Toonces, you're right that there are a limited amount of options.
One thing that would show the difference between USN and IJN methods, and give you some extra decision making is the force anti aircraft tactics.
The Japanese relied on the maneuverability of their carriers. The weapons suite was relatively poor, and to enhance the freedom of maneuver, the escorts typically spread out away from the carriers.
The USN by contrast, had a very strong and layered AA weapons suite. And they worked on tactics to give a layered defence.
The carriers would be in the center of the formation, and near the end of the war, there were Task Groups with up to five carriers. Then there was a ring of heavy ships, battleships and cruisers, at anywhere from 500 to 1,000 yards around the carriers.
For steaming, there was an outer ring of destroyers that was further out. When an air attack was detected, the destroyers moved into the ring of cruisers to enhance their firepower.
Totally different methods of defending the high value ships.
The possible problem with the USN method was the tighter the ring, the greater chance of an airborne torpedo hitting something. Or leading to the maneuvering ships to collide.
Gerry Bogan preferred to have the ring in really tight to the carriers. But his Task Group normally operated with only three carriers.
Slew McCain, who's group had five carriers, preferred his ring to be further from the high value center group. He noted a worry about collisions.
If the game allowed this kind of detail, it would give you some choices in your AA defence scheme for the americans.
Forthe Japanese, though, there isn't enough information in english to determine if they ever changed their tactics.
