Gung-Ho US Carrier Commanders

Gung-Ho US Carrier Commanders (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Uncommon Valor - Campaign for the South Pacific

Message

Didz -> Gung-Ho US Carrier Commanders (5/21/2002 5:31:24 PM)
Has anyone else noticed how with 'React to enemy' on the US Carriers seem determined to sail within strike range of Rabaul airbase? In every scenario so far I have lost both US carriers due to their gung-ho commanders sailing into certain death. In the first attempt the US CV force had just completely creamed the Japanese invasion force heading for Gilli Gilli leaving the Jomini Passage carpeted with drowning Japanese soldiers. They then took on the IJN CV force that was steaming to assist and crippled three of their CV's. Before sailing straight for Rabaul and getting pounded into scrap metal. In the second attempt they severely damaged the Lunga Inasion fleet crippling two CA's and an AP before sailing for the Jap base and certain doom. Now I've decided these guys just are not to be trusted and I have turned the 'React to enemy' option off. It means I miss out on a few juicy targets but so far I have managed to keep both CV's afloat.

Ron Saueracker -> (5/21/2002 5:34:58 PM)
Sounds like a fix is needed.

U2 -> (5/21/2002 5:38:42 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ron Saueracker [B]Sounds like a fix is needed. [/B][/QUOTE] I have had no problem with this. Lets take Gili Gili for example. I position my carriers 4-6 hexes from that base and wait and if there is a reaction to carriers it cannot move that far up north. Again I have had no problems with this as jap or yank. But I do treat my CVs as if they were my own kids!:) Dan

Fuchida -> (5/21/2002 5:54:58 PM)
It would be nice to have a third option. React to enemy but not if it will take you close to enemy LBA. Surely there must have been orders of that nature historically.

Didz -> (5/21/2002 7:29:47 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Fuchida [B]It would be nice to have a third option. React to enemy but not if it will take you close to enemy LBA. Surely there must have been orders of that nature historically. [/B][/QUOTE] Well personally I think that would be a given. Was it common for CV task Groups to approach heavily defended stone frigates in daylight?

Ron Saueracker -> (5/21/2002 7:31:58 PM)
Back to the timeless dilemma of creating a decent AI.;)

vils -> 4TH option (5/21/2002 8:26:58 PM)
4. Load Lexington with TNT and rush her into Tulagi, blowing entire port to schreds! :) And all 90 pilots can act as kamikazes on every ships in sight, using planes as leathal torpedos. How about that? ;)

osros -> (5/21/2002 8:47:47 PM)
I too keep my babies on react off, it was 50/50 for me with it on I got the drop on a CV TF and others, but just has many times got hammered myself. Its tricky, Its Timing, Its Luck ( Luck in a computer game? :confused: )

madflava13 -> (5/21/2002 8:49:08 PM)
I generally keep react off, but when I have it on, I make sure Fletcher or another "cautious" commander is at the helm -- seems to do the trick so far.

Admiral DadMan -> (5/21/2002 11:04:14 PM)
An excellent case of reacting to enemy but staying out of LBA is Spruance at Midway in June 42. He would have kept chasing the Japs back to Hell if it weren't LBA from Wake reaching out to him...

Von_Frag -> (5/22/2002 12:12:24 AM)
An excellent case of reacting to enemy but staying out of LBA is Spruance at Midway in June 42. He would have kept chasing the Japs back to Hell if it weren't LBA from Wake reaching out to him... well that and Yamamoto's center van consisting of several battleships including Yamato. Frag

Mike Wood -> (5/22/2002 3:48:10 AM)
Hello... Have you looked at ther range of the Japanese LBA at Rabaul? Such an order would keep Allied carriers out of battle through out the entire campaign. Have Fun... Michael Wood __________________________________________________ [QUOTE]Originally posted by Fuchida [B]It would be nice to have a third option. React to enemy but not if it will take you close to enemy LBA. Surely there must have been orders of that nature historically. [/B][/QUOTE]

Griffin -> (5/22/2002 10:10:18 AM)
However, I don't see any Japanese CVBG commander exhibit such behavior.

Andrew Offen -> (5/22/2002 10:39:56 AM)
Played my first game last night (Coral Sea) and had the same problem. US CV TF reacted from around 4 or 5 hexes south of Gilli Gilli to about 3 hexes north west of it on the wrong side of PNG. Result - exchanged strikes with the IJN CV TF (coming off second best) then got cleaned up by land based air out of Rabaul. Yorktown and Lexington sunk vs Shoho damaged, game lost. How do you stop the guys doing that but still be close enough to hit enemy TF's headed around the end of PNG? Andrew

Erik Rutins -> React vs. Patrol (5/22/2002 10:52:31 AM)
I'm sure most of you have noticed that even with Do Not React orders set, a Carrier TF will conduct a limited reaction when it finds an enemy Carrier TF within range. This usually takes the form of one or two hexes closer for the Allies to get as many planes in range as they can. Personally, that's the only setting I use for my Air Combat TFs in about 95% of cases. There are rare exceptions where I'm distant enough from enemy LBA that it doesn't matter. Using these rules of thumb, I've had no trouble through many games. The React orders get the most use for me with surface combat TFs that I need to station in a given area and intercept any enemy units that try to run the gauntlet. Personally, I'm not sure anything more is necessary, but I'm not against a change if it is requested often enough and is not unreasonable from a programming standpoint. Keep in mind that any good suggestions that don't make it into the list of UV enhancement will most likely show up in WitP, so keep them coming. :) Regards, - Erik

Didz -> (5/22/2002 2:46:59 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mike Wood [B]Hello... Have you looked at ther range of the Japanese LBA at Rabaul? Such an order would keep Allied carriers out of battle through out the entire campaign. Have Fun... Michael Wood __________________________________________________ [/B][/QUOTE] Is there a way of checking the effective range of the aircraft at an enemy airbase? I've just been basing my assessment on the distance between Rabaul and the New Guinea bases they keep bombing.

Didz -> (5/22/2002 2:54:20 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Griffin [B]However, I don't see any Japanese CVBG commander exhibit such behavior. [/B][/QUOTE] Oh! I'm not sure about that in my game (Scn 17) the IJN have moved their CV's within range of Port Moresby several times. Unfortunately, I only have fighters stationed there normally. A quick transfer of bombers from Australia sometimes catches them out but never in enough strength to do any damage. I certainly don't see them charging my main bomber bases on the Australian mainland.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

6.328125