bakara
Junior Member
Posts: 55
|
Post by bakara on May 18, 2019 19:48:03 GMT -6
There is a tech in the tactis tree/section that is called carrier force which enables carrier task force/kido butai style formations, do you have that tech? Once i got that there started apperaing seperate carrier centered groups in my large engagements with no BB's.
|
|
bubby
Junior Member
Posts: 66 
|
Post by bubby on May 18, 2019 20:55:00 GMT -6
There is a tech in the tactis tree/section that is called carrier force which enables carrier task force/kido butai style formations, do you have that tech? Once i got that there started apperaing seperate carrier centered groups in my large engagements with no BB's. Yes, i've had that tech since about 1928 iirc. |
|
|
|
Post by tortugapower on May 18, 2019 23:02:52 GMT -6
Hi bubby , I'm not sure this solves the underlying mechanic that you're not happy with (carriers not being the flagship), but if you play in Captain's mode, the flagship and its division are much less important. Captain's mode gives you control over every division, regardless sight range from flagship. |
|
|
|
Post by polyarmus on May 19, 2019 1:53:21 GMT -6
It's 1940, i've been in multiple wars. I've completely eradicated my Battleship Fleet in favor of a fast Heavy-Cruiser and Aircraft Carrier focused Navy.
Not once have I been able to use a Carrier as a flagship, or in a major battle.
I've even gone so far as to set a CV by itself in Northern Europe during a war against Germany. Over 2 years and not once was I prompted with combat.
Meanwhile i've been prompted with Countless Cruiser and Destroyer engagements over the course of the game.
This entire game is centered around the introduction of Air power and Aircraft carriers, but it won't even let me use them?
It seems as if CV's and CVL's will avoid combat at all costs unless there is a Battleship or Battlecruiser present, if one is, the BB or BC is immediately the flagship and the CV's go AI controlled and almost always wander off or into the enemy battle line.
If this is intended, this is one of the biggest disappointments in recent memory.
We should be able to have direct control over Carrier taskforces, operating separately from the rest of the fleet and capable of initiating combat all their own. Currently that is not possible it seems.
I've had the same issue during one of my demo games. It works since, so I thought it was solved during an update. My recommendation would be to start a new game and you will see. I've actually the opposite problem. My best 28kn CVL intercepted German raider- 30 kn, 9" CA. Alone. The result was as you can imagine... |
|
|
|
Post by ramjb on May 19, 2019 7:28:13 GMT -6
It's 1940, i've been in multiple wars.
I sincerely don't want to come across as hostile or angry, or whatever but... By 1940 most navies in the world didn't think too much about the Aircraft Carrier and the few which did were still led by Big Gun Admirals. Adm. Yamamoto (boss of the probably most air-progressive fleet of it's time) commanded the Combined Fleet at Midway...from the Yamato. Let that sink in. And probably, the main reason Spruance didn't do anything similar is because the US had no fast battleship in service at the Pacific, and barely any active battleships at that after Pearl Harbor. The big shift towards big CVs acting as main fleet flagships didn't happen until well into WW2, and that only in the US and Japanese navies (the RN Still kept BBs as their flagships until they decomissioned their last one) TL:DR: you want to play with hindsight and knowledge that wouldn't fly in the times of the game you're playing. You commanding the battle from a battleship is not a fluke or a bug - is part of what was the norm at the time. Besides, in my own carrier battles (and I've had quite some by now), I always have manual control over my big carriers and most of the times over my CVLs too (in rear-admiral diff mode) even while my flagship is a BB. So...what's exactly the problem?. |
|
|
|
Post by ramjb on May 19, 2019 7:32:27 GMT -6
And as someone mentioned avobe - if you ONLY had carriers in your fleet in a given zone... those ships never sailed alone. NEVER.
WEll one once did, as an exceptional measure during emergency times. And was blasted into oblivion by german 11'' guns. Figures.
|
|
|
|
Post by Antediluvian Monster on May 19, 2019 7:55:10 GMT -6
It's 1940, i've been in multiple wars.
By 1940 most navies in the world didn't think too much about the Aircraft Carrier and the few which did were still led by Big Gun Admirals. Would that be a case in RTW's alternate '40s where multiple small wars had demonstrated the concept? I haven't played into the carrier era yet in release version, but in the demo I managed to decisively cripple Soviet battleline with just two converted light carriers... in 1922. |
|
|
|
Post by ramjb on May 19, 2019 12:19:28 GMT -6
By 1940 most navies in the world didn't think too much about the Aircraft Carrier and the few which did were still led by Big Gun Admirals. Would that be a case in RTW's alternate '40s where multiple small wars had demonstrated the concept? I haven't played into the carrier era yet in release version, but in the demo I managed to decisively cripple Soviet battleline with just two converted light carriers... in 1922. Well, again, Yamamoto was on board of Yamato, not on Akagi, during Midway. And we all know what had happened during the 7 previous months in the Pacific, don't we?  . Another instance: Adm. Cunningham was always aboard his 15'' gunned battleship even after the british carriers had mauled the italian fleet from Tarento to Matapan and been critical in the hunt for the Bismark... yet the Mediterranean Fleet Admiral's flag was flying on Queen Elizabeth. Not to mention, in December 1941 Prince of Wales was relocated to Singapore to serve as the flagship of the RN's Far Eastern squadron. She was scheduled to go with a carrier too (Victorious I think?), which in the end couldn't go for some reason or another - need for repairs, IIRC -... and Adm. Phillips had his flag aboard PoW...and would've done the same even if Victorious had been around. I mean, even the americans did it. Even after Coral Sea, Midway, Santa Cruz, Guadalcanal, or the Marianas, when the US Navy attacked the Phillipines the flagship was a BB, not a carrier. Hasey had overall command of the US 3rd Fleet during Leyte Gulf, his was the overall command of the forces in the area (Including TF38's fleet carriers). His flag wasn't flying on USS Essex, or Enterprise. It flew on USS New Jersey. Oh...and the japanese didn't surrender aboard any US carrier. They did so aboard USS Missouri, and it wasn't a coincidence, it was specifically demanded by the americans. If that's not proof enough... |
|
|
|
Post by Antediluvian Monster on May 19, 2019 12:24:54 GMT -6
I'd say not exactly proof enough. The first sinking of a BB underway by carrier aircraft happening in 1922 rather than 1944 is a lot of time for stuff to sink in and attitudes to change.
|
|
|
|
Post by ramjb on May 19, 2019 12:39:02 GMT -6
I'd say not exactly proof enough. The first sinking of a BB underway by carrier aircraft happening in 1922 rather than 1944 is a lot of time for stuff to sink in and attitudes to change. The same was said about PoW being sunk by air power alone (first BB to be so) in december 1941 and again, the japanese flag during the desperate attempt to oppose the Leyte Gulf Landings still was flying, once again, aboard Yamato. The fixation of the admirals of the time by the big gun battleship would not go just because a couple of them had been sunk by planes alone. I mean, come on, if there were two fleets in 1944 who knew which was the real powerhouse of the game it was the americans and the japanese admirals... yet the ones who called the shots went to Leyte aboard battleships. The carrier might be the powerhouse...but the battleship was their flagship. is the way it was and I don't really think it'd been any other way in any alternative timeline, to be honest. |
|
|
|
Post by ramjb on May 19, 2019 12:46:37 GMT -6
If that's not proof enough... Even after the entirety of the text you've written here, you still seem to somehow miss the fundamental point of my post. Somehow.
I'm not going to break it down again. You're talking about irrelevant matters that do not pertain to the issues i'm having. Period.
Starting by assuming anyone other than yourself is utterly clueless when it comes to the history of Naval Air Power isn't a very good, or respectable, place to start.
Your "fundamental point" is that you're having battleships as flagships during CV battles, no matter how hard you try. Which is exactly what happened all along during the historical times this game represents. Because CVs were used as flagships only when fast battleships weren't around. And sometimes not even then (I'd struggle to call Queen Elizabeth or Warspite "fast battleships", they still were flagships of a fleet which won the mediterranean mostly because of how it used it's CVs). If you want to run hindsight-is-all games be my guest, but you're calling something a bug when it's not a bug, certainly not keeping in mind historical precedents of the time, and how far this game goes to prevent players using hindsight to get unrealistic results too early in the game timeline. Also, I haven't assumed anything about you being either clueless or a doctor in history. I don't know where the heck you got that from, but making stuff up just for the sake of doing so and putting it on someone else's mouth is what's really impolite here. Look, mate, that someone tells you that what you're trying to do is not what was done at the time this game represents, and that you're trying things in a way that was never tried historically (And when it happened, in an emergency, ended up in disaster) doesn't assume anything. It's telling you facts. And, If by stating facts, someone is assuming you're clueless then you've got a very uphill struggle to go, let me tell you. Have a good day. |
|
|
|
Post by ramjb on May 19, 2019 12:54:20 GMT -6
Your problem is that you're having battleships as flagships during CV battles. Let me stop you there, that isn't my issue.
Re-Reading works wonders.
Have a good day.
And let me help you here, and I quote: "It's 1940, i've been in multiple wars. I've completely eradicated my Battleship Fleet in favor of a fast Heavy-Cruiser and Aircraft Carrier focused Navy." In short, you played using 20/20 hindsight, doing something that no navy of the time would've ever done, and you're complaining the game is not using your CVs as flagships. Ok, let me re-iterate it again: "BIG GUN" ships were flagships of the day. If you scrapped the 16'' inchers and the biggest gun was an 8'', your "big gun" flagship is going to be a a cruiser. That's the result loopholing the system doing something the game should (honestly) prevent you from doing (a CiC of any fleet of the time who tried to get rid of battleships would've seen his career cut short into the hours), and then "rewarding" you by... still giving you the biggest gunned warship you have as the flagship. It actually kinda looks like a feature that the game does on purpose, doesn't it?. Certainly doesn't sound like a "bug" to me, it actually looks as if it's designed to do just that. Bottom point and I insist: by design RtW1 already went quite far to prevent far-off unhistorical decisions, so does RtW2. What you're calling a "problem" is not a problem - if there's a problem here is that you got rid of all your capital ships in your navy...and you were able to hold your office for more than a couple of hours afterwards... |
|
|
|
Post by ramjb on May 19, 2019 12:59:19 GMT -6
YYyyyyup. First you accuse me of something I did not (Calling you clueless), then when I don't let it fly you go on and throw the insults. You're a true gentleman, that's for sure. Oh well. |
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 19, 2019 13:02:11 GMT -6
Gentlemen:
Might I suggest that you curb the accusations, personal attacks and language because Big Brother is watching you.
|
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on May 19, 2019 13:10:42 GMT -6
Gents...lets cool our jets here, please. Personal attacks are against our terms of service, no matter who makes them. ***You debate the other posters arguments/statements, you not attack the opponents character/morals/whatever.*** I'd prefer to be working on updating the game and helping players, so if we can just 'agree to disagree' and move on that would help all of us.
EDIT: I have deleted the last few posts in thread that do not meet our standards of conduct. If it continues I will be forced to take more measures.
|
|
.
