Something to take note of

[HansBolter]

Not sure how common the knowledge of this may be, but I recently noticed that when changing commanders for submarines/TFs the selection is often much more severely limited for the TF than for the individual submarine.

Early on, the Americans are short on good sub commanders and many payers often relegate their fleet boats to supply or minelaying duty while assigning the short supply of good commanders to the s-boats.

The combination of the high dud rate and crappy commanders makes many players not want to employ the fleet boats offensively.

Don't let yourself get caught into thinking your supply of available commanders is more limited than it really is by waiting until you put the sub in a TF to realize you need to replace the commander.

Examine the commander and replace him while the sub is disbanded into the port.

Two photos will follow of examples of the lists available when replacing in port and in TF.

[HansBolter]

First example replacing while in port:

[HansBolter]

Second example replacing while in TF:

[HansBolter]

Notice how much longer the list is when disbanded into the port compared to when in a TF.

Available TF commanders are much fewer in number than available sub commanders and since sub TFs are almost always one ship TFs the commander of the TF and of the sub are the same entity.

[Skyros]

Awesome, never realized this.

[geofflambert]

I have never in my life changed a sub TF commander from the sub's captain to someone else. Also, the only times (and they are few) when I have had more than one sub in a TF was when I was moving a number of them to a certain theatre, where they broke up.

[btd64]

Yes, I've noticed the same thing. It almost looks like the short list is CO's that are on site, at the docks, and the long list includes everyone in range. I'm spit balling here....GP

[pws1225]

Thanks Hans. I never realized that before. I bet the same technique will help us JFBs too. [:D]

[alimentary]

The difference here is replacing the captain of the boat versus replacing the commander of the task force. They are different roles and have a different pool of available officers.

[btd64]

ORIGINAL: alimentary

The difference here is replacing the captain of the boat versus replacing the commander of the task force. They are different roles and have a different pool of available officers.

I think your on to something. Hans if you take the same sub TF and select the boat and then the CO, you get the bigger list. If you select the sub TF and then the CO, the TF will get a TF commander but not replace the sub commander. I just remembered this when alimentary made his post....GP

[HansBolter]

Absolutely.

My problem is that I often forget to examine the sub commander before I create the TF.

Only then, do I look to change the commander and instead of looking at the individual boat commander within the TF I have a tendency to try replacing the TF commander, which leads to the truncated list of guys with mostly 46 naval skill and 26 aggressiveness.

Making sure you are looking at replacing the boat commander provides you withe the extended list.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: alimentary

The difference here is replacing the captain of the boat versus replacing the commander of the task force. They are different roles and have a different pool of available officers.

correct

[NigelKentarus]

I've pretty much done it that way all along. I usually export ship leaders (from Tracker), delete everyone except sub CO's and unassigned. Then I sort by Agg, Nav, & Leadership (all descending), come up with an arbitrary cutoff point and start changing submarine CO's. I don't know it it helps, but I guess it doesn't hurt.

[Jorge_Stanbury]

Problem with using TF is that I always disband submarine; pretty much after each patrol, as the sub will always come back to PH with enough damage to require a few days in the shipyard

[GetAssista]

I rarely if ever assign TF commanders to subs or transport convoys. Default commanders derived from ships are enough if you assigned decent ship captains to escorts and subs beforehand. No need to throw PPs away needlessly

[geofflambert]

For the most part, not just with subs, I think that appointing a TF commander other than the most senior captain is a waste of PPs. Put in good captains and they'll still be there after you disband.

Wow, I didn't read GetAssista's post before posting myself. [8|] We must be telepathically connected.

[Admiral DadMan]

Yeah, I use the sub's captain as the TF commander