Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Automatic carrier strike

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Automatic carrier strike Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Automatic carrier strike - 11/5/2016 7:45:25 AM   
fulcrum28


Posts: 660
Joined: 2/28/2010
Status: offline
I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.


_____________________________


The most comprehensive website on the IJN Imperial Japanese Navy Y:"Let us enjoy the beauty of the moon (sinking aboard Hiryu)
Post #: 1
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/5/2016 8:15:10 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline
Are you thinking that the "reaction" setting controls the range at which your carrier aircraft will strike?

The "reaction" setting is how far a carrier TF (or any combat TF) will move to close the distance with a sighted enemy. It does not control how far your aircraft will fly, other than giving them a closer distance to make it easier to reach the enemy.

If you are trying to prevent your carrier aircraft from attacking beyond a certain range you also need to limit the range setting for each squadron. Are you saying that you are doing this and your aircraft are still attacking at a distance beyond that set range?

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to fulcrum28)
Post #: 2
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/5/2016 9:13:25 AM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.




The setting you are talking about governs surface/sub/ASW reaction ranges. It determines up to what distance to a hostile contact the TF moves to engage in the reaction phase of the turn resolution. If, for example, you set an ASW group to react '3', it will react (and hopefully engage) towards any sub detected within 3 hexes - naturally this also depends on a couple of other parameters as usual in WitP.

It does not help with carrier battles in general because there additional parameters that ignore (or overrule) the reaction range setting come into play. A CV TF will always react in a specific way (see manual) to an enemy CV TF based on their nationality.

Note that the above is in no way related to 'the distance from which a carrier strike can occur'. This can only be influenced via the Air Group range settings.

< Message edited by LoBaron -- 11/5/2016 9:14:13 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to fulcrum28)
Post #: 3
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/5/2016 2:18:22 PM   
btd64


Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.




The setting you are talking about governs surface/sub/ASW reaction ranges. It determines up to what distance to a hostile contact the TF moves to engage in the reaction phase of the turn resolution. If, for example, you set an ASW group to react '3', it will react (and hopefully engage) towards any sub detected within 3 hexes - naturally this also depends on a couple of other parameters as usual in WitP.

It does not help with carrier battles in general because there additional parameters that ignore (or overrule) the reaction range setting come into play. A CV TF will always react in a specific way (see manual) to an enemy CV TF based on their nationality.

Note that the above is in no way related to 'the distance from which a carrier strike can occur'. This can only be influenced via the Air Group range settings.


Plus One....GP

_____________________________

Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 4
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/5/2016 5:07:55 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.


You seem to be asking the AI to stop processing the turn and ask you for permission to carry out a strike you did not plan on. This is the equivalent of a Naval HQ on land not allowing the TF commander at sea to use his initiative - something that has proven disastrous time after time IRL.

Apart from interfering with turn processing (by requiring you to monitor turn execution) this would also remove one of the variables that make the game exciting and realistic. You have picked your TF commander and given him his command. When unexpected situations occur it is the commander's job to figure out how to handle it. I say - "hands off".

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to fulcrum28)
Post #: 5
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/5/2016 5:13:31 PM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.


You seem to be asking the AI to stop processing the turn and ask you for permission to carry out a strike you did not plan on. This is the equivalent of a Naval HQ on land not allowing the TF commander at sea to use his initiative - something that has proven disastrous time after time IRL.

Apart from interfering with turn processing (by requiring you to monitor turn execution) this would also remove one of the variables that make the game exciting and realistic. You have picked your TF commander and given him his command. When unexpected situations occur it is the commander's job to figure out how to handle it. I say - "hands off".


His request would also make the game impossible to play by e-mail, thus removing the best way to enjoy this masterpiece.

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 6
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/5/2016 11:30:31 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.




The setting you are talking about governs surface/sub/ASW reaction ranges. It determines up to what distance to a hostile contact the TF moves to engage in the reaction phase of the turn resolution. If, for example, you set an ASW group to react '3', it will react (and hopefully engage) towards any sub detected within 3 hexes - naturally this also depends on a couple of other parameters as usual in WitP.

It does not help with carrier battles in general because there additional parameters that ignore (or overrule) the reaction range setting come into play. A CV TF will always react in a specific way (see manual) to an enemy CV TF based on their nationality.

Note that the above is in no way related to 'the distance from which a carrier strike can occur'. This can only be influenced via the Air Group range settings.


Just one caveat here, ASW TF's won't react to subs. They will chase those that are detected when they pass through the ASWs' hex, but they will not react toward them.


_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 7
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/6/2016 1:53:22 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 14863
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi


quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.




The setting you are talking about governs surface/sub/ASW reaction ranges. It determines up to what distance to a hostile contact the TF moves to engage in the reaction phase of the turn resolution. If, for example, you set an ASW group to react '3', it will react (and hopefully engage) towards any sub detected within 3 hexes - naturally this also depends on a couple of other parameters as usual in WitP.

It does not help with carrier battles in general because there additional parameters that ignore (or overrule) the reaction range setting come into play. A CV TF will always react in a specific way (see manual) to an enemy CV TF based on their nationality.

Note that the above is in no way related to 'the distance from which a carrier strike can occur'. This can only be influenced via the Air Group range settings.


Just one caveat here, ASW TF's won't react to subs. They will chase those that are detected when they pass through the ASWs' hex, but they will not react toward them.



Actually, I don't believe that is true. For instance, if your land based search planes or ASW planes spot a sub, an ASW TF patrolling in the area may well move to that hex.

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 8
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/6/2016 8:14:44 AM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi
Just one caveat here, ASW TF's won't react to subs. They will chase those that are detected when they pass through the ASWs' hex, but they will not react toward them.



Reasons why they do not show this behaviour in your games might be due to

- react range set to 0
- too low dl on subs
- too low leadership/agg rating of TF commanders
- suboptimal PZ positioning


_____________________________


(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 9
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/6/2016 4:08:18 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

It does not help with carrier battles in general because there additional parameters that ignore (or overrule) the reaction range setting come into play. A CV TF will always react in a specific way (see manual) to an enemy CV TF based on their nationality.



Aha, so the CV fleet re-act setting can be overruled. I had this happen to bad effect, I thought the commander was the culprit. I had a 2CVL fleet following a 4CV fleet and the best and biggest Zero CAP unit was on the CVLs. They were set to follow in the same hex and react "0". But the 4CVs reacted a hex and the CVL not dividing my power and left the CVs without the most important CAP unit. Also the Kates from the CVLs would then go in without escort and apart from the CV planes. Not good, first I did not want any reaction (was overruled) and second I wanted both in the same hex - but the CVLs did not follow the react of the CVs....if they had ended up both in the same hex, ok this particular battle had probably sunk 3 enemy CVs with perhaps no own or light losses. The CAP unit on one of the CVLs was 36 x Zero with "0" range dedicated to protect. They did nothing during the whole batte, the CVLs were not attacked and with range "0" they did not protect the CVs.

Not to mention all the AA guns lost in the CVL fleet...

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 11/6/2016 4:10:41 PM >

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 10
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/6/2016 4:30:38 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi


quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.




The setting you are talking about governs surface/sub/ASW reaction ranges. It determines up to what distance to a hostile contact the TF moves to engage in the reaction phase of the turn resolution. If, for example, you set an ASW group to react '3', it will react (and hopefully engage) towards any sub detected within 3 hexes - naturally this also depends on a couple of other parameters as usual in WitP.

It does not help with carrier battles in general because there additional parameters that ignore (or overrule) the reaction range setting come into play. A CV TF will always react in a specific way (see manual) to an enemy CV TF based on their nationality.

Note that the above is in no way related to 'the distance from which a carrier strike can occur'. This can only be influenced via the Air Group range settings.


Just one caveat here, ASW TF's won't react to subs. They will chase those that are detected when they pass through the ASWs' hex, but they will not react toward them.



This is not my experience at all. I have had ASW TF with high skill and aggressive commanders react multiple times in a turn to enemy sub threats. In fact it is my policy not to set reaction ranges above 2 or 3 because I have had them react clear out of air cover range into enemy territory and get clobbered by an airstrike.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 11
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/6/2016 7:08:48 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi


quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

quote:

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.




The setting you are talking about governs surface/sub/ASW reaction ranges. It determines up to what distance to a hostile contact the TF moves to engage in the reaction phase of the turn resolution. If, for example, you set an ASW group to react '3', it will react (and hopefully engage) towards any sub detected within 3 hexes - naturally this also depends on a couple of other parameters as usual in WitP.

It does not help with carrier battles in general because there additional parameters that ignore (or overrule) the reaction range setting come into play. A CV TF will always react in a specific way (see manual) to an enemy CV TF based on their nationality.

Note that the above is in no way related to 'the distance from which a carrier strike can occur'. This can only be influenced via the Air Group range settings.


Just one caveat here, ASW TF's won't react to subs. They will chase those that are detected when they pass through the ASWs' hex, but they will not react toward them.



Pay close attention to the replay when you have ASW TFs on patrol with a reaction setting. You will see them react to detected enemy subs. This doesn't mean that they start combat with them, but they will react and move in to the hex the sub is in (if they can), which may trigger the sub to attack them.

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 12
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/7/2016 12:02:41 AM   
rustysi


Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
OK, look here.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3981268&mpage=2&key=ASW%2Creacting%2Csub&#

Edit:Check Alfred's post 41.

< Message edited by rustysi -- 11/7/2016 12:04:07 AM >


_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 13
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/7/2016 9:41:06 AM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

OK, look here.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3981268&mpage=2&key=ASW%2Creacting%2Csub&#

Edit:Check Alfred's post 41.


Hey rustysi, thanks for the link.

Interesting read, I was not aware of this discussion up to now.

So combining what I read in that debate and what my personal expeerience is this sums up like below:

In my games I use ASW TF´s set with 2 or 3 PZs and react 2-4 depending on the situation. In areas where it is possible I put up a lot of NavS to vector the ASW TF´s on possible contacts.
My empirical data is that a) I get the `TF xyz reacts to enemy TF` message during the reaction phase on a regular basis where xyz is referring to the ASW TF. On multiple instances I then see b) combat initiated by the same TF xyz that was reported to react to a contact.
What I did not verify is whether the reaction of TF xyz actually resulted in a genuine deviation from the designated path between PZs to intercept a sub contact and a subsequent attack on that contact, or whether it was just a correlation and TF xyz did not deviate but rather attacked a sub in a hex that was part of the designated path anyway.

So I know that a) and b) happen sequencially for a specific TF, but what I do not know is whether
1) b) is technically a result of a) or
2) b) is just an independent event without any causal relation to a).

From the link you provided Alfred seems to be convinced that 2) applies. This alone makes 2) a real possibility, backed up by the usual extensive research Alfred does before making such statements. But this would at least mean we are experiencing either a bug or at least an inconsistency in messages the game provides to the player (react message although the TF doesn´t react).

Actually it would be pretty easy to sandbox a Scenario to verify what happens:

1) Position a sub TF with react 0 into a hex.
2) Put an ASW TF with high skill commander in a neighbouring hex, single PZ, set to react 1.
3) In a nearby base set up extensive airborne NavS to max out DL on the sub.

Run that setup for a while without changing anything. Any combat initiated by either ASW TF or sub TF will indicate that the ASW TF reacted into the sub TF hex.

_____________________________


(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 14
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/7/2016 12:58:52 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
For ASW in my last game vs. the AI I got a lot of re-act to sub messages starting in 43 or so (guess better exp then), but never or very rarely saw a ASW TF fight subs to which the message stated it re-acted. In the current PBM I have not seen it yet (up to May42). Also LoBaron why do you use nav search and not ASW ? For the longer range?

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 11/7/2016 1:00:31 PM >

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 15
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/7/2016 3:10:10 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron


quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

OK, look here.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3981268&mpage=2&key=ASW%2Creacting%2Csub&#

Edit:Check Alfred's post 41.


Hey rustysi, thanks for the link.

Interesting read, I was not aware of this discussion up to now.

So combining what I read in that debate and what my personal expeerience is this sums up like below:

In my games I use ASW TF´s set with 2 or 3 PZs and react 2-4 depending on the situation. In areas where it is possible I put up a lot of NavS to vector the ASW TF´s on possible contacts.
My empirical data is that a) I get the `TF xyz reacts to enemy TF` message during the reaction phase on a regular basis where xyz is referring to the ASW TF. On multiple instances I then see b) combat initiated by the same TF xyz that was reported to react to a contact.
What I did not verify is whether the reaction of TF xyz actually resulted in a genuine deviation from the designated path between PZs to intercept a sub contact and a subsequent attack on that contact, or whether it was just a correlation and TF xyz did not deviate but rather attacked a sub in a hex that was part of the designated path anyway.

So I know that a) and b) happen sequencially for a specific TF, but what I do not know is whether
1) b) is technically a result of a) or
2) b) is just an independent event without any causal relation to a).

From the link you provided Alfred seems to be convinced that 2) applies. This alone makes 2) a real possibility, backed up by the usual extensive research Alfred does before making such statements. But this would at least mean we are experiencing either a bug or at least an inconsistency in messages the game provides to the player (react message although the TF doesn´t react).

Actually it would be pretty easy to sandbox a Scenario to verify what happens:

1) Position a sub TF with react 0 into a hex.
2) Put an ASW TF with high skill commander in a neighbouring hex, single PZ, set to react 1.
3) In a nearby base set up extensive airborne NavS to max out DL on the sub.

Run that setup for a while without changing anything. Any combat initiated by either ASW TF or sub TF will indicate that the ASW TF reacted into the sub TF hex.


I would say that this is my experience. However, I am certain that I have ended up with ASW TFs well out of their assigned patrol zones at the end of the turn. This is back when I set every ASW TF to six hexes reaction range. I do not do that any more so the behavior has changed. Perhaps is is a factor of range and operation points expended. That is a ASW TF with operational points left over will return to it's normal patrol zone before the turn has ended but one that made multiple reactions over a longer range will not have the points to fully return to its patrol zone. So, the test should be done with a few ASW TFs with very high aggression leaders against a few subs. The area should be saturated with air search and the subs should be five to six hexes away. The test then should be rerun with the subs in a stepped progression of 2, 4 and six hexes away. So the ASW TF might only be reacting a few hexes each time but bounce further out with multiple reactions.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 16
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/7/2016 8:31:45 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline
My experiences jive with what crsutton states.

Have seen ASW TFs vectored several hexes out of patrol patterns reacting to subs many times.

Get the 'reacting' message quite regularly.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 17
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/8/2016 7:55:10 PM   
LoBaron


Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77
Also LoBaron why do you use nav search and not ASW ? For the longer range?


For the sake of simplicity of the example I emphasised NavS to max DL.

In my games I use a mix of NavS and airborne ASW and ASW TFs. The mix depends on region priority, type/distance of threat, area to cover, plane types available, pilot skill and training, surface ships available, other threats in the reagion, and the logistics situation. As with all things in WitP AE there is no easy answer to a complex challenge.

_____________________________


(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 18
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/8/2016 9:12:23 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77
Also LoBaron why do you use nav search and not ASW ? For the longer range?


For the sake of simplicity of the example I emphasised NavS to max DL.

In my games I use a mix of NavS and airborne ASW and ASW TFs. The mix depends on region priority, type/distance of threat, area to cover, plane types available, pilot skill and training, surface ships available, other threats in the reagion, and the logistics situation. As with all things in WitP AE there is no easy answer to a complex challenge.


+1

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to LoBaron)
Post #: 19
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 11/9/2016 9:47:00 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
I chose the post I did because of the quote Alfred had put in there from Don Bowen. What Don explains in his post has been what I've experienced with some very limited tests. The ASW TF does seem to be 'reacting' to a sub TF that has passed through the ASW TFs' hex. I have seen said ASW TF 'follow' the sub TF through several hexes. That's good enough for me.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 20
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 12/14/2016 11:02:47 PM   
fulcrum28


Posts: 660
Joined: 2/28/2010
Status: offline
Thanks for all your interesting and useful comments.

This issue is important to understand well the game mechanics. I have improved the management of the task forces thanks to your comments. However, specially when CVTFs are involved I still faced situations like the ones described above by Alpha77. So I feel like losing control of important task forces.

Let me summarize the concepts and please correct if i am wrong:


1) For non-CVTFs: A TF will move to the ordered/indicated location "L1" by the player during the phase movement. Suppose it has a maximum reaction range set up (eg. 3 hex), when it arrives to the location L1 (perhaps even before arriving to L1), and, if and only if, the friendly TF has spotted an enemy TF, the enemy TF will be evaluated and it it is a similar or weaker force and the commander of the friendly TF has enough aggressive skills, it will move again up to 3 hexes in order to intercept the enemy TF. This can also occur more than one time in the same movement phase. (I wonder if it does not violate the maximum speed (space/time allowed) by each ship. It looks that ultra-high speed could be achieved if you move with reaction movement several times which could be not realistic, assuming the location "L1" was the maximum distance you could reach in a turn and you are, in addition, moving forward several times 3 hexes.

2) For CVTFs: The maximum reaction range will be "ignored" if the friendly CVTF identifies an enemy CVTF. Then, automatically, and based on the aggressive skills of the commander, the friendly CVFT will approach to the enemy CVTF (a maximum movement of 4 hex for the Japanese and 3 hex for the US Navy ?) in order to perform an aerial strike. Another question here is: If you still have a zero range setting for the torpedo and dive bomber squadrons, could the commander still order/perform the attack?

looking forward to your comments, thanks!



_____________________________


The most comprehensive website on the IJN Imperial Japanese Navy Y:"Let us enjoy the beauty of the moon (sinking aboard Hiryu)

(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 21
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 12/15/2016 5:18:22 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
I think the 1000 ops points per phase is part of the equation for reactions. If a TF uses up all of its ops points moving at normal speed it should not be able to react - reaction being an increase to flank speed to cover extra distance.

The ops points for launching aircraft seem to be independent of TF movement - the TF can use all the ops points getting to the launch hex and the aircraft will still take off (if there are no problems like weather cancelling strikes).

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to fulcrum28)
Post #: 22
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 12/15/2016 11:00:36 AM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline
I believe it's been stated by at least Alfred, if not also a Dev, that units with very high experience can, very rarely, exceed the maximum range limitation, so it may also be that they can also exceed a player restricted range setting.

One of the aspects of this game that give many people grief, is the lack of tactical control.

It's a strategic game, ordered operationally and executed tactically.

We, as players, get control over the strategic and operational, but not the tactical.

Not having tactical control is one of the endearing aspects for many of us who have come to love the game.

Nothing can be predicted absolutely.

This is also a hallmark of Gary Grigsby games.

He puts so many variable factors into things for that very reason.

< Message edited by HansBolter -- 12/15/2016 11:10:01 AM >


_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to rustysi)
Post #: 23
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 12/15/2016 11:50:19 AM   
fulcrum28


Posts: 660
Joined: 2/28/2010
Status: offline
thanks for your valuable comments. bbfanboy, where can you read the ops points you still have?

_____________________________


The most comprehensive website on the IJN Imperial Japanese Navy Y:"Let us enjoy the beauty of the moon (sinking aboard Hiryu)

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 24
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 12/15/2016 2:17:47 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline
For ships it shows in the TF list.
Not sure it shows anywhere for ports.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to fulcrum28)
Post #: 25
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 12/15/2016 5:33:41 PM   
glyphoglossus

 

Posts: 71
Joined: 9/26/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

quote:

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

It does not help with carrier battles in general because there additional parameters that ignore (or overrule) the reaction range setting come into play. A CV TF will always react in a specific way (see manual) to an enemy CV TF based on their nationality.



Aha, so the CV fleet re-act setting can be overruled. I had this happen to bad effect, I thought the commander was the culprit. I had a 2CVL fleet following a 4CV fleet and the best and biggest Zero CAP unit was on the CVLs. They were set to follow in the same hex and react "0". But the 4CVs reacted a hex and the CVL not dividing my power and left the CVs without the most important CAP unit. Also the Kates from the CVLs would then go in without escort and apart from the CV planes. Not good, first I did not want any reaction (was overruled) and second I wanted both in the same hex - but the CVLs did not follow the react of the CVs....if they had ended up both in the same hex, ok this particular battle had probably sunk 3 enemy CVs with perhaps no own or light losses. The CAP unit on one of the CVLs was 36 x Zero with "0" range dedicated to protect. They did nothing during the whole batte, the CVLs were not attacked and with range "0" they did not protect the CVs.

Not to mention all the AA guns lost in the CVL fleet...


Wow. This would spoil anyone's day, I'm sure.

So, just to clarify: a TF with "follow" orders will not necessarily comply if the followed TF reacts-moves (as opposed to just a move)?

(1) Is this absolutely/confirmed/state to be true in some documentation?

(2) Would this hold if the following TF has a "react" > 0? I.e., if the following TF has the same "react" range as the followed TF, can we count on the following TF following the followed TF through a "react" move?

(3) If [2] above is True, is there a risk that the following TF will react move on its own even if the followed TF does not, thus disregarding the "follow" order?

(4) If either [2] is not True or [3] is True, then it seems that the only way for multiple CV TF's to consistently maintain a mutually supporting same-hex relationship with each other is to set react 0 for both?

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 26
RE: Automatic carrier strike - 12/15/2016 5:47:09 PM   
glyphoglossus

 

Posts: 71
Joined: 9/26/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: glyphoglossus

So, just to clarify: a TF with "follow" orders will not necessarily comply if the followed TF reacts-moves (as opposed to just a move)?

(1) Is this absolutely/confirmed/state to be true in some documentation?

(2) Would this hold if the following TF has a "react" > 0? I.e., if the following TF has the same "react" range as the followed TF, can we count on the following TF following the followed TF through a "react" move?

(3) If [2] above is True, is there a risk that the following TF will react move on its own even if the followed TF does not, thus disregarding the "follow" order?

(4) If either [2] is not True or [3] is True, then it seems that the only way for multiple CV TF's to consistently maintain a mutually supporting same-hex relationship with each other is to set react 0 for both?


Ah, just found the Alfred-post on "reacts":

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=3981586

In particular, the illustrative example given is relevant:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
TF #1 is an amphibious TF.
TF #2 is a surface combat TF. It has been given movement orders to follow TF #1 and has also been given a naval reaction range of 6.

If an enemy surface TF is detected and all the relevant boxes are ticked, TF #2 will react towards the enemy because the follow order tells it to protect TF #1 and it's own reaction range tells it to move towards the enemy anyway. Remember a reaction move overrides existing movement orders (see point 7 above).

If, however, TF #2 does not have a follow TF #1 order, then it will not react towards the enemy in order to protect TF #1 but will only react on the basis of the threat/opportunity to itself alone. Most players will not notice this situation because they usually set following TFs at a range of zero and hence any enemy TF is simultaneously a threat to both friendly TFs which are in the same hex.


However, the example discusses the behavior of a surface combat TF tasked with protecting the followed amphibious TF. It seems that the behavior of two Air Combat TF's might be different, otherwise Alpha77's situation would not have occurred?

(in reply to glyphoglossus)
Post #: 27
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Automatic carrier strike Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

5.469