+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28

Thread: screening ships for carriers

  1. #1
    Captain
    Arsenal of DemocracyDarkest HourFor the MotherlandHearts of Iron IIISemper Fi

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Budapest
    Posts
    406

    screening ships for carriers

    afair it was discussed before, but simply can't find that article.
    the question is simple: DD or CL (or maybe a mix of them?) fits better to screen a CV fleet?

  2. #2
    Field Marshal
    Arsenal of Democracy

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,045
    It depends on your current naval doctrines. But in general you are better of with destroyers. The late CVs are faster than the fastest CL, so there is an additional argument for destroyers.

  3. #3
    Captain
    Arsenal of DemocracyDarkest HourFor the MotherlandHearts of Iron IIISemper Fi

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Budapest
    Posts
    406
    the match between DD - CL comes to this:

    - Researching them "costs" exactly the same. CL tech gives u better secondary armament as a bonus, and DD tech gives you better escort efficiency. it seems that any nation that can go the CV line naval doctrine (usa,jap) will build mostly carriers so secondary armament tech is insignificant to them. on the other hand better escorts for the convoys can have it uses (especially for usa).

    - Building CLs are cheaper in icdays. However with 2 brigades attached instead of 1, CL costs the same as a DD. it's a draw.

    - Brigades DD can have 1, CL can have 2 of them. it seems to be a clear advantage for the CL

    - Air defence suits better for a CL, but once your fleet is getting bombed by naval bombers and you unable to cover them with fighters, it seems insignificant if your ships can shot back or not. Unfortunately CV's attack doesn't count as an "air attack" but a "sea attack" so the CL main purpose to prove better air cover versus carrier attacks, not modeled in this game. what a shame! still the CL shines better in this role.

    - Submarine defence, DD suits better for this task. It doesn't seem so very important, never experienced a massive submarine warfare on the pacific. it's clearly more important to usa to counter german sub invasion. DD is much better in this aspect.

    - In terms of Spotting and visibility DD has a clear superioirty what is very important in naval engagments, to determine the starting positions of the fleets.

    - Speed, as Pang pointed out, CLs later in the game can't keep up with modern carriers. It is a very serious drawback, to reduce the speed of the whole fleet. DD is better.

    - Supply/oil consumption. it is absolutely no matter for Allies, but could be more important for nations like Japan. DD superioirty in this aspect is clear.

    - Repairs, DDs are cheaper and faster to repair, but they sustain higher str losses because of the lower "sea defence" capability. i don't know... call it a draw.

    - Scavange of outdated models DDs can be converted to escorts once seriously outdated, while CLs has to be dismantled. it's a clear advantage of the DD.

    So my conclusion is: any cv-heavy nation can use DD better than CL for screening purposes. On the other hand nations with lots of BBs and BCs constantly aiming for short distance naval engagements can have better use of CLs because the longer firing range / better punch they provide, and because of their secondary armament bonus on warships.

    Please feel free to comment on this or correct my mistakes, or points left out from the analysis.
    Last edited by mcganyol; 07-03-2012 at 03:52.

  4. #4
    I generally find that CLs suit Britain better (as your fleets are more likely to have surface fights) and DDs suit the USA better (as most of your battles will be carrier battles). Just a location thing - UK fights Germany and Italy, who don't have carriers and are more likely to close in. USA just fights Japan, who do have carriers.
    Most Serene

    (Currently working on: Mod1914)

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Serenissima View Post
    I generally find that CLs suit Britain better (as your fleets are more likely to have surface fights) and DDs suit the USA better (as most of your battles will be carrier battles). Just a location thing - UK fights Germany and Italy, who don't have carriers and are more likely to close in. USA just fights Japan, who do have carriers.
    I have a 50/50 chance of crash-carrier building as Germany in my '36 or '38 campaigns. Especially if I plan on making any sort of forays into places like Asia or America. Always manage to have an 80 to 100 unit fleet (with less than twelve subs and eighteen transports) that sport at least four carriers, levels III and IV, with 24 CLs, levels IV and V, 30-40 DDs, levels IV mostly V, and an odd assortment of BBs, BCs, and CHs (depending on my overspending) that range from levels I to VI. All this by June of '41. And I usually can have 4 to 8 NAVs that can support local operations.

  6. #6
    Field Marshal
    Arsenal of Democracy

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,045
    Quote Originally Posted by mcganyol View Post
    - Brigades DD can have 1, CL can have 2 of them. it seems to be a clear advantage for the CL
    The brigades that are possible differ. Only DD can use the ASW-Brigade and i consider it the best brigade. For Carriers DDs are better also from this point of view.

    Quote Originally Posted by mcganyol View Post
    - In terms of Spotting and visibility DD has a clear superioirty what is very important in naval engagments, to determine the starting positions of the fleets.

    - Repairs, DDs are cheaper and faster to repair, but they sustain higher str losses because of the lower "sea defence" capability. i don't know... call it a draw.
    CLs have a higher visibility. Is that an advantage? Does that increase the chances, that they soak damage instead of the more valueable Carriers? With improved hull CLs can have up to 8 seadefence, destroyers can never have more than 3 defence. It seems that CL is the better choice when you need damage soaks and DDs are better to prevent that need. So CLs are the better choice in bad weather.
    In good weather the enemy should not reach their distance. But what is if we have a battle between two CTFs? Will the carriers aim for DDs, CLs or CVs?

  7. #7
    Captain
    Arsenal of DemocracyDarkest HourFor the MotherlandHearts of Iron IIISemper Fi

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Budapest
    Posts
    406
    Quote Originally Posted by Pang Bingxun View Post
    The brigades that are possible differ. Only DD can use the ASW-Brigade and i consider it the best brigade. For Carriers DDs are better also from this point of view.
    why do u consider ASW the best brigade? in the pacific i've never experienced massive submarine warfare, but it's always a struggle there to control the skies. In the atlantic ASW is a factor, but in the pacific AA capabilities are much more important imo.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pang Bingxun View Post
    CLs have a higher visibility. Is that an advantage? Does that increase the chances, that they soak damage instead of the more valueable Carriers? With improved hull CLs can have up to 8 seadefence, destroyers can never have more than 3 defence. It seems that CL is the better choice when you need damage soaks and DDs are better to prevent that need. So CLs are the better choice in bad weather.
    In good weather the enemy should not reach their distance. But what is if we have a battle between two CTFs? Will the carriers aim for DDs, CLs or CVs?
    Afaik, visibility has nothing to do in battle. Lower visibility is important to avoid of being spotted.
    The chance of spotting is determined by the 2 fleets visibility and sea detection values. The lower your fleet combined visibility the harder to spot them (thats why a lone transport often can pass seazones with lots of enemy ships). So lower visibility is an advantage. The starting positions of the fleets are influenced by 1,commander, 2,naval doctrines, 3,and who spot the other first.
    Afaik CVs always try to aim capitals first, so the damage soaking function of the CLs or DDs in CV vs CV engagements is marginal (but i can be wrong)

  8. #8
    Field Marshal
    Arsenal of Democracy

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,045
    Quote Originally Posted by mcganyol View Post
    why do u consider ASW the best brigade? in the pacific i've never experienced massive submarine warfare, but it's always a struggle there to control the skies. In the atlantic ASW is a factor, but in the pacific AA capabilities are much more important imo.
    Carriers have high AA capabilities themselfs. So if screens are neither used against airplanes nor as damage soaks the ability to screens vessels on and under the water is the most important thing. Screening Subs is the most difficult task of all, so there is highest to gain from a brigade. In the pacific other priorities may be appropriate. I lack expierence to offer a good judgement there.

  9. #9
    Ok. CLs and DDs are good in a mixed bag (usually a 1:2 ratio, respectively) that are certainly useful to meet capital's screen requirements. However, I prefer my CLs because of their strength and 500 km extra range can keep them with my carriers on operations further into the Atlantic. I also pack several heavier ships with my CVs to absorb damage and keep my carriers and weak screens to maintain the pressures against the enemy fleet. That is often a BB or BC with two CHs. CVs never go above three (unless two or more carrier fleets become engaged in the same fight.)

  10. #10
    First Lieutenant vitality's Avatar
    Arsenal of DemocracyDarkest HourIron CrossMagicka

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Götaland
    Posts
    281
    I prefer to just churn out huge quantities of destroyers. I also like to put a few CAs with my carriers. Usually 2-4 carriers, 3-5 CA and rest destroyer.

  11. #11
    Captain
    Arsenal of DemocracyDarkest HourFor the MotherlandHearts of Iron IIISemper Fi

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Budapest
    Posts
    406
    Mixing the carriers with other capitals (even CA) in the given ruleset is a very bad idea. In theory damage soaking, or helping the CVs in bad weather sounds good, but stacking penalty cripples CV's attack and (more importantly) defence. So any unnecessary ship is the task force becomes only a serious burden.
    Allocating more (or less) screens to them than 1:1 also lowers their effectivness.

    Given all other factors are equal (techs, naval doctrines, commanders, sliders, ministers... etc)
    a 3CV+3DD fleet will crush a 3CV+8BC+12DD+7CL fleet very badly.
    3CV+3DD vs 5CV+10BB+8BC+7CA is a one shot, one kill for the smaller carrier fleet. I bet 3CV+3DD won't lose even 10% str while sinking every opposing ship.
    You can try it for yourself if u don't belive me.

  12. #12
    Colonel
    Arsenal of DemocracyDarkest HourHearts of Iron III

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Morrow, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by mcganyol View Post
    Mixing the carriers with other capitals (even CA) in the given ruleset is a very bad idea. In theory damage soaking, or helping the CVs in bad weather sounds good, but stacking penalty cripples CV's attack and (more importantly) defence. So any unnecessary ship is the task force becomes only a serious burden.
    Allocating more (or less) screens to them than 1:1 also lowers their effectivness.

    Given all other factors are equal (techs, naval doctrines, commanders, sliders, ministers... etc)
    a 3CV+3DD fleet will crush a 3CV+8BC+12DD+7CL fleet very badly.
    3CV+3DD vs 5CV+10BB+8BC+7CA is a one shot, one kill for the smaller carrier fleet. I bet 3CV+3DD won't lose even 10% str while sinking every opposing ship.
    You can try it for yourself if u don't belive me.
    Amen brother. Nice to see somebody else discover this too.

    The biggest problem with the game as I see it is that naval battles need to be done differently for air attack versus naval gunnery. In surface battles, more ships in a fleet just get in each other's way and diminishing returns does and should set in. However, more ships in a carrier battle SHOULD NOT reduce the attack and defense of ships in the battle. IT DOES!!! This is why a 3CV + 3CL fleet will defeat a 10CV +5BB + 10 screening fleet most of the time. This needs to fixed in the EXE file to do this properly.
    "To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize"
    "It is dangerous to be right when your government is wrong"
    -- Voltaire

  13. #13
    People are having some sad naval results if the 3 CV fleet with only 3 DDs are defeating fleets with twice the screens and other capitals. I must be blessed! My fleets (as described earlier) crushed an US fleet that had 6 CVs and 6 DDs. Some of their CVs were the best level VI classes. With 4 CVs, 1 BB, 2 CA, 6 CLs and 4 DDs, I lost one CL and sank three of their CVs. They even brought in 2 NAVs and 4 TACs during the 23 hour battle. They damaged one CA almost destroyed and the BB was at 60% strength. My carriers? One level IV was at 88%.

    Most of the rest of that game saw me hunt down the 12 American CVs and their large number of DDs. Only ever lost two CVs during the war, and they were my tier II and III that died with their 4 DD screens helping during Sealion. The fleet that destroyed them? A UK mix of 1 CV, 3 BBs, 6 CAs, 10 CLs and 14 DDs.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by mcganyol View Post
    the match between DD - CL comes to this:

    my conclusion is: any cv-heavy nation can use DD better than CL for screening purposes. On the other hand nations with lots of BBs and BCs constantly aiming for short distance naval engagements can have better use of CLs because the longer firing range / better punch they provide, and because of their secondary armament bonus on warships.

    Please feel free to comment on this or correct my mistakes, or points left out from the analysis.
    Any nation aiming for sea superiority is better using DDs

    CLs are better if you aime at being dominated at sea

    P.S : IMHO CV are so good that even germany and SU use them. The only debatable nation is UK (cause Uncle Sam will win you a long game anyways)

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Emmanuel_M View Post
    Any nation aiming for sea superiority is better using DDs

    CLs are better if you aime at being dominated at sea

    P.S : IMHO CV are so good that even germany and SU use them. The only debatable nation is UK (cause Uncle Sam will win you a long game anyways)
    In my opinion, you are stating pure opinion here. You probably used to run DD zerg fleets back in the day. They BOTH have uses in certain situations. Claiming that one is better than the other for the overall naval picture is ignorant.

    CVs are "so good" that any human will chew up an under-protected CV fleet. You go ahead and send your 3CV/3DD fleet to Europe. It won't come back if I'm there.

  16. #16
    Close the worLd,.txEn eht nepO GAGA Extrem's Avatar
    200k clubAchtung PanzerA Game of DwarvesArsenal of DemocracyHearts of Iron 2: Armageddon
    Cities in MotionCrusader Kings IIDarkest HourEast India Company CollectionElven Legacy Collection
    EU3 CompleteDivine WindFor the MotherlandHearts of Iron IIIHeir to the Throne
    King Arthur IILeviathan: WarshipsMagickaMajesty 2EU3 Napoleon's Ambition
    Rome GoldSemper FiSupreme Ruler 2020 GoldSupreme Ruler 2020Victoria 2
    Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of DarknessMount & Blade: WarbandV2 BetaCK2: Holy Knight
    EU3 Collectors EditionKnights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    7,090
    I haven't played for some time, but iirc, CL are way superior to DD in regards of air attack. So if you are facing enemy air units, CL are never a bad choise.
    DD on the other hand shine against submarines (duh). So if you are playing ENG and face GER, you are probably better off with DD, while the USA vs. JAP could use CL in their main carrier fleet and DD for hunter-killer groups.

  17. #17
    Captain
    Arsenal of DemocracyDarkest HourFor the MotherlandHearts of Iron IIISemper Fi

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Budapest
    Posts
    406
    As i already wrote 2 posts earlier, carriers attack doesn't count as an 'air attack' but as a 'sea attack'.
    so no air defence/attack will help against them. it's a flaw in the game mechanics.
    Please don't mislead beginner aod players stating CTFs with CLs are performing better against other CTFs.

  18. #18
    Close the worLd,.txEn eht nepO GAGA Extrem's Avatar
    200k clubAchtung PanzerA Game of DwarvesArsenal of DemocracyHearts of Iron 2: Armageddon
    Cities in MotionCrusader Kings IIDarkest HourEast India Company CollectionElven Legacy Collection
    EU3 CompleteDivine WindFor the MotherlandHearts of Iron IIIHeir to the Throne
    King Arthur IILeviathan: WarshipsMagickaMajesty 2EU3 Napoleon's Ambition
    Rome GoldSemper FiSupreme Ruler 2020 GoldSupreme Ruler 2020Victoria 2
    Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of DarknessMount & Blade: WarbandV2 BetaCK2: Holy Knight
    EU3 Collectors EditionKnights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    7,090
    Quote Originally Posted by mcganyol View Post
    As i already wrote 2 posts earlier, carriers attack doesn't count as an 'air attack' but as a 'sea attack'.
    so no air defence/attack will help against them. it's a flaw in the game mechanics.
    Please don't mislead beginner aod players stating CTFs with CLs are performing better against other CTFs.
    Ah, yes, the many hours of HoI3 have taken their toll. Post has been adjusted.

  19. #19
    Major The-Doc's Avatar
    Arsenal of DemocracyDeus VultEuropa Universalis: ChroniclesFor The GloryEuropa Universalis: Rome
    Rome: Vae Victis500k clubEuropa Universalis IV

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Texian Empire
    Posts
    551
    Quote Originally Posted by mcganyol View Post
    As i already wrote 2 posts earlier, carriers attack doesn't count as an 'air attack' but as a 'sea attack'.
    so no air defence/attack will help against them. it's a flaw in the game mechanics.
    Please don't mislead beginner aod players stating CTFs with CLs are performing better against other CTFs.
    Arghh, how did I never realize this? Guess this pretty much makes AA brigades worthless on ships. I mean how often are you fighting naval bombers as opposed to other ships (including CVs I guess). Does this go for Port Strike as well?
    "Wherever an altar is found, there civilization exists." - Joseph de Maistre

  20. #20
    Close the worLd,.txEn eht nepO GAGA Extrem's Avatar
    200k clubAchtung PanzerA Game of DwarvesArsenal of DemocracyHearts of Iron 2: Armageddon
    Cities in MotionCrusader Kings IIDarkest HourEast India Company CollectionElven Legacy Collection
    EU3 CompleteDivine WindFor the MotherlandHearts of Iron IIIHeir to the Throne
    King Arthur IILeviathan: WarshipsMagickaMajesty 2EU3 Napoleon's Ambition
    Rome GoldSemper FiSupreme Ruler 2020 GoldSupreme Ruler 2020Victoria 2
    Victoria II: A House DividedVictoria II: Heart of DarknessMount & Blade: WarbandV2 BetaCK2: Holy Knight
    EU3 Collectors EditionKnights of Pen and Paper +1 Edition500k clubEuropa Universalis IV: Pre-order

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    7,090
    Quote Originally Posted by The-Doc View Post
    Arghh, how did I never realize this? Guess this pretty much makes AA brigades worthless on ships. I mean how often are you fighting naval bombers as opposed to other ships (including CVs I guess). Does this go for Port Strike as well?
    NAV are absolutely brutal when they attack. The AI rarely utilizes air-to-sea power, but when it does, you will be happy you added AA to your cruisers. I remember NAV were banned or limited in the few MPs I played, simply because a wing of 12 NAV would just obliterate any fleet within hours.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts