|
pasternakski -> (9/12/2002 2:43:01 AM)
|
Just a couple of questions by way of trying to be helpful...
Did you have your surface combat TF set to "react to enemy" and "patrol/do not retire?"
Did you have your TF float planes set to 100% naval search?
Did you set your TF destination to a hex you calculated to be pretty close to where the crippled ships would be?
I don't know. I have had some success in chasing down cripples, but often have seen them slip away. I would not recommend changing the way the game works now, however. Think of your surface TF commander, out there at dusk after a confusing day of air attacks, orders followed by countermanding orders, false (or true, or impossible to determine) reports of significant enemy surface forces in the area. He is getting limited, if any, information from land-based naval search. He likely does not know how well (or poorly) the air combat has gone, and may suspect that, come dawn, Vallie and Katie are going to come and spoil his breakfast.
I know that I am reading a lot into the UV game engine that isn't really there (yes, I have always had a penchant for seeing the Emperor's new clothes), but hesitance (not born of cowardice, I would say, but of reluctance to commit "the big mistake") on the part of subordinate commanders was a way of life in this WWII theater. How frequently have you hoped for your surface combat TF you always send along with your carrier groups to find and engage the enemy carriers and beat 'em up? It happens, but not very often, and frequently the surface TF gets the crap beat out of it by air attacks during the chase. This is the price of aggressiveness, in my estimation. You've got to calculate your risks in comparison to the benefit you hope to derive. Aggression or foolhardiness? History will judge you harshly if you fail (and so will the game).
I am content with UV's modeling of the vagaries of subordinate commanders' actions (and resultant successes and failures).
|
|
|
|
