Using Carriers...

[Ace Rimmer]

So, I see this alot; Player A has subs in Pacific, Player B has carriers right over them. Player B never switches to anti-sub. Or as more often the case, two players subs cross paths in the Pacific and neither one pings here and there to see if somebody else is out there.

Hehe.

[iRadiated]

In any formation I try to have at least one carrier on a anti-sub duty.
Ideally in a group of 4 I will have one on anti-sub, 2 with fighers ready to get bombers and one with bombers ready to take off in case a battleship wanders within range or in case a sub pops its head up.

I've only recently started to experiment with 2 carriers in a group but forget to switch one to anti-sub.

Bet that carrier belongs to me in that picture

[shak]

thats very funny.
today i played a game i had 7 carrier single and 7 battleships single in pacific.
none of them anti sub.
half bomber half fighter.
then 6 subs under my fleet changed to active and killed 2 battleships.
i changed 3 carriers to anti-sub and they killed all subs and i only lost 1 carrier.

i know you wanted to make people search for subs with carriers anywhere in the sea, but i did that often and found in the most games nothing.
sure its funny when subs are moving under carriers, but you cant know where enemy subs are placed so its often a big surprise, if you find subs with cariers/active subs randomly.

and the other problem is, that if you change subs to active mode without fleet support you dont know, when a carrier or radar or air force sees your sub and the enemy nukes it, because subs have a low "radar".

(sorry for poor english : )

[Ace Rimmer]

Well, what I mean is not leaving the unprotected carrier on anti sub, but "spot checking".

[Why?]

Nice idea with "spot checking", but I usually don't have time for hunting until the end of the game.(imo, leaves you too vulnerable, unless you know they're gonna sneak some subs with no support.) I think it's faster and safer to have bombers checking spots, or at least close and ready, in the event of a surface. I like to launch 3-6 subs fast and use them for hunting, in some situations.

In that picture, tho... yeah... typical spot... having both in fighter mode makes no sense, unless you're expectin lots of bombers, but you'd just be marchin to your death anyway, with that lil' fleet. Leaving bbs behind makes even less sense.

[Tripper]

Hehe ... what I _try_ to do is put carriers on antisub once all their bombers have been launched. It's reasonably quick to switch them back into fighter mode if required (in a trademark group of 5 ships, I would put 1 bb (for short range air defence, 2 bomber mode (for long range fleet attack)1 fighter mode (for long range air defence, remember, those bombers wont even see you), and one antisub. And 4 bombers in the air behind the fleet.

Also, if I'm holding a line, I'll try to swap positions of carriers on antisub, so you get a sort of antisub partrol. Not 100% effective, but better than nothing.

Also also, most people who play me know I deploy subs right underneath any ships I can see at defcon 4. Oh, the suicide!

Cheers, Tripper

[sfericz]

I've always tried to predict where I think they might try to take their subs. Then set up a line like so....

A= subs B= battleship C= carrier

A-A-A
B-B-B
C-C-C

Leaving the subs closest to enemy line on sonar, during decon 3-1. Then at Defcon 1 move that line back, turn subs back on passive, and use empty carriers for sub pings.
Doing that, you always will have fleet checking for subs crossing.

This usually only works in gaps or small naval areas.

[rus|Mike]

A= subs B= battleship C= carrier

A-A-A
B-B-B
C-C-C

Ah, good old days...

[Ace Rimmer]

A= subs B= battleship C= carrier

A-A-A
B-B-B
C-C-C

Ah, good old days...

Hehe, I did this until I got tired of losing subs/started enjoying having 12 launch at once too much. revealing subs (especially passive ones) too early is typically more risk than reward. The exceptions are usually close quarter fighting right at Defcon 3, but those can be avoided, sometimes.