Iowa/Atlanta - the fleet to beat?

[Dr.Cornelius]

Is this the fleet to beat?

68 USS Iowa
12 USS Atlanta
07 USS Fletcher
06 USS Samuel B. Roberts
07 Catalina (or a second Fletcher)
100 points

With extended range 5, Bristling with Guns and Armor 9 the Iowa is very strong against surface ships.

Add the USS Atlanta's AA Specialist SA and the the Iowa is very tough to take down with aircraft.

Its only weakness appears to be torpedo attacks which are covered by the Destroyers and/or Catalina.

Will have to playtest against a range of fleets. First up is the 8 U-Boat / 2 Kondor fleet. Anybody have fleet ideas to take down the Iowa?

[Uncle_Joe]

Best way I can see is to use something to trade out against the Atlanta and then try and mob the Iowa with Torpedo bombers. Its generally not too hard to get rid of the Atlanta (or at least cripple her) if you are willing to lose a CA or so to do it. You lose point-wise there, but hopefully you can make it back by killing the Iowa.

But even there, the Iowa has 9 AA dice! That generally aborts one plane/turn and have a decent shot of killing most normal planes. But a handful of Kates can quickly cause problems for even the biggest battleships if there is little or no fighter cover.

The harder thing IMO is not necessarily killing the Iowa in the long-term, but preventing her fleet from claiming the objectives. She can pretty much 'one shot' just about anything but another BB that gets in range. So it makes it hard to contest objectives while your bombers work her over.

Subs and Torpedo bombers with a CA or so to kill off the Atlanta looks like a fairly solid bet (as much as anything else I've seen so far).

[Walgers]

Or lots of *** subs. Stay out of the way of your destroyers, or give them priority on being sunk. Then even the Iowa can only suffer three hits from Long Lances.

[Count_Ciano]

Is this the fleet to beat?

68 USS Iowa
12 USS Atlanta
07 USS Fletcher
06 USS Samuel B. Roberts
07 Catalina (or a second Fletcher)
100 points

With extended range 5, Bristling with Guns and Armor 9 the Iowa is very strong against surface ships.

Add the USS Atlanta's AA Specialist SA and the the Iowa is very tough to take down with aircraft.

Its only weakness appears to be torpedo attacks which are covered by the Destroyers and/or Catalina.

Will have to playtest against a range of fleets. First up is the 8 U-Boat / 2 Kondor fleet. Anybody have fleet ideas to take down the Iowa?

Well, first of all, I would like to welcome you and Uncle Joe to the WAS boards, as I have thoroughly enjoyed your posts on the AAM boards. :) And now, how I would counter such a build.

I don't like the 8 u-boats/2 condors against this because of the Catalina. Granted, the Catalina can't shoot down the Condors, but there is nothing there to threaten the Catalina, either. Plus, there's no way to occupy any of the objectives, either, so the best such a player can hope for is a stalemate. And well, since I play to win, I would not take such a build against this Iowa fleet. ;)

I would instead go with something like this:

Scharnhorst x 1 38 pts.
Luca Tarigo x 2 16 pts.
U 510 x 3 33 pts.
Condor x 2 12pts.

Total: 99 pts.

Firstly, the Condor is, arguably, the best fleet attack plane in the game because of the Anti-Ship Missle SA. I won't have to occupy the same sector as any surface units, I can hit from ADJACENT ones. So my priority targets for the Condors would be the ASW heavyweights, the Sam Roberts and the Fletcher. Once those are dealt with, only the Catalina is left to challenge the U-boats. With 3 U boats to sink with only 3 dice, the subs will have plenty of time to work on the Atlanta and the Iowa.

My surface fleet, the Scharnhorst with the Lucas escorting, will be advancing towards an objective. The Lucas' job will be to "drop smoke", covering the advance, and hopefully keeping the Iowa's firepower in check. As that's happening, the U boats will be targeting the Atlanta and Iowa with the Condors in support, and even joining the attack, since there is no fighters to worry about. Their objective on Iowa is simple; just get that ONE point of damage to neutralize the Iowa's ER 5. Once that happens, I can bring the Scharnhorst out of hiding, as it now has a range advantage. I would keep Scharnhorst, just out of range, harassing Iowa in consort with the Condors and what ever Uboats have survived. And since the Atlanta has no torpedo attack and not enough firepower to threaten Scharnhorst, it's only a matter of time now. Once Iowa is sunk, Scharnhorst is free occupy which ever objective it chooses, ensuring the win for team Scharnhorst. :D

Oh, and if this post looks a little jumbled, I have had quite a few beers up to this point. :p Anyway, that's how I would challenge this build.

Ciao!

[Autarch]

Just got my Iowa yesterday, so I'm going to try this against the convoy raider build I can't seem to beat:

Scharnhorst
Graf Spee
Karl G x2
Luca T x2
Zeke

[Count_Ciano]

Actually, the 8 Uboats/2 Condors might be able to pull off a "points" win, if played properly. ;)

[Bigblue2]

This fleet might be able to give the Iowa 100 point fleet a run for its money.
38 Scharhorst
08 Karl Gaster
05 Nordmark
22 U510 x2
12 Condor x2
14 Stuka x2
99 points

The idea is to strip away the destroyers with the condors and stukas, then use the condors and U-boats to sink the Iowa. Meanwhile the 3 surface ships give the Iowa and others something to shoot at, but they will also be attempting to detroy any ASW threats while grabing an objective or two. This fleet is looking for a victory by turn 3 or 4.

[Joisey]

In my fight last night, I learned that the Atlanta cannot close with the center, heavy BB to the middle of the map. It gets wasted by the enemy's big guns too easily. It's fine if you expect the Iowa to hang back all game, but your build, Dr. C., doesn't include any units likely to survive long enough to take an objective (the Fletcher and S.B. Roberts). So, you're force is subject to losing all three objectives to an "early rush strategy", or, alternatively, it is subject to losing the Atlanta if the Iowa goes to take an objective. If you lose the Atlanta, you have no AA support to speak of. Also, your ASW capacity is weak and you can lose it early. Again, while you can have a Fletcher or DE hang back with the Iowa to ward off subs, you haven't budgeted anything to go fight for objectives.

Unfortunately, if we aren't going by strict historical limits, a pair of Richelieus will probably get the better of the Iowa, because you CAN afford a pair of them and still have enough left over to budget for ASW and air defense---which, by the way, is probably best left to the Wildcat, because Wildcats can't be sunk like the Atlanta can be.

On a side note: The Richelieu served in the war with the British Royal Navy Home fleet, so if she isn't fighting for the Axis, she ought to be restricted to use with the British fleet or at least in the Atlantic. Having the Richelieu fight the Japanese is not historical.

Two Richelieus can stack with a sub and with several fighters---a formidable force that covers all the bases.

I'm fast coming to the belief that the best defense against subs is another sub: Destroyers have been getting wasted too quickly in my games. If you hang back with your subs until the surface action gets going, chances are good that the enemy's destroyers will be gone and then your subs can operate with impunity.

[XAos]

Unfortunately, if we aren't going by strict historical limits, a pair of Richelieus will probably get the better of the Iowa, because you CAN afford a pair of them
Isn't 2xRichilieu 108 points...?

Is this the fleet to beat?
Anybody have fleet ideas to take down the Iowa?
Possible counter for this specific fleet;
12 2xKondors
54 Bismark
33 3xU-Boats
The Kondors bomb the 2 ASW ships. If Atlanta guards them, they crippile both destroyers with missiles.
Bismark tries to grab objectives (and avoid Iowa) Once the subs have done as much damage as they can, Bismark tries to finish of Iowa.
I suspect that any 100 point fleet is beatable, you simply can't balence a mix of AA, ASW & guns/torpedoes in 100 points.
If your not being "historic", then;
3 Kondors (the Kondors missile Atlanta, then bomb the ASW)
Zeke
2 U-boats
Bismark
would be stronger.

[Lotus]

Not that I like to mix Japanese and German ships, but my fleet is limited at the moment.

Against your build Doc, (unfair knowing ahead...sure) I would consider this:

Bismark = 53
I-19 x 3 = 39
Zeke = 6
2 cents change

The Zeke keeps the plane off the subs and the subs' torpedo contenders to the objectives, leaving the 2 battleships at the end of it w/ the subs. The Bizmark obviously has to take at least one objective and survive.

Destroyers are not as dangerous to subs as some think. I've had no problem thus far sinking them before they became sub killers. Planes are another matter, hence the zeke.

If the Bizmark can close with the Iowa, and the zeke can defend the subs and/or kill the Catalina, then it could be a good game.

Subs have yet to be feared properly on these boards I think.

I'll say this though, the Iowa looks very much to be feared in any build.

[EDIT]: Replace Bismark w' Japanese Battleship. I don't have one so I don't know the costs, but I'm reasonably certain there's one at Bizmark cost or less. Maybe the Kongo?

[Joisey]

A Zero cannot attack a sub. It can protect another aircraft that can, however.

[Autarch]

I'm fast coming to the belief that the best defense against subs is another sub: Destroyers have been getting wasted too quickly in my games. If you hang back with your subs until the surface action gets going, chances are good that the enemy's destroyers will be gone and then your subs can operate with impunity.

I agree, Joisey! Axis DDs have been getting mauled by air and sub counter attack. Plus on top of that, rolling 3 or 4 ASW dice against 3 armor isn't cutting it. This is how I finally beat the convoy raiders with 5 subs and some fighters.

[Lotus]

A Zero cannot attack a sub. It can protect another aircraft that can, however.

A zero can theoretically protect a japanese sub from the Catalina. That's the point of one in my build.

[Count_Ciano]

Actually, Lotus, I would consider replacing the Bismarck with The Kongo (35 pts.), an 8 pt. destroyer (Karl or Luca?), and a 9 point Shoho for your Zeke, that way you can provide fighter cover for your subs EVERY turn. ;)

[Fallschirmjager]

I haven't played the game yet (still on order) so this may sound stupid, but what about this build...

x1 yamato (70)
x2 ambra (18)
x2 "zeke" (12)
= 100

You got the italian subs to harass and possibly sink the destroyers and cruiser, then you have the yamato to blow Iowa out of the water. The 2 zekes are more than enough to take down the catalina. Also you can have one of the subs deal 1 pt. of dmg to the iowa to ake out its ER. Or how about substituting one of the ambras with the shoho so you can position one of the zekes into better fireing range on the catalina and protect your sub as it moves into a good stratigic postion (depends on how you play;))

[Fallschirmjager]

Hehe, I have all the stats from an earlier post. It really helps, keeping me at pace with the others:D

[Joisey]

Actually, Lotus, I would consider replacing the Bismarck with The Kongo (35 pts.), an 8 pt. destroyer (Karl or Luca?), and a 9 point Shoho for your Zeke, that way you can provide fighter cover for your subs EVERY turn. ;)

Two land based fighters will always be cheaper than 1 fighter and one CVE. Plus, two fighters provide more tactical flexibility.

[TheFoeHammer]

Two land based fighters will always be cheaper than 1 fighter and one CVE. Plus, two fighters provide more tactical flexibility.


The only benefit would be if you had used up your land based capacity with some other type of plane (Betty's, Kondors, PBYs, B-25s, B-17s... oh wait, I'm getting ahead of myself.)

[Joisey]

The only benefit would be if you had used up your land based capacity with some other type of plane (Betty's, Kondors, PBYs, B-25s, B-17s... oh wait, I'm getting ahead of myself.)


True! Eventually, I'm going to sit down and do a 500 point fleet, and have a full 5 bombers parked on the ground based airfield and will need to put the fighters on a carrier. Best of all, the Carriers' torpedo and bomber bonuses apply to the land based planes, so you'll still be getting the maximum benefit out of the carrier.

[Thunderjp]

Also, at 500 points, you can put a lot more of 5 planes on your airfield.

[Joisey]

Also, at 500 points, you can put a lot more of 5 planes on your airfield.

Except land based planes are capped at a maximum of Five. :eek:

[Thunderjp]

In the rule book, I seem to remember page 35, but that could be something else heh... under the section where it discusses larger point games, I am pretty sure that it indicates that you should expand your air base on larger games.

[Joisey]

I would instead go with something like this:

Scharnhorst x 1 38 pts.
Luca Tarigo x 2 16 pts.
U 510 x 3 33 pts.
Condor x 2 12pts.

Total: 99 pts.

My surface fleet, the Scharnhorst with the Lucas escorting, will be advancing towards an objective. The Lucas' job will be to "drop smoke", covering the advance, and hopefully keeping the Iowa's firepower in check. Ciao!

Hey, Count! I was just wondering how you've made out with this tactic in an actual game(s)? Have you been able to have your Italian destroyers drop smoke, while advancing, and keep the enemy from shooting at your BC?

[viperm4a3]

For 200, 300, and 500 point engagements the land based air capacity increases to 7, 9, and 13 respectively.

[Count_Ciano]

Hey, Count! I was just wondering how you've made out with this tactic in an actual game(s)? Have you been able to have your Italian destroyers drop smoke, while advancing, and keep the enemy from shooting at your BC?

Haven't ran it yet...don't have an Iowa. I suppose I could use my Washington instead.....sounds like an after work project. ;) Either way, against an Iowa or a Richeliue, keeping my BC out of it's sight until the heavyweight is damaged would be my priority.

But the "dropping smoke" bit, I'll let you know how that goes!

[Dr.Cornelius]

I would consider this:

Bismark = 53
I-19 x 3 = 39
Zeke = 6
2 cents change

The Kondor is a tremendous force multiplier for subs and the anti-ship missle is difficult to stop. Zekes are critical for taking out Catalinas and other ASW aircraft and can also strafe destroyers.

Here is one way to think about it - on the turn that the Japanese subs close to range 3, they fire a total of 3 torpedoes. But at the same range, two I-1 supported by a Kondor get a total of 4 torpedoes. At range 2 you are down one torpedo per round, but the Kondor's anti-ship missle makes up for it.

Rather than three I-19, I would go with two I-19 and two Kondors or a Kondor and a second Zeke.

If you are really bold you could downgrade the Bismark to the Scharnhorst and gain another sub and Kondor/Zeke. There is probabaly a combo with the italian smokescreen also.

[Count_Ciano]

Okay, so I ran a little skirmish to test out my "advancing behind smoke cover" theory. I had to do some proxying here, I "Iowized" the Washington mini I had (+1 to all main battery and defense values, simple enough!;) ), but I did want to test it vs. an ER5 battleship. So, the builds were as follows:

Team Iowized

68 Iowa
12 Atlanta
6 Samuel L. Roberts
7 Fletcher
7 Catalina

pts. 100

VERSUS

Team Scharnhorst

38 Scharnhorst
16 Luca Tarigo x 2
12 Condor x 2
33 U 510 x 3

pts. 99

And now, onto the battle report!

Setup-- Map 5

Allies on "blue" side, towards center, Iowa paired with Atlanta, Fletcher and Sam Roberts flanking, Catalina on airbase.
Axis on "red" side (see rule book), Scharnhorst with both Lucas towards right flank, Uboats forward towards center, Condors on airbase.

Turn 1-- initiative Axis
Both fleets out of range, Scharnhorst and Lucas move toward right flank objective, Allies toward center, Uboats toward center.
Condors attack Fletcher and Sam Roberts with anti-ship missles, both ships sunk. Catalina attacks uboat 1, uboat crippled.

Turn 2 -- initiative Allies
Both fleets continue their advance toward their respective objectives, flanking Luca "drops smoke", Scharnhorst still has a clear line of fire to right objective. Iowa and Atlanta close in on the middle. Catalina attacks crippled uboat, misses.

Turn 3 -- initative Allies
Axis occupy right objective, flanking Luca drops smoke. Scharnhorst and 2nd Luca on objective. Iowa occupies center, Atlanta advances to left side objective. Catalina attacks uboat 2, misses. uboats with condor's pin-pointer attack Iowa, 2 hits, 2 damage (torpedo defense 1). Iowa's ER gone.

Turn 4-- initiative Axis
Atlanta occupies left objective, crippled uboat follows. Iowa at center. Scharnhorst moves off, Luca drops smoke. Catalina attacks uboat 2, misses. Condor between uboats (Axis are using 2, alternating deployment each turn). Crippled uboat attacks Atlanta, misses. Uboats 2 and 3 attack Iowa, 2 hits, 2 points damage.

Turn 5-- initiative Allies
Scharnhorst moves 2 more zones. Iowa chases. Uboats 2 and 3 pursue Iowa. Crippled uboat continues on Atlanta. Catalina attacks Uboat 2, misses. Crippled uboat attacks Atlanta, misses. Uboat 2 and 3 attack Iowa, miss. Scharnhorst fires at Iowa from range 4, hits. Iowa crippled.

Turn 6-- initiative Allies

Flanking Luca heads for center. Scharnhorst moves off 2 zones. Iowa moves back for center objective. Catalina attacks uboat 2, misses. Iowa fires on Luca 1 with main battery and secondaries. ONE hit (no..REALLY! Iowa rolled terribly, only 5 successes total! :p ), Luca crippled. Luca returns fire, misses. Uboat 2 and 3 attack Iowa, 1 hit. Iowa sunk. Crippled uboat attacks Atlanta, 2 hits. Atlanta sunk.

End simulation.

Map 5 proved to be an excellent testing ground for "dropping smoke". :) So, "dropping smoke" to cover the advance works best when you go first, therefore it is better to LOSE the initiative when using this tactic. Also, using this tactic, it is best to have the "smoker" unit flanking in the adjacent sea zone, blocking off the opponent's LOS while leaving a firing lane open for the covered units. Plus, a flanking unit also allows for some manuevering room for the covered units, and is a great tactic for securing objectives. Overall, with some lucky rolls, it was a pretty fun battle!

Now, one thing that really stood out was just how good the Condor/Uboat combo really is! Combined with the Wolf Pack SA, the uboats had as many as 5 dice to throw (which is where they got most of the hits on Iowa). Even the "crippled" uboat still had 4 dice to throw, eventually sinking Atlanta.

As far as the "fleet to beat", I found the lack of fighters to be it's biggest weakness. The Condors were able to attack, and "pinpoint" the uboats with virtual impunity. The Atlanta's impressive AA abilities never even came into play. One suggestion I would make for this fleet is to trade in the Iowa for a Washington and 2 Seahawks. That way, the Seahawks (the British fighters) can harass the condors, even aborting or shooting them down, eventually neutralizing the pinpointer for the Uboats. Of course, the Catalina not rolling well didn't help much either, as did the US losing ALL of their ASW in the first turn. And my strategy of parking the Iowa on the center objective to take advantage of it's ER5 and hence an excellent field of fire, was flawed also, especially since the uboats with condors were more powerful than I'd imagined! That, and the "dropping smoke" bit worked pretty well.

So, does that answer your question, Joisey? :D

[Richter von Manthofen]

As pointed out in another thread

Yamato
3* Betty
2* Zeke (in this case as I know that you dont have planes except for a catalina I would add another Betty or two 8if I can get them ;) - but the above I can field.

The point of the bettys is to do some torpedo damage on the IOWA, so she cant use extended range - in a close up I bet my money on the Yamato.

one Zeke to defend against the Catalina - a second to hunt and damage (possibly) a DD...

Betty to get ONE damage to the IOWA...

[XAos]

My prefered Iowa build is;
Iowa
Atlanta
Catalina
Wildcat
Sea Hurricane
The 2 fighters can deal with any smoke screen DD's {Luca or Javalin) A Dauntless would be better against ships, but the fighters have a lot more flexibility. And can Escourt the Catalina, shoot down Kondors or sink MTB's that hide on islands near the objective. I'd use 2 land based fighters as the minimum airforce for any fleet.


in a close up I bet my money on the Yamato.

Me too, but I'm dubious about 3 Betteys getting even 1 hit on Iowa+Atlanta. Theres a 56% chance that all 3 are aborted, just from AA fire. So only a 13% chance of a torpedo hit. And if any are destroyed (87%) then the odds get worse for the next attack.

[Joisey]

Okay, so I ran a little skirmish to test out my "advancing behind smoke cover" theory. I had to do some proxying here, I "Iowized" the Washington mini I had (+1 to all main battery and defense values, simple enough!;) ), but I did want to test it vs. an ER5 battleship. So, the builds were as follows:

Team Iowized

68 Iowa
12 Atlanta
6 Samuel L. Roberts
7 Fletcher
7 Catalina

pts. 100

VERSUS

Team Scharnhorst

38 Scharnhorst
16 Luca Tarigo x 2
12 Condor x 2
33 U 510 x 3

pts. 99

And now, onto the battle report!

Setup-- Map 5

Allies on "blue" side, towards center, Iowa paired with Atlanta, Fletcher and Sam Roberts flanking, Catalina on airbase.
Axis on "red" side (see rule book), Scharnhorst with both Lucas towards right flank, Uboats forward towards center, Condors on airbase.

Turn 1-- initiative Axis
Both fleets out of range, Scharnhorst and Lucas move toward right flank objective, Allies toward center, Uboats toward center.
Condors attack Fletcher and Sam Roberts with anti-ship missles, both ships sunk. Catalina attacks uboat 1, uboat crippled.

Turn 2 -- initiative Allies
Both fleets continue their advance toward their respective objectives, flanking Luca "drops smoke", Scharnhorst still has a clear line of fire to right objective. Iowa and Atlanta close in on the middle. Catalina attacks crippled uboat, misses.

Turn 3 -- initative Allies
Axis occupy right objective, flanking Luca drops smoke. Scharnhorst and 2nd Luca on objective. Iowa occupies center, Atlanta advances to left side objective. Catalina attacks uboat 2, misses. uboats with condor's pin-pointer attack Iowa, 2 hits, 2 damage (torpedo defense 1). Iowa's ER gone.

Turn 4-- initiative Axis
Atlanta occupies left objective, crippled uboat follows. Iowa at center. Scharnhorst moves off, Luca drops smoke. Catalina attacks uboat 2, misses. Condor between uboats (Axis are using 2, alternating deployment each turn). Crippled uboat attacks Atlanta, misses. Uboats 2 and 3 attack Iowa, 2 hits, 2 points damage.

Turn 5-- initiative Allies
Scharnhorst moves 2 more zones. Iowa chases. Uboats 2 and 3 pursue Iowa. Crippled uboat continues on Atlanta. Catalina attacks Uboat 2, misses. Crippled uboat attacks Atlanta, misses. Uboat 2 and 3 attack Iowa, miss. Scharnhorst fires at Iowa from range 4, hits. Iowa crippled.

Turn 6-- initiative Allies

Flanking Luca heads for center. Scharnhorst moves off 2 zones. Iowa moves back for center objective. Catalina attacks uboat 2, misses. Iowa fires on Luca 1 with main battery and secondaries. ONE hit (no..REALLY! Iowa rolled terribly, only 5 successes total! :p ), Luca crippled. Luca returns fire, misses. Uboat 2 and 3 attack Iowa, 1 hit. Iowa sunk. Crippled uboat attacks Atlanta, 2 hits. Atlanta sunk.

End simulation.

Map 5 proved to be an excellent testing ground for "dropping smoke". :) So, "dropping smoke" to cover the advance works best when you go first, therefore it is better to LOSE the initiative when using this tactic. Also, using this tactic, it is best to have the "smoker" unit flanking in the adjacent sea zone, blocking off the opponent's LOS while leaving a firing lane open for the covered units. Plus, a flanking unit also allows for some manuevering room for the covered units, and is a great tactic for securing objectives. Overall, with some lucky rolls, it was a pretty fun battle!

Now, one thing that really stood out was just how good the Condor/Uboat combo really is! Combined with the Wolf Pack SA, the uboats had as many as 5 dice to throw (which is where they got most of the hits on Iowa). Even the "crippled" uboat still had 4 dice to throw, eventually sinking Atlanta.

As far as the "fleet to beat", I found the lack of fighters to be it's biggest weakness. The Condors were able to attack, and "pinpoint" the uboats with virtual impunity. The Atlanta's impressive AA abilities never even came into play. One suggestion I would make for this fleet is to trade in the Iowa for a Washington and 2 Seahawks. That way, the Seahawks (the British fighters) can harass the condors, even aborting or shooting them down, eventually neutralizing the pinpointer for the Uboats. Of course, the Catalina not rolling well didn't help much either, as did the US losing ALL of their ASW in the first turn. And my strategy of parking the Iowa on the center objective to take advantage of it's ER5 and hence an excellent field of fire, was flawed also, especially since the uboats with condors were more powerful than I'd imagined! That, and the "dropping smoke" bit worked pretty well.

So, does that answer your question, Joisey? :D

Yes, it does, and you provided alot of useful info there. Thanks. Plus, that's the first battle I've heard about that lasted more than 4 turns.

Kondors are so effective, it is criminally negligent for any build NOT to have at least one fighter.

[Richter von Manthofen]

Chance of 3 bettys are not the best though 44% is not bad. Thats why I thought of using a 4th against this special build - must only find one :D

[LoneWolf]

In my fight last night, I learned that the Atlanta cannot close with the center, heavy BB to the middle of the map. It gets wasted by the enemy's big guns too easily. It's fine if you expect the Iowa to hang back all game, but your build, Dr. C., doesn't include any units likely to survive long enough to take an objective (the Fletcher and S.B. Roberts). So, you're force is subject to losing all three objectives to an "early rush strategy", or, alternatively, it is subject to losing the Atlanta if the Iowa goes to take an objective. If you lose the Atlanta, you have no AA support to speak of. Also, your ASW capacity is weak and you can lose it early. Again, while you can have a Fletcher or DE hang back with the Iowa to ward off subs, you haven't budgeted anything to go fight for objectives.


I learn't this the hard way as well, the Atlanta doesn't survive gun fights to well. Nice to defend a Carrier I reckon.

[kaz]

right basikly im new 2 all this iv orded 2 starter sets an 3 bosters id like 2 know every ones apinon about all the fleets and im thinkin about startin a carier fleet probly a japanes one n would like some tips ???? if any

[Hum_35711]

1 Iowa
1 Baltimore
2 fletchers
= 100 pts.

[Thunderjp]

1 Iowa
1 Baltimore
2 fletchers
= 100 pts.

Thats the best 100 point fleet I've found as well. You could swap out a fletcher for a Wildcat if you suspect a Kondor or two from your opponent.

[Hum_35711]

Thats the best 100 point fleet I've found as well. You could swap out a fletcher for a Wildcat if you suspect a Kondor or two from your opponent.

I'm undefeated with 5 straight wins using this fleet. With 3 of those wins against Japanese carrier builds. But it hasnt faced a sub heavy build yet.

[Uncle_Joe]

I think carrier builds are going to be very weak in 100 point matchups. You cant have both enough aircraft and still have enough ships to contest/threaten objectives. This is especially true for the Japanese who are paying a premium price on their CLs and DDs due to the Long Lance ability.

[Fallschirmjager]

I think carrier builds are going to be very weak in 100 point matchups. You cant have both enough aircraft and still have enough ships to contest/threaten objectives. This is especially true for the Japanese who are paying a premium price on their CLs and DDs due to the Long Lance ability.

Well what about this set up...

x1 USS Enterprise
x1 USS Princeton
x3 F4F Wildcat
x2 PBY Catalina
x2 USS Atlanta
=100 pts.

[Bigblue2]

Well what about this set up...

x1 USS Enterprise
x1 USS Princeton
x3 F4F Wildcat
x2 PBY Catalina
x2 USS Atlanta
=100 pts.

Why have carrier capacity for 5 aircraft, yet only have 3. Why not change out the princeton for 16 points of something else?

[Uncle_Joe]

Well what about this set up...

x1 USS Enterprise
x1 USS Princeton
x3 F4F Wildcat
x2 PBY Catalina
x2 USS Atlanta
=100 pts.

Its got no kill-power IMO. You cant really hurt anything bigger than a light cruiser unless you get really lucky.

[Fallschirmjager]

Why have carrier capacity for 5 aircraft, yet only have 3. Why not change out the princeton for 16 points of something else?

Well actually I have a carrier capacity of five WITH five aircraft. The Enterprise holds 3, and the Princeton has two, but i see your point. Gte rid of the Princeton a Catalina and a wildcat. That now gives you 30 points. So heres a compromise:

x1 USS Enterprise
x2 F4F Wildcat
x1 PBY Catalina
x2 USS Atlanta
x1 USS Baltimore
x1 USS Barb
=100

[Hum_35711]

you can't base catalinas on a carrier, and even if you could, would you really want to? They can deploy every turn from the land base anyway.

[afilter]

Is this the fleet to beat?

68 USS Iowa
12 USS Atlanta
07 USS Fletcher
06 USS Samuel B. Roberts
07 Catalina (or a second Fletcher)
100 points

With extended range 5, Bristling with Guns and Armor 9 the Iowa is very strong against surface ships.

Add the USS Atlanta's AA Specialist SA and the the Iowa is very tough to take down with aircraft.

Its only weakness appears to be torpedo attacks which are covered by the Destroyers and/or Catalina.

Will have to playtest against a range of fleets. First up is the 8 U-Boat / 2 Kondor fleet. Anybody have fleet ideas to take down the Iowa?

Here is my answer:

Mixed IJN/GE Fleet

Scharnhorst-38
Kates x 4
Kondor

First turn - hope for a lucky shot with Kondor (missle attack) on Atlanta

2nd turn - 4 Kates on Iowa/Atlanta (hopefully remove range 5)

3rd turn on - Continue to alternate Kates going after Iowa Resort to Slug fest with Scharnhorst.

Of course a wise allied opponent will include 1 is not 2 wildcats in the build and then this does not work :)

[BooMer(FC)]

For a pure Japanese build I believe that the following Carrier/Sub build will be competitive against both Carrier fleets and BB fleets
1x Akagi 27
2x I-19 26
2x Vals 20
1x Kate 13
2x Zekes 12

The Iowa / Atlanta build is vulnerable to Subs, the ASW component is easily sunk by the aircraft from the Akagi. After the DD's are gone the subs have free reign against the Iowa and Atlanta.

[Uncle_Joe]

The Iowa / Atlanta build is vulnerable to Subs, the ASW component is easily sunk by the aircraft from the Akagi. After the DD's are gone the subs have free reign against the Iowa and Atlanta.

Sure, but you are on a strict timetable to kill the Iowa. Each torpedo hit from a sub is going to do a whopping one point of damage. And you have to kill it before it claims the objectives. That equates to ~7 turns at the most, and you likely wont get shots from each sub each turn. That means you'll probably have to get pretty lucky to kill it in time with the subs. The Vals are all but useless vs the 9 armor and the AA on the BB alone should be able to at least abort the Kate every turn.

With nothing to contest or deny the objectives, the CV fleet is required to kill the entire enemy fleet quickly or else lose the game regardless of whether the subs might eventually kill the BBs off. I think two subs will have a hard time doing that in time (but obviously it will come down to the dice rolling for torpedoes).

The massive sub builds look to have a better chance at that strategy than the CV/sub hybrid builds do IMO.

[XAos]

With nothing to contest or deny the objectives,
That CV fleet has one ship to contest the objectives. Akagi.
The strategy is to let Iowa commit towards one side of the map & then race for the other side with Akagi. With equality in flag+2 that should be viable in some games(50/50)
Akagi has adaquate gunnary to detroy the other 32 points of that Iowa fleet.
If Akagi gets one objective then Iowa can't win. And will eventually be sunk by the subs.

[Joisey]

That CV fleet has one ship to contest the objectives. Akagi.
The strategy is to let Iowa commit towards one side of the map & then race for the other side with Akagi. With equality in flag+2 that should be viable in some games(50/50)
Akagi has adaquate gunnary to detroy the other 32 points of that Iowa fleet.
If Akagi gets one objective then Iowa can't win. And will eventually be sunk by the subs.

What if Iowa/Atlanta charge up the middle and ignore the flank objectives, instead chasing the akagi down and sinking it first?

[swarbs]

What if Iowa/Atlanta charge up the middle and ignore the flank objectives, instead chasing the akagi down and sinking it first?

If the Iowa ignores objectives all the better, it has to go through the I-19's and Akagi doesn't have to move farther than the nearest island. I think that with Val's pressing the attack on Atlanta there's not a bad chance. The problem really is you need to get lucky enough for none of your attack aircraft to get picked off.

[Cale]

My friend plays a German fleet composed of:

Scharnhorst (38)
3x U 510 (11, 11, 11)
2x Karl Galster (8, 8)
2x Kondor (6, 6)

Against this, the Iowa takes roughly thirty dice worth of torpedo attacks before it can claim any objectives or take any shots at the Scharnhorst&co (presuming the Scharhorst hangs back)

The subs will always get at least two range 0-1 shots at 3 dice + 1 for wolfpack and 1 for spotting from the Kondors (it's also worth noting that the Kondors easily cripple the Atlanta with their anti-ship missiles by the second turn, making it easy prey for the scharnhorst after the subs have finished the Iowa)

Even with exceptional difference in maneuvering skill, we should still expect at least two of those subs to take one round of 0-1 range fire, and take range 2 fire once or twice. While thirty torpedoes is the maximum (before the Iowa gets an objective, anyway) expecting less than about 26 is overly optimistic. Neither the Iowa nor the Atlanta can hurt either the Kondors or the subs (unless the Kondors are used stupidly, which I think we can presume they will not be), and the subs alone will reliably kill or cripple the Iowa before it does anything useful at all (while the planes will reliably cripple the Atlanta).

Under optimal circumstances, we can expect the US fleet to do as well as capture two objectives, one with each ship, before both of their ships are sunk (and that's very optimistic) still leaving the Germans with the victory.

Depending on how the Americans fill their remaining twenty points, this could work better or worse, but, considering that the non-Scharnhorst&co element of the German fleet will hands-down defeat the Iowa/Atlanta duo, (and the Shcarnhorst is hardly such a pushover that it can't be stand up to the Iowa for a few turns if necessary) I'd say that the Iowa/Atlanta fleet is certainly not the 'fleet to beat.'

I would take a sharnhorst/wolfpack fleet against it any day and expect to come out on top in the vast majority of games.

[Joisey]

If the Iowa ignores objectives all the better, it has to go through the I-19's and Akagi doesn't have to move farther than the nearest island. I think that with Val's pressing the attack on Atlanta there's not a bad chance. The problem really is you need to get lucky enough for none of your attack aircraft to get picked off.

So, position your subs to intercept a run by the Iowa up the middle, and make him run a torpedo gauntlet. If he turns off to hunt objectives, he gives the carrier planes more turns to attack. I find Kates more effective than Vals, by the way. You need a really lucky roll to score a hit with the Vals.

[swarbs]

So, position your subs to intercept a run by the Iowa up the middle, and make him run a torpedo gauntlet. If he turns off to hunt objectives, he gives the carrier planes more turns to attack. I find Kates more effective than Vals, by the way. You need a really lucky roll to score a hit with the Vals.

I agree with you completely about the Kate's over the Val's for the Iowa, I'm just thinking that with the three Iowa/Atlanta AA attacks and possibly four(from a fighter), a press the attack may be necessary just to get a shot in. And thank goodness a Kate offers a reasonable chance of survivability.