Replacement aircraft for carrier air groups

[Andy]

OK..... before I downloaded this Beta patch , I could replenish a carrier's lost aircraft at any level 3 port , now I can't .

[MizuYuuki]

Now you have to go back to a level 5 port and "release" the CV to replenish the planes. On balanced difficulty, the CV will be unavailable for 3 days. After that it is returned to available status. You get the command points back, and have to requisition the CV again.

[Andy]

Originally posted by MizuYuuki:

Now you have to go back to a level 5 port and "release" the CV to replenish the planes. On balanced difficulty, the CV will be unavailable for 3 days. After that it is returned to available status. You get the command points back, and have to requisition the CV again.

Well that's just ridiculous .......!!!!!!

[MizuYuuki]

Originally posted by Andy:

Originally posted by MizuYuuki:

Now you have to go back to a level 5 port and "release" the CV to replenish the planes. On balanced difficulty, the CV will be unavailable for 3 days. After that it is returned to available status. You get the command points back, and have to requisition the CV again.

Well that's just ridiculous .......!!!!!!

Some method of reducing the availability of aircraft was needed for game balancing, and the mechanic of releasing ships was already in the game. However, it's a half measure, and easily circumvented by rotating two carriers. Better methods, for example, would be to provide only 1 squadron of each aircraft type per week or charge command points for replacement aircraft, and then allow the aircraft to fly out to a carrier that is in range or return the carrier to a level 3 port to rearm. The exact number of aircraft available or alternatively the cost could change with difficulty level.

[JAKeller]

A better solution would've been to allow carrier aircraft to land on a carrier. i.e. CV AC that's not originally in the CV's air group.

[Andy]

Originally posted by JAKeller:

A better solution would've been to allow carrier aircraft to land on a carrier. i.e. CV AC that's not originally in the CV's air group.

It would certainly be a more realistic scenario .

[Dan_Dare]

well, it is quite realistic from a point of view of the IJN, where they had air groups assigned to an especific Koku Sentai (remenber that Zuikaku could not participate on Midway due to her AG decimated at Coral Sea) the only thing for me, and cause lots of you complain about it, that could make it somehow better it is that maybe penalizing with the 100% of the CP could be considered unfair, so in order to complicate the things a little further I will suggest returnig inmediatly a 60% of the CP ( if the CV was not damaged but the airgroup is below 50%) and three weeks (should be 4 weeks but i will not complain) later when the CV is back to operations. the 40% of the remaining CPs

from the point of view of the USN, well, the AGs were not 100% attached to an expecific CV, so in less than three weeks those could have been replenished (lets say one to two weeks, but I will not complain here either)

well, and if we had 2 TF of CVs (one CV each) and then you had one CV sunk (a TF with two CV is the same, but without adding the range restrictions to the operation), should we be able to land in the other carrier till topping up the air group? ( the rest of course should be ditched on the sea)...history told as yes, but i couldn`t find any proff of this mixed AG being used afterwards as a fully operational AG...so the restictions should be into force anyhow.

Some one could say that "But in the middle of the battle this mixed AG could launch an attack!!!", well if, the mixed AG is 80% of the original you are maybe rigth, but that 20% will not make much a difference either. but if the mixed AG is 20% of the original AG then some penalties (lets call them administrative-operational penalties) sure will be in force...such a can of worns I have just openned.

The exception to the above (and not yet feasible in the WOTS world) could be if we asignned the dbs or tbs from an AG to land (ala Enterpise at Guadalcanal?), but then the CV would have the penalties to top up her AG


those are my two cents to this conversation...

[Herr Flick]

I like the unavailable days for regrouping it makes me use my aircraft and CV more carefully rather than just wipe out your strike force sail it to Shortlands and just click rearm and set sail again and repeat, I actually start now with the Zuiho and Ryujo first then while there regrouping send out a Shokaku and rotate the forces, only thing is the AI doesn’t have the same penalty sort that out and it will be fine, damage repair days are fine by me

[Drydock Dreams Games]

That mechanic is one of the single most realistic improvements made to WotS since release.
In 1942 there's nothing realistic at all about replenishing the aircraft complement at sea. Worse, actually in SOPAC, when damaged, a carrier would transfer all its planes ashore (to Henderson Field in this case) and retire to obtain a new air group. That whole new system is great & reflects this mechanic best IMHO.
Replacement airgroups & dedicated CVEs to carry them were a thing that came much, much later. Absolutely out of scope in the current circumstances.
Cheers!

[MizuYuuki]

Originally posted by Drydock Dreams Games:

That mechanic is one of the single most realistic improvements made to WotS since release.
In 1942 there's nothing realistic at all about replenishing the aircraft complement at sea

OK. Then the AI should stop doing it because it definitely flies replacement planes out to its carriers.

[Kraznova]

Originally posted by MizuYuuki:

Originally posted by Drydock Dreams Games:

That mechanic is one of the single most realistic improvements made to WotS since release.
In 1942 there's nothing realistic at all about replenishing the aircraft complement at sea

OK. Then the AI should stop doing it because it definitely flies replacement planes out to its carriers.

No it doesn't. You have been insisting on this for months, and I have never once seen it happen. I think you are confusing the bug that was there for a while, where AI carrier air wings were replenished automatically

[Redmarkus4]

Originally posted by Andy:

Originally posted by JAKeller:

A better solution would've been to allow carrier aircraft to land on a carrier. i.e. CV AC that's not originally in the CV's air group.

It would certainly be a more realistic scenario .

I'm sure I've seen the AI doing this - delivering replacement AC to carriers. Or was I imagining that?

[Redmarkus4]

Originally posted by Kraznova:

Originally posted by MizuYuuki:

OK. Then the AI should stop doing it because it definitely flies replacement planes out to its carriers.

No it doesn't. You have been insisting on this for months, and I have never once seen it happen. I think you are confusing the bug that was there for a while, where AI carrier air wings were replenished automatically

Ah - OK. It was a bug.

[Gelfrat]

Originally posted by Kraznova:

Originally posted by MizuYuuki:

OK. Then the AI should stop doing it because it definitely flies replacement planes out to its carriers.

No it doesn't. You have been insisting on this for months, and I have never once seen it happen. I think you are confusing the bug that was there for a while, where AI carrier air wings were replenished automatically

I don't know if this also applies to the vanilla game, but the bug seems to still exist in the Tokyo Express mod.

[MizuYuuki]

Originally posted by Kraznova:

Originally posted by MizuYuuki:

OK. Then the AI should stop doing it because it definitely flies replacement planes out to its carriers.

No it doesn't. You have been insisting on this for months, and I have never once seen it happen. I think you are confusing the bug that was there for a while, where AI carrier air wings were replenished automatically

I saw it happen in v1.08g5h7. I had an IJN campaign where I gave the AI 800 CP to start. Early in the campaign I located a USN CV east of Rennell Island and sent and airstrike of 12 bombers and 12 fighters. The fighters got too far out in front of the bombers and the AI triggered an engagement with its CAP fighters. My 12 fighters shot down all 24 of the F4F fighters, and I exited back to the strategic map. I saw 2 icons of USN fighters fly from the north to the spot where the USN CV was located. The USN CV was not detected because the few remaining Zeros were in cool down. When my bombers arrived they spotted the USN CV and I entered tactical. The USN CV put up 24 F4F fighters, and shot down all of my aircraft. A few F4F fighters were shot down. I had a second 12 fighter and 12 bomber airstrike strike following the first which had been launched as soon as possible after the first strike from my CV. When my planes detected the USN CV I entered tactical, and the remaining F4F fighters (I don't remember exactly how many, but it was the correct number minus the previous losses) engaged my planes. This time my bombers got through and sank the USN CV (Saratoga).

Those fighters must have come from another CV because there is nothing to the north or northeast other than Santa Cruz which was unoccupied. I never did locate this other CV because I had no scouting up in that area. Without fighters, that CV should have returned to New Hebrides because that was the mechanic introduced when the automatic replacement of aircraft was removed from the game sometime back in Sept 2021. If the F4Fs didn't come from a second CV, then they materialized out of nothing, but that mechanic had long since been removed from the game.

I don't normally see replacement fighters coming to USN CVs in my normal IJN campaigns because those USN CVs show up one at a time, and I don't attack them until they are northwest of Rennell Island. At that point the CV is beyond the range of F4F land based fighters which have a very limited range of 421 nm.

So I'll rephrase my statement. If the AI is flying replacement aircraft out to carriers, it should stop doing that.

[KillZoneGB]

Originally posted by MizuYuuki:

. At that point the CV is beyond the range of F4F land based fighters which have a very limited range of 421 nm.

So I'll rephrase my statement. If the AI is flying replacement aircraft out to carriers, it should stop doing that.

As they say "theres more than one way to skin a cat".

I would like to see more logistic ways to replace aircraft/ammo/fuel on a cv than send back to a level5 port.

1) Aircraft loaded up on a Liberty ship and unload at a port, ready for the cv to replenish lost AC
2) Ferry AC from Escort Carriers and Airfields, which could introduce Fuel stock for Tankers.
when the fuel runs out, the Escort task force has to replenish its stocks at a Port with fuel.
same with ammo (liberty ships).

When i do play, I tend to have tankers/cargo ships in my task force, Mid sea refuelling and supply's. silly me I got to try a kick this habit in this game.

I don`t like this idea that Human ship`s have to disband to replace AC loses.
Most important asset not on patrol/duty. (nah i don`t think so)

Anyhoo, it`s 5:30 AM, now I`m off to wake up to this very fine day with a cup of lovely Joe.

Have a great one folks...