miko,
Thks for your kind reply, if it was addressed to me. Thnks in the name of the adresse If it was not. Sure he/she will appreciate it on what it's worth.
Seeing it, I think my poor english does not allow me to explain myself properly.
When I say working toghether I do not mean visual range whatsoever. Working + Togheter implies only common strategic goals, and allow not only separate tasks but even separate tactics. I do not know where in my text (If your answer relates to my post) is visual range or having them on the same spot. I am sure you have some reasons beyond my limited intelligence not to consider this point but, sorry, they escape me.
Besides that, Task Groups (that's how they are deployed here) comprise not only CV's but also escorts. And there is a cruiser on each one with some 8" and some 5" that can meka a nice (but tricky) work in shore bombardment and fleet to fleet engagement. So if you put 2 in a spot, you double firepower...sorry to explain that to you, but being so dumb, I want to make sure I'm making the proper maths.
I don't know if this reason is good enough by your obviously higher and more clever than mine standards. Anyway, having taken a look to the mirror this morning, I have assumed my dayly idiocy quota, so your post do not offend me.
btw, my evident lack of perspicacy and inference ability made impossible the task of having a look at your gaming trajectory in current version. I tried miko, miko2d with no result. Can you please provide me with your handle so I can check, and give credit to your authorised opinion?. I did not look for past ones since navy was not implemented, and, as is it crystal clear you are not an idiot, it would be evident to you that its absence would nullify your entitlement to give any opinion about CV (in my idiocy I would start to call it TG) use & misuse in the MA.
Sure I am an Idiot, and that must be the reason I do not care about some virtual personna calling me that in my virtual face.
Feel free to correct me If I am wrong, I always appreciate intelligent, constructive criticism, as you evidently showed in your last post. And forgive me for this long post that you, from your superior point of view, will have forseen in all its points. I'm doubtless about this.
Cheers,
Pepe