Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

The Fires of Midway» Forums » Rules

Subject: Constructing Task Forces rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Dan Poole
United States
Goldsboro
North Carolina
flag msg tools
Udu Wudu
badge
Udu Wudu
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Aside from the reason listed below, why would you ever make a 2-Marker TF as opposed to placing 2 single-Carrier TF's in the same area? From what I can tell, A and B as separate TF's in the same area function identically to an A+B TF (i.e., CAP engagements, bomber target selection etc).


The only advantage I can see to combining 2 Carrier Markers into a single Task Force is to guarantee a certain placement combination if your opponent has the starting advantage, since he gets to place your TF's.

Or am I missing something? Do 2 single TF's occupying the same area somehow function differently than a single double carrier TF (aside from the fact that single TF's in the same area don't have to move together)?

Thanks

-D
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Cunliffe
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar

A two carrier task force is standard operating force. You can try experimenting with one carrier task forces but having a 2nd CAP on hand to defend your carriers can be very handy.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Poole
United States
Goldsboro
North Carolina
flag msg tools
Udu Wudu
badge
Udu Wudu
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
But isn't it legal to have 2 single carrier task forces in the same area? If so, don't both carriers benefit from each other's CAP? I am only asking to make sure I understand the rules correctly. My understanding is that when a strike force enters an enemy-occupied area, all CAP are placed in the ocean line, even if they come from different task forces, right?

Thanks
-D
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Cunliffe
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar

The maximum number of carriers that can be in the same area is 2. Only carriers in the Target Area contribute CAP.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Poole
United States
Goldsboro
North Carolina
flag msg tools
Udu Wudu
badge
Udu Wudu
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So if you have 2 separate single carrier task forces in the same area, both carriers will be able to use their CAP against a strike force, right?

This in essence would be the equivalent of having the same 2 carriers as part of the same task force.

As always, I appreciate your patience and prompt responses

-D
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Cunliffe
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
Yes it is exactly the same. It might be helpful for you to think in terms of individual carries.

Each carrier can operate separably or together in groups of two. If carriers are together they may share defensive CAP but can each be targeted by one Strike Group.

If you separate your carriers, they have less defensive potential but you won't risk losing them all at once from a single Strike Group.

Which option is better? That is for you to decide. The real life admirals experimented with different options to find the right balance between defense and survivability.

Good luck.

- S
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jose Angel Garcia Gomez
Spain
Madrid
Madrid
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You may want to try my variant for stacked carrier markers. It gives some pros and cons to the decision of stack or not carrier markers and I donĀ“t think it's unbalanced.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jonathan
United States
Maitland
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
A recent opponent of mine tried seperating his US carriers in the Coral Sea engagement. At first I thought he was crazy, but I did lead to a ton of excess damage on a carrier that was already going to sink anyhow... I do think the benefits of stacking them together outweigh the gains of keeping them apart.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Cunliffe
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
In the real life Coral Sea battle the Shoho was operating seperatly when it was hit by the American Strike Group. What happened next was one of the worst cases of overkill in the history of naval warfare. Three torpedo hits and over a dozen bomb hits were scored on the lone light carrier!

On the plus side for the Japanese the two fleet carriers, Shokaku and Zuikaku operating sepertly were completly undamaged and free to launch a blistering counterattack.

Ultimatly the Shoho served as a good distraction for American attentions!

- Steve
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rob Veenenberg
Netherlands
Vinkeveen
flag msg tools
Re: Constructing Task Forces: 4 carriers and 43 CAP during fatal minutes in Midway battle
Steven,

In the Midway battle the 4 Japanese carriers maneuvred within 1 Taskforce and managed to have 43 Fighters on cap (divided by 9 Zero's per squadron in the game that means: 5 CAP!!!!

So I would suggest that making TF's must make sense that reconnaisance must be made against each TF in an sea area separately. A TF may consist of 1 to 4 carriers and each carrier may put 1 fighter on CAP, so that a TF of 4 carriers is protected by max 4 CAP.

On page 212 of Parshall and Tully all 4 cariers are in 1 TF with Haruna and Kirishima in the front acting as reconnaissance ships for incoming enemy strikes and Chikuma and Tone (most modern of all CA's) in the rear with the same function.

Even with these mighty and superior 43 Zero's in the air and even 1 on the runway, the Japanese could only stop the incoming strikes of VT-8 (Hornet), VT-6 and VT-3, but failed to dislodge the Escort fighters of VF-3 and VS-6 and reach for the dive bombers of VB-3 and VB-6 in time to prevent their deadly attacks. These attacks crippled 3 carriers. Big Akagi was hit by only ONE bomb on the elevator but the inferno's following that hit eventually destroyed the ship to a burning hulk. Her crew was unable to control these (formidable) fires despite the frantic and heroic efforts which killed many fire fighters.

NB There were NO Japanese bombers on their decks, but (worse) down in the enclosed hangers, which became inferno's after first bombs exploded and turned aircraft, petrol tanks into raging hot fires.

Exploding aircraft would have done less havoc and carnage if the hangers would have been open to each side as in US cariers (burning aircraft could then have ben pushed over the side) and the Japanese would have avoided reserve petrol being stored close to the hangers or had a better fire fighting system than the foam they used. In Taiho and Shinano (both with armoured decks) most faults were taken care off, but these carriers were torpedoed with a disastrous outcome.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.