Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ???

Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945

Message

The Duke -> Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 7:18:39 PM)
Situation: Bad guys have a carrier TF in the region, and you want to send out a TF of cruisers and destroyers to react and engage the enemy. However, I've never once seen a surface combat TF react a given # of hexes and engage the enemy.... Is there any way (other than just throwing darts and sending out your TF blind and hoping you stuble across the enemy) to actually have your surface TF react and engage the enemy? I'm talking about situations where you know from air recon where the enemy CV TF is....if you guess wrong and your CA/DD TF is a hex or two away, it will be wiped out with zero reaction, even if you have it set to 6 hexes. Am I missing something here, or is that just the reality of the situation?

bradfordkay -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 7:23:13 PM)
The reaction setting for surface combat TFs involves any friendly bases within the reaction range. The TF will not react to enemy TFs within reaction range that are not in hexes involving freindly bases, only those that are in hexes with friendly bases. For interception on the open sea, you have to guess which hex the enemy TF will end the turn in and move your surface combat TF to that location (choose wisely!).

The Duke -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 7:42:13 PM)
Wow, that's a tough nut to crack for surface combat....seems like BBs/CAs/CLs with float plane recon would rather move a hex or two to engage the enemy rather than sit there like fish in a barrel for a few series of moves in which they all get sunk.

wild_Willie2 -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 9:38:12 PM)
You would THINK that, but that is not how the game works [;)]

Ron Saueracker -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 9:46:16 PM)
Unfortunately SC TF will only react if a friendly base is threatened by either a bombardment or transport TF and it is set to PATROL. Nothing else causes a reaction by SC TFs. Really rudimentary and difficult to manipulate TFs in WITP. Here is an example. To get a TF to follow another, it must be set to PATROL and to FOLLOW TF...no other combination works. BUT!!!!! Look out![X(] If you do this and simply want the TFs to follow another TF, lets say to clear out of a dangerous situation, make sure that you change all the Surface Combat TFs to another mission, otherwise, despite having orders to FOLLOW TF, the PATROL orders override it and off the TF goes to it's most likely destruction. Yes it happenned to me recently.[8\|][8D] Really clunky UI, especially with TFs.

6971grunt -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 9:46:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: The Duke Wow, that's a tough nut to crack for surface combat....seems like BBs/CAs/CLs with float plane recon would rather move a hex or two to engage the enemy rather than sit there like fish in a barrel for a few series of moves in which they all get sunk. Yup, TF actions in an open sea hex [60 miles] is a matter of having more luck than skill.

ADM Halsey -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 9:56:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker Unfortunately SC TF will only react if a friendly base is threatened by either a bombardment or transport TF and it is set to PATROL. Nothing else causes a reaction by SC TFs. Really rudimentary and difficult to manipulate TFs in WITP. Here is an example. To get a TF to follow another, it must be set to PATROL and to FOLLOW TF...no other combination works. BUT!!!!! Look out![X(] If you do this and simply want the TFs to follow another TF, lets say to clear out of a dangerous situation, make sure that you change all the Surface Combat TFs to another mission, otherwise, despite having orders to FOLLOW TF, the PATROL orders override it and off the TF goes to it's most likely destruction. Yes it happenned to me recently.[8\|][8D] Really clunky UI, especially with TFs. Would you be refering to the pounding I gave onr of your surface TFs? [:D]

ADM Halsey -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 9:56:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker Unfortunately SC TF will only react if a friendly base is threatened by either a bombardment or transport TF and it is set to PATROL. Nothing else causes a reaction by SC TFs. Really rudimentary and difficult to manipulate TFs in WITP. Here is an example. To get a TF to follow another, it must be set to PATROL and to FOLLOW TF...no other combination works. BUT!!!!! Look out![X(] If you do this and simply want the TFs to follow another TF, lets say to clear out of a dangerous situation, make sure that you change all the Surface Combat TFs to another mission, otherwise, despite having orders to FOLLOW TF, the PATROL orders override it and off the TF goes to it's most likely destruction. Yes it happenned to me recently.[8\|][8D] Really clunky UI, especially with TFs. That TF got away after the battle if I remember right.

Arkady -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 10:33:33 PM)
You must get feeling for your enemy movements.... Best way how to know where you enemy will be next turn is train in WPO [:)] There is no all seeing air cover and you can only guees where dreadnoughts should be ...but after some hundred turns you will learn [:'(] I have four different mid ocean intercepts within last seven days (in-game)

AmiralLaurent -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 10:50:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: The Duke Wow, that's a tough nut to crack for surface combat....seems like BBs/CAs/CLs with float plane recon would rather move a hex or two to engage the enemy rather than sit there like fish in a barrel for a few series of moves in which they all get sunk. Agree, but CV TF are roughly as fast as BB/CA/CL and will also move to evade them. The only known example of a BB TF attacking a CV TF (the battle of Samar) wasn't especially a slaughter in Japanese favor. The US lost a CV and 3 DD/DE, the Japanese lost 3 CA.

Ron Saueracker -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 11:10:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ADM Halsey quote: ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker Unfortunately SC TF will only react if a friendly base is threatened by either a bombardment or transport TF and it is set to PATROL. Nothing else causes a reaction by SC TFs. Really rudimentary and difficult to manipulate TFs in WITP. Here is an example. To get a TF to follow another, it must be set to PATROL and to FOLLOW TF...no other combination works. BUT!!!!! Look out![X(] If you do this and simply want the TFs to follow another TF, lets say to clear out of a dangerous situation, make sure that you change all the Surface Combat TFs to another mission, otherwise, despite having orders to FOLLOW TF, the PATROL orders override it and off the TF goes to it's most likely destruction. Yes it happenned to me recently.[8\|][8D] Really clunky UI, especially with TFs. That TF got away after the battle if I remember right. Kinda... Somehow, after the AI intiatiated two rounds of combat against 5 battleships and their escorts (good move[8\|]), Houston, Boise and 2 DDs escaped. The cripples CL Marblehead and 3 four stakers were sunk next day by your LBA from the add water and stir base you just captured a few phases earlier in the turn. I suppose I was lucky even getting a few ships out but it was bad luck and a very unfriendly user interface that was the cause of the mess in the first place. Too many unknown aspects of the design and too many mouse clicks have a tendency to instigate human error...my error being not realizing that leaving the mission as SC would cause them to jump off a bridge.[;)]

Feinder -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 11:15:38 PM)
I wouldn't call it all luck.� There is a bit of skill involved in engaging CVs in open water (altho having several ships at your disposal helps tremendously). Had PBEM game as Allies (05-42), got Sigint that invasion TF was heading to Canton and Baker.� I knew baby-KB was in SRA, figured this would be escorted by KB, and had damaged Soryu previously, thought she was in the shop.� Kinda saw it coming anyway, but figured this was my best shot at actually having an advantage vs. KB (5 or 6 CVs, since no baby-KB) vs. everything in the arsenal (5x USN(75), + RN(45) + RN(33) + RN(20), and some support from Wellingtons at Canton an AF(5). Allied CVs had just raided shipping around Lunga (bagged about 5x DDs, and 2 fish into Mutsu - wish I had gotten that kill, but didn't).� Ran like a bat outta he11 towards around SoPac, Suva (fuel) - Pago (fuel) - Canton.� Didn't actually stop at Canton, since he was constantly reconning, would spot my CVs. PBYs from Baker spotted KB with mega-invasion TF near Tarawa.� Was moving about 2+3 hexes each turn, tracked 'em for two turns.� Figured they were heading to one of four hexes next turn.� Sortied 4x TFs, each with 1x CL, 4x DDs into expected destination hexes.� Moved up my own CVs and held my breath. KB hit onto one of the SC TFs.� I lost 2x DDs, but my CL actually landed a single hit on Kaga (not major, but I'll take what I can get). Next morning was lots of airstrikes... 1.� Surface engagement -probably- burned some ops points for KB.� Every little bit helps. 2.� AI must have evaluated the SC TF in same hex as "immenent threat", because launched several smallish strikes vs. my CL and DDs and surrounding SC TFs.� Sank probably 3 CLs and about 5 DDs, but those were planes not flying against my CVs. 3.� KB's "alpha-strike" targeted RN CVs.� Sank RN(45), and damaged CA and PoW.� Was a big enough strike that I think Kaga was still launching that morning. 4.� My alpha strike mauled Hiryu, Soryu, Kaga (no sinkings, but definatly crippled).� More damage to Hiryu, Soryu, Kaga.� Also some damage to Akagi, Shok, and Zhi. 5.� PM strikes roll around...� No strikes from KB...� My guess ops points shut down 2nd strike by Akagi, Shok and Zui, because I didn't land but one or two bombs on them in the AM. 6.� My PM alpha strike nailed KB again.� Pretty much they all in trouble. 7.� Day 2, I think it was probably Shok that was still launching while making "best speed" back to Tarawa. 8.� She wasn't fast enough. Traded RN(45) + 4x CLs + 6x DDs for Shok, Zui, Kaga, Akagi, Soryu, and Hiryu, Hei, Krishima, Chitose.� I'm quite sure that I'll never see that again in my WitP carreer.� So I saved the replay, and and will play it again when I get my arse handed to me in my next game (grin). Spent the next week bombing transports.� Litterally ran out of sorties and then went home. Baker and Canton are still in Allied hands. [sm=Tank-fahr09.gif] -F-

Feinder -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 11:21:35 PM)
quote: Best way how to know where you enemy will be next turn is train in WPO Bingo. Play WPO a lot (or beta test it, in my case), and you'll get much better at guessing your opponents destination hexes. -F-

Ron Saueracker -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 11:29:07 PM)
Unfortunately, there was little or no need to guess in real life given the presence of aircraft, decent comms etc. That is why there should be some sort of order in the TF UI to *INTERCEPT* an enemy TF that has been selected by the player. Add some variables of course but to not have anything but a player's best guess in an entire movement phase, and to not enable the ability of surface TFs to engage other TFs as subs can at any point during movement is really quite an oversight.

Kereguelen -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/13/2006 11:33:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent quote: ORIGINAL: The Duke Wow, that's a tough nut to crack for surface combat....seems like BBs/CAs/CLs with float plane recon would rather move a hex or two to engage the enemy rather than sit there like fish in a barrel for a few series of moves in which they all get sunk. Agree, but CV TF are roughly as fast as BB/CA/CL and will also move to evade them. The only known example of a BB TF attacking a CV TF (the battle of Samar) wasn't especially a slaughter in Japanese favor. The US lost a CV and 3 DD/DE, the Japanese lost 3 CA. Not the only example: The British CV Glorious was sunk by Scharnhorst and Gneisenau in 1940.

bradfordkay -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/14/2006 6:58:53 AM)
Ron, isn't the Patrol/Do Not Retire order given to a SCTF an order to intercept enemy TFs? Why else would you have an SCTF patrolling, if not to intercept incoming enemy TFs? I'd like to see the SCTF reaction setting expanded to allow for "at sea" interception of TFs with a high detection rating.

jwilkerson -> RE: Surface Combat TF - Reaction Setting ??? (10/14/2006 7:48:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Feinder quote: Best way how to know where you enemy will be next turn is train in WPO Bingo. Play WPO a lot (or beta test it, in my case), and you'll get much better at guessing your opponents destination hexes. -F- Concur ! Playing WPO has definitely sharpened my surface TF combat technique !!!! ... and in WPO I've had hundreds of MOI !!! They are STD faire once you know how [:)]

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.96875