But then it limits you to 1 naval action at any one time since the NAV's can't be in 2 places.
As for bombarment this is ture, but ultimately not worth much. See you invade undefended provinces and then attack over land to take the port. It is much more effective and faster doing it that way. And because it's undefended you don't shore bombard. Yes I know it can add to a battle along the shore which is nice, but I use TAC/CAS for that anyway.
One last point. Your NAV's are based somewhere. You send a SAG out to the North Sea and also west of France hunting UK CV's. You find one CTF (pick either area). The game pauses and you send the NAV out to participate and also INT. But it takes time for the planes to arrive and at least one and most likely 2 rounds happened where your SAG is hit by the CAG's with no return fire.
The only way to coutner this is to have standing air superiority over all potential naval zones, or limit your SAG's to a zone where you want to operate (of course the enemy might not be there).
One other point. Not sure if FTM fixed this but in SF and before the NAV's weren't guaranteed to find the enemy surface fleet even if your SAG was engaged in combat. In my tests for SF the NAV's sometimes never joined the fight and kept patrolling the area or just sat doing nothing in the sea zone.
When going SAG, I don't "chase CV's".
SAG forces can bomb the shorline, adding up to a 25% penalty, at no cost to the ships. While it is true that I tend to "invade" in open provinces, the followup taking of the port most definitely involves my big guns nearby. Note that this does not "exclude" air bombardment; I often have TACs bombing targets that are actively being ship-shelled as well. Concentration of force and all
.
CAGs can't do that; the most they do is send CAG-planes against the target, but as anyone can attest, against land forces, they get chewed up fast.
CVs only real purpose is to kill ships. That's all they are good for (unless someone's left their ports criminally under-defended... CAGs are effective if the only port defense is 3xMIL ;p).
Not only do players know this, so does the AI.
I don't need to "hunt down" CV's, because I know they will come to ME.
As such, I can have my INTs and NAVs already in position. If the CVs show up, I'm ready. If they don't, my SAGs have free reign for shore support and (since I'm most often doing this with GER) near-port, hyper-effective convoy raiding (also good for admiral experience gain
).
Also, since my NAVs are only "pinning" the CVs for my ships to shoot, I don't mind if they are at half-ORG from having just been rebased; the NAVs will score "some" hits, but the fill the primary goal of interfering with the CV forces regardless if they are fully staffed wings or 4 half-shot up planes. (That's right folks, I've taken the "zombie CAG" situation and REVERSED IT on the carriers themselves on occasion with "zombie NAV's" ;p)
Also, in 3.05 at least, the bug you describe is gone. If a fleet is in a Surface fight, then any planes will spot it 100% of the time, and if a fleet is being bombed, then any approaching SAGs will spot it 100% of the time.
And still, at no point am I saying that "BCs are carrier killers", just that they are valid strategic assets that, in the proper environment, can do the job. Not necessarily the *absolute most* IC-efficient way, but it can be done. If you are going the BC route, it needs to be, strategically, for more than just "killing carriers".
I've tried it with multiple avenues (I didn't come up with the "NAV pin" method on my first try ;p), and have found the following out as to when it is a valid option:
A) Tried with GER, it can be quite effective for a while. GER's navy will generally operate within friendly air cover for most of it's life, and since all convoys to UK tend to go through the same few seazones, the UK is forced to bring its CV fleets to counter you where you so choose (preferably, AWAY fromt he UK mainland, otherwise you first have to take out all the UK's INTs, which is tough). Especially if you take over Spain/Gibraltar; you can "operate" your BC-convoykillers off the west coast of Spain, where your own land craft can reach, but UK's really can't. Also, having a half dozen BC-based fleets makes Sealion much more doable; even if your "outside" BC fleets get smacked around during the landings, as long as they are keeping the fleets away from your transports, AND are providing shore bombardment bonuses, you can "overload" UK. A risky gambit to be sure, but, not without a good chance of success.
B) Tried with JAP, I was *eventually* able to win out navally, but boy-howdy did it take forever. The only reason I was able to toy with the US as long as I did was because (due to me being an intelligent JAP player), I had all of China, Indochina, India, Australia, etc etc. already under control, giving me a rather decent IC base to work off of. Lots of US carriers were sunk, but so were lots of JAP BCs. Technically possible, but not a great overall strategy. (Note: Even if you do go Carriers, I still advocate a SHBB or 2 built to escort your Transprot fleets with).
C) Tried with USSR, it works *as long as* your goal is to take over GER, JAP, and maybe extend into Europe for a faux-WW3. Just like GEr-Sealion, you have full control over where your engagements will be held (for air purposes), and the Big Ships will make invasions of JAP/UK more efficient. If you want to sail all the way to the USA, given your rather pitiful LS values (at least until you've taken all of Asia and Europe), then you may as well just start with carriers... sometimes around 1946 ;p.
D) Tried with the USA, it *can* work, simply because the USA can make 290384294923 BCs by the time war starts for them. You'd essentially be using the Naval equivalent of the USSR's human wave MIL-ART strat. Note, however, that the USA can EASILY field both landing-supporting BC(or BB) fleets AND teched CVs, so in their case, it's really not a "choice" to be made. Just make all of them.
E) Tried with UK, it gets real interesting. Since UK can air-cover the english channel just as well as GER can, they can end up forcing GER into a rather bad situation: either force them to build a lot of Naval forces just to contend, or end up having ZERO control over the waters. you know, a lot like real life. The difference that BC/BB fleets make is that those fleets can't be "rendered ineffective" by INT strikes against their CAGs, and naval strikes can also be intercepted frequently. So the UK is essentially saying "bring it" when they line the shores with powerful SAG fleets... at least until GER is done with. If the UK tries to contend with JAP with only a lot of SAGs, and not a lot of airbases nearby, they are going to end up in a world of hurt. So unless the UK has full confidence that they can rely on US to do their Pacific stuff for them, it's not normally a good idea for them to "abandon the CV".
All of those situations are assuming a "historical playout". If you are doing something like having JAP join the allies or USA going axis, then the entire scene changes.
