice touch is squeezing one of the F4F recon squadrons on board.
I really like your idea of having a recon element on a CV. My game is in late '43, & my AirCombat TFs are looking for land targets.
If you don't have recon aircraft on your CVs, consider using the float planes from the escorting BBs or cruisers. They can be detached for a couple of days if you want them to scout ahead of the CVs to pick strike targets.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: Resizing Squadrons

Post by HansBolter »

ORIGINAL: jmalter
ORIGINAL: HansBolter
Another nice touch is squeezing one of the F4F recon squadrons on board.
I really like your idea of having a recon element on a CV. My game is in late '43, & my AirCombat TFs are looking for land targets.


They have far greater range than the carrier bombers you rely on for Nav search as well so they extend the eyes of your carriers in mid ocean when not being used for land recon.

Look ahead at your carrier reinforcements. I think the ones with an organic recon squadron of 4 planes start arriving soon for you.
Hans

User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9303
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Resizing Squadrons

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: jmalter

While I can understand the urge to maximize carrier airgroup size, I'd advise you don't get carried away.

Let's say you've upsized a carrier's groups to 115%, & all groups are wearing the max # of planes + 3 in reserve. That's fine, you're sailing out from port & looking for trouble. Problem is, carrier capacity includes active planes + repair/maintenence planes (reserve planes don't count against carrier capacity). After a combat phase, some few planes will need repair, & reserve planes will auto-transfer to the active category. So there's a real risk that a CV that sailed from port w/ an orange plane-load is now in the red, it's at a disadvantage until the damaged planes are repaired.

So I'd be careful, mebbe you could increase one of a CV's airgroups, to 105% of capacity (or more, if you expect that your airgroups will suffer heavy losses), but understand that CV airgroup overload isn't always advantageous.

In this situation, the extra planes would be pushed over the side, I think. It might take a day...

I go up to 110% for IJN. For the Allies, I don't bother until the VBF units arrive in 1945 - 90 planes is plenty.

Also in my experience, you can't resize to 110% total capacity and pull 3 reserves into each unit. For example, my size-63 CVs have a total group size of 70, but I can only pull 6 planes into reserve not the full 9, or not even up to the 8 that I thought I should be able to do (115% = 72.45, or 72 planes, and reserves count at 1/4). I'm not concerned about damaged planes causing those in reserve to be pulled out, as damaged planes means I had a battle and I definitely lost at least one plane. IJN planes aren't exactly known for being sturdy [:'(].
Post Reply

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