Naval search (Full Version)

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



Message


Samurai -> Naval search (10/26/2002 4:52:53 AM)

Does the size of a TF or the ships that are in it influence the spotting/detection level/MDL?




Admiral_Arctic -> (10/26/2002 5:27:34 AM)

Yes. The smaller the TF size the more difficult it is to discover. From reading other forums:
1-2 hardest
4-5 gain some benefit in stealth
8-10 little benefit
over 12 no benefit.
oversized TF are penalised.

Distance from the enemy bases/CV also makes it more difficult to spot enemy.

Adverse weather will make it harder to see you. But as you know, the weather is not even so even if it is thunderstorms, you might be sitting in the sunshine. The reverse is also true.


I'm not sure if Tf contents or speed have any benefit/penalty.

I have had some success in sneaking up by dividing the ships into one ship Tfs. When I get to the hex that I want to perform the mission from, I regroup the ships into their mission TF and launch an attack. For example, If I want to attack Gili Gili from Cairns or Townsville. The ships will be in one TF each (so there might be 10-15 TFs). I set them to the same hex 11-12 from the target. Next turn when they are all together , I regroup into one or two Tf (depending on possible opposition) and go attack. Even though your CA and DD are separated and unescorted, I rarely get attacked by subs. Normally I set out in poor weather so that it is even more difficult to spot. But don't over do the weather thing, or every time there is thunderstorm, or opponent will be extra ready for you.

If I don't think there will be opposition (particularly subs), I move AP individually, in the open sea hexes. I set them 3,,4,5 (depending on speed) hexes from the base, when they approach the base the escort comes out and I regroup them back into one TF. They go into the base where the subs are. If you count of the hexes and time it right you don't waste time waiting for escorts. But your ships will be escorted on the way in. For example, if I am moving supplies to Shortlands from Truk. If no sub at Truk, all the AP sail individually form there wilth their destination 3 or 6 hexes from Shortlands. When they approach their DH the PC escorts are sent from Shortlands. I regroup into one TF and go into the base. This way they are escorted in the danger area. I don't think many subs are going to attack me in the big blue. Also if you send the PC across from Truk to Shortlands, they need lots of refueling and slow everything down. If there was a sub at Truk, the TF would have been formed into one TF with three PC escorts. On the first turn out, I break up the TF. The AP go to Shortlands individually as described. The PCs either return to Truk in one TF or they will be regrouped with another Tf coming to Truk. Most returninmg AP are sent home in one TF because it is too much hassle to do in both directions and their is much chance of being attacked by air power. At the moment I own MP, GG, Lunga. If one of these falls, I will break down the AP down again.

Sometimes if you want to get discovered, use an oversized TF. My TF of 20+ seem to get sighted in all weather and distances from enemy bases. Some times this is good if you are trying to let or opponent know where you are. You might want to be seen. Then next turn divide into smaller TF, dash 24 hexes on retire orders and attack an unexpected location. But don't go dashing everywhere if not necessay, or you will gain toooooo much system damage.




CapAndGown -> (10/26/2002 7:55:20 AM)

I have thought about using these tactics, but it is just too much work. Also, it is very gamey. Instead of naval search worrying about TF size, it would be better if it concentrated on how many ships were in a hex. Then this gamey aspect would be eliminated.




pasternakski -> (10/26/2002 8:27:44 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cap_and_gown
[B]I have thought about using these tactics, but it is just too much work. Also, it is very gamey. Instead of naval search worrying about TF size, it would be better if it concentrated on how many ships were in a hex. Then this gamey aspect would be eliminated. [/B][/QUOTE]

I absolutely disagree and find nothing "gamey" about the current design (I also have no problem with working hard at my favorite hobby). Ships are organized into TFs. They are not scattered genrally around in 30x30 "hexes." You have to find TFs, not individual ships (except for submarines, which can be one-ship TFs).




CapAndGown -> (10/26/2002 8:32:36 AM)

Are you trying to say that finding one ship out of 20 scattered about in a 30 mile square area is harder than finding the 20 ships all grouped together in that same plot of ocean? I don't think so. :p




Admiral_Arctic -> (10/26/2002 6:19:35 PM)

It's no more gamy than dozens of things I have read on this forum. Like Mogami's dumping off 20 000+ supply points and 10 000+ fuel points on undeveloped but maybe never-to-be to used bases. How much Tupperware did Japan produce during the war? He is taking advantage of supply points not deteriorating over time. His points could be sitting there years. Never to be attacked because the Allied player has no way of striking at them. Or people docking heavily damaged ships on the hex dots to repair flt damage quicker. This also apparently leaves your ships very difficult to spot- unless a sub or recon mission goes there! Or taking planes from off-map CVs. Or having their whole fleet in one hex. Or removing all the bombers from CV to replace them with fighters. Or loading your land units on ships that have supply on them and then unloading the unit with a small fraction of the unit left -so that you don't loss the whole unit. Or ...

I won't take air units from off the map, but I will do some or all of the others. My opponent warned me he would "dirty" so I figured he must be same things. In a game were I am the Allies I don't deploy the above naval movement to that degree. Most surface and transport TF have at least five ships unless their mission requires less.




CapAndGown -> (10/26/2002 7:08:30 PM)

Although you have obviously taken "gamey" to be a pejorative, I didn't mean it that way. If the game allows it and you want to do it, that is fine with me. For instance, I hate the scythian tactics that are possible in Panzer Campaigns (dance in, take a couple of shots, dance out) but that hasn't stopped me from using them.

As to some of your other examples, some of them I don't find gamey. Dumping supplies on an ungarrisoned beach? I do it all the time in order to set up shuttle points for barge routes. Japs did it IRL as well, though it was actually the barges that set up these way points. The question is, is there too much supply available which allows players to "waste" it in this fashion? Yes. And there have been suggestions on limiting the amount of supply arriving at Noumea and Truk.

Docking at a hex dot? Tulagi was little more than a "hex dot", yet US ships would take shelter there in order to make a few fast repairs. Calling that "docking" would be a misnomer.

As I said, I have thought about using your tactics myself. Obviously I am not above using gamey tactics. But is still gamey nonetheless. :p




mogami -> undeveloped (10/26/2002 9:36:18 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Admiral_Arctic
[B]It's no more gamy than dozens of things I have read on this forum. Like Mogami's dumping off 20 000+ supply points and 10 000+ fuel points on undeveloped but maybe never-to-be to used bases. How much Tupperware did Japan produce during the war? He is taking advantage of supply points not deteriorating over time. His points could be sitting there years. Never to be attacked because the Allied player has no way of striking at them. Or people docking heavily damaged ships on the hex dots to repair flt damage quicker. This also apparently leaves your ships very difficult to spot- unless a sub or recon mission goes there! Or taking planes from off-map CVs. Or having their whole fleet in one hex. Or removing all the bombers from CV to replace them with fighters. Or loading your land units on ships that have supply on them and then unloading the unit with a small fraction of the unit left -so that you don't loss the whole unit. Or ...

I won't take air units from off the map, but I will do some or all of the others. My opponent warned me he would "dirty" so I figured he must be same things. In a game were I am the Allies I don't deploy the above naval movement to that degree. Most surface and transport TF have at least five ships unless their mission requires less. [/B][/QUOTE]



Greetings, I do develop the bases to size 2 port and airfield, I then move the engineer units. I do not just dump supply on beaches and leave it.




pasternakski -> (10/27/2002 8:29:26 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cap_and_gown
[B]Are you trying to say that finding one ship out of 20 scattered about in a 30 mile square area is harder than finding the 20 ships all grouped together in that same plot of ocean? I don't think so. :p [/B][/QUOTE]

Actually, that's pretty much what I AM saying.

For one thing, you have to remember that naval war is an environment where ships are organized into groups for the purpose of accomplishing missions. They don't just wander around all over the ocean in groups of one. These groups of ships originate at bases and move toward objectives. That narrows down the possibilities considerably for the enemy air search.

Second, air search, as is modelled by the UV game engine, is better at finding large groups of ships than it is at finding small groups (and especially individual ships). As the above paragraph suggests, it is more desirable to find large groups of ships than single ships. This is the whole point of naval search: warn of major enemy operations so that counter-measures can be taken (Midway is a perfect case study).

One last thing: Admiral Arctic, if you want to bring your ships to my bases one at a time in hope of consolidating them into task forces after they get there, come on, baby. My pilots are salivating like Pavlov's dogs after a long weekend for the lab workers.




Admiral_Arctic -> (10/27/2002 10:37:13 AM)

If we had way points, I might not need to do this. Also you can not set speed other than cruise or full speed. So it is impossible to disperse your ships without huge clinking and counting hex adventures.


But I guess everyone tries to make an advantage for themselves. Maybe these things should be discussed before you start a battle. But as I said, my opponent warned me he would play "dirty" which I assumed was a license that he expected to play any gamy acts.

When version 2.0 is released, I could be open to an extra game or two. I had some non-UV commitments that are nearly finished.




Raverdave -> (10/27/2002 6:34:13 PM)

mmmmmmmMMMMMMMMmmmmmmm................way-points *Drool*




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.734375