Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 3:46:09 PM   
Ursa MAior

 

Posts: 1416
Joined: 4/20/2005
From: Hungary, EU
Status: offline 		In a recent game of mine I had calculated (rather guessed the range where I can use my range advantage, which was in turn nullified by the opponents turned on reaction. Meaning his cv tf has closed the 'calculated' 5 hex range to 2 where he demolished me with 3 textbook attacks. I had a Midway in the Coral sea. Could we (as a player playing mostly IJN) have a similar possibility, but with the opposing effect or could we skip this option all together for Air ops Tfs?

_____________________________


Art by the amazing Dixie
Post #: 1
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 4:39:13 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		the game is designed to allow mutual reaction and exchange of strikes but with careful timing you can utilize the Japanese range advantage. TF needs to be set to do not retire, and a less aggressive leader probably helps. Can be tricky and its not guarenteed to work though i recently viewed a combat replay sent to me where it was done to perfection.

_____________________________


(in reply to Ursa MAior)
Post #: 2
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 6:30:17 PM   
Ursa MAior

 

Posts: 1416
Joined: 4/20/2005
From: Hungary, EU
Status: offline 		Could you give me a hint hot to do it? Even in Pm. In the above case I was not careful enough.

_____________________________


Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 3
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 6:40:53 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		As i've never pulled it off, no hints to give. My personal playstyle frowns on extended range strikes so i don't attempt them but I know at least one player who pulled it off. Believe it is also influenced by how far the TF's have moved at the end of the movement phase.

_____________________________


(in reply to Ursa MAior)
Post #: 4
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 6:48:00 PM   
rroberson

 

Posts: 2050
Joined: 5/25/2004
From: Arizona
Status: offline 		talk to 2ACR, he pulled the perfect extended range strike against me early in our game...I never even got a shot off.




_____________________________


(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 5
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 6:50:21 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		That was the game!

Yes....2ndACR pulled it off. Were you moving at full speed or anthing Rob? I had thought that maybe it was because you'd used up all your op points.



_____________________________


(in reply to rroberson)
Post #: 6
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 7:24:04 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline 		Basically complete luck.

_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 7
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 7:24:35 PM   
Ursa MAior

 

Posts: 1416
Joined: 4/20/2005
From: Hungary, EU
Status: offline 		Yes this is something I talk about. But it would be 'automatic'. Set keep distance to 5(instead reaction mvement) and the tf commnader moves away from any sighted enemy CV (if ops allow).

_____________________________


Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 8
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 7:28:33 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Basically complete luck.


good commanders create their own luck.



_____________________________


(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 9
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 9:24:04 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline 		I can't think of a cv battle where a commander had sufficient minute-by-minute information on the enemy's cvtf speed and course to maintain a specific distance from it. Given the state of recon reporting, don't think it would ever be possible in that time period either.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 10
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 9:52:24 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		It wouldn't require that degree of precision IRL, but it would require excellent scouting. However I agree that in the period discussed there would be no 'driver' that would encourage a Japanese commander to try to utilize his range edge (which risks higher operational losses due to lower margin of error) Ozawa did it in 44 only because he knew he was outgunned and outnumbered. In 42? The Japanese would most likely close the range aggressively.



_____________________________


(in reply to anarchyintheuk)
Post #: 11
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 9:54:07 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline 		Same thoughts here. I take it for granted that you saw Curse of the Were-rabbit.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 12
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 9:55:17 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
Wasn't it SOP for the Japanese to aggressively close to launch strikes, then turn away? Or was that just the Pearl Harbor raid plan of attack?

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 13
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 10:04:39 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		Japanese doctrine was heavily geared towards attack so the natural tendancy was to close. The best example was Midway. After discovering TF 17 the SS authors suggested that closing was probably not the best course of action as they had a range edge even then. Even after the disaster, yamaguchi closed with Hiryu when he should have been making tracks the other way (though thats partially a bad example......the japanese "blood" was up by then so the instinct to close to grappling range was even stronger)


_____________________________


(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 14
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 10:20:25 PM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Basically complete luck.


good commanders create their own luck.




Being good does not matter much as the player has very little control over naval units.


_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 15
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/14/2006 11:04:27 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker


Being good does not matter much as the player has very little control over naval units.



2ndACR managed it. Maybe he's just a better player than you.

Besides which....the game isn't designed as a tactical carrier game. Its an operational level wargame.




_____________________________


(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 16
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/15/2006 12:21:11 AM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker


Being good does not matter much as the player has very little control over naval units.



2ndACR managed it. Maybe he's just a better player than you.

Besides which....the game isn't designed as a tactical carrier game. Its an operational level wargame.





Could be, but like I said, it basically luck as player has next to no control. I must admit I'm unlucky with ranges but very lucky with outcomes so far. Usually come out on the short end but have yet to lose a CV (lots damaged).


_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 17
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/15/2006 12:24:11 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Could be, but like I said, it basically luck as player has next to no control. I must admit I'm unlucky with ranges but very lucky with outcomes so far. Usually come out on the short end but have yet to lose a CV (lots damaged).



There are times when I want to shelter my CVs so I try to minimize the reaction by putting someone in command who has low aggressiveness.

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 18
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/15/2006 12:29:42 AM   
Ron Saueracker


Posts: 12121
Joined: 1/28/2002
From: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Could be, but like I said, it basically luck as player has next to no control. I must admit I'm unlucky with ranges but very lucky with outcomes so far. Usually come out on the short end but have yet to lose a CV (lots damaged).



There are times when I want to shelter my CVs so I try to minimize the reaction by putting someone in command who has low aggressiveness.


Done that to avoid the reaction which happens even if set to zero. Of course, the one time I have Halsey in command and need him to close the range he does nothing!


_____________________________





Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 19
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/15/2006 12:35:07 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Done that to avoid the reaction which happens even if set to zero. Of course, the one time I have Halsey in command and need him to close the range he does nothing!



I believe the reaction range doesn't apply to ships on the open seas. I was under the impression that it only applies to TFs in friendly base hexes that you want to react to enemy TFs. Basically, it's for surface TFs, not Air TFs.

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)
Post #: 20
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/15/2006 1:09:59 AM   
Sonny

 

Posts: 2008
Joined: 4/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Done that to avoid the reaction which happens even if set to zero. Of course, the one time I have Halsey in command and need him to close the range he does nothing!



I believe the reaction range doesn't apply to ships on the open seas. I was under the impression that it only applies to TFs in friendly base hexes that you want to react to enemy TFs. Basically, it's for surface TFs, not Air TFs.



Pretty sure it applies to Air Combat TFs vs another Air Combat TF. Surface TF react range is what you described.

_____________________________

Quote from Snigbert -

"If you mess with the historical accuracy, you're going to have ahistorical outcomes."

"I'll say it again for Sonny's sake: If you mess with historical accuracy, you're going to have
ahistorical outcomes. "

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 21
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/15/2006 3:27:50 AM   
BLUESBOB

 

Posts: 219
Joined: 8/27/2005
From: Fullerton, Ca.
Status: offline 		The Japanese range advantage is bogus. The Americans are shortchanged on distance for many of their carrier based planes. The Devestator alone should have it's effective range, at the very least, doubled.

(in reply to Sonny)
Post #: 22
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/15/2006 3:37:07 AM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5665
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline 		I never really planned that ambush, but I had a itch that something was up, so turned reaction off. I hate reaction myself (always moves me into point blank range).

I was only allowing them to move a total of 3-4 hexes per turn. Andy just stumbled over me after a speed run. I was actually waiting for him to hit Tarawa before jumping him). I have made a few "perfect" long range (range 5) ambush strikes though. 2 against Panzerjager Hortland, 1 against Ron (he helped by not going to full speed). Once you figure out where the computer will send a TF, stop the TF outside a base etc, it is not really hard to plan one.

Every player is different though. Some are aggressive right away, some are very cautious. Aggressive players are easier to ambush most times.

(in reply to BLUESBOB)
Post #: 23
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/15/2006 7:05:47 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline 		"talk to 2ACR, he pulled the perfect extended range strike against me early in our game...I never even got a shot off."


Gee, Rob, I thought that this was SOP in your games?


_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 24
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/15/2006 7:56:21 AM   
ChezDaJez


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline
quote:

I believe the reaction range doesn't apply to ships on the open seas. I was under the impression that it only applies to TFs in friendly base hexes that you want to react to enemy TFs. Basically, it's for surface TFs, not Air TFs.


Most definitely applies to air TFs. That's how I lost Zuikaku and Shokaku near Andamann. They had absorbed a very damaging air strike and were incapable of flight ops. I set them to withdraw towards Rangoon. What happens? They both react to the allied TF (who was heading away from them) and charge right in. Both got sunk outright without a single plane in the air for cover. And their reaction was set to ZERO! Unfortunately they did have an aggressive TF commander.

Chez

_____________________________

Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 25
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/16/2006 12:18:20 AM   
dtravel


Posts: 4533
Joined: 7/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

quote:

I believe the reaction range doesn't apply to ships on the open seas. I was under the impression that it only applies to TFs in friendly base hexes that you want to react to enemy TFs. Basically, it's for surface TFs, not Air TFs.


Most definitely applies to air TFs. That's how I lost Zuikaku and Shokaku near Andamann. They had absorbed a very damaging air strike and were incapable of flight ops. I set them to withdraw towards Rangoon. What happens? They both react to the allied TF (who was heading away from them) and charge right in. Both got sunk outright without a single plane in the air for cover. And their reaction was set to ZERO! Unfortunately they did have an aggressive TF commander.

Chez


I remember you posting about that. What's even worse IMHO is that in order to do that, your carriers had to decide at sunrise, before they could have possibly spotted them, to move towards the position the enemy carriers would be at many hours later. And that your own search planes wouldn't even be in range to spot them until after your ships had reacted to spotting them.

_____________________________

This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.

"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy

Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.


(in reply to ChezDaJez)
Post #: 26
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/16/2006 2:41:01 AM   
ChezDaJez


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline
quote:

And that your own search planes wouldn't even be in range to spot them until after your ships had reacted to spotting them.


It is strange the way it works. The only way to rationalize it is to assume the TF commander said, "Well, they were over there yesterday..... CHARGE!!!!"

Chez

_____________________________

Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98

(in reply to dtravel)
Post #: 27
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/16/2006 10:04:43 AM   
Ursa MAior

 

Posts: 1416
Joined: 4/20/2005
From: Hungary, EU
Status: offline 		That's just the way a non real time strategy game works. Its fine by me. Would you like to have 1-6 hour pulses instead and wait an hour for a day to pass staring at the monitor? I am a big fan historicalicity but given the restraints of the interface IMHO it is the BEST we can get.

Uff



_____________________________


Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to ChezDaJez)
Post #: 28
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/16/2006 10:29:52 AM   
herwin

 

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline 		I just had an interesting variant on this happen in a CHS 1.06 solitaire game with the extended map. The AI decided to leave the KB at Hawaii for a second day. Took out a cruiser, an AV, and six destroyers. I'm thinking about looking for his oilers with my carriers. I suspect this involved commander initiative.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to Ursa MAior)
Post #: 29
RE: Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view - 3/17/2006 1:05:07 AM   
dtravel


Posts: 4533
Joined: 7/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

That's just the way a non real time strategy game works. Its fine by me. Would you like to have 1-6 hour pulses instead and wait an hour for a day to pass staring at the monitor? I am a big fan historicalicity but given the restraints of the interface IMHO it is the BEST we can get.

Uff





Uh, no. I don't think you are understanding what happened. Even taking into account the length of the turns and air attack phases, in Chez's case the Allied carriers at the beginning of the day were (IIRC) northwest of the Japanese carriers and far outside of the range of any scouting aircraft he had. The IJN TF commander then ignored orders to head southeast towards a friendly base with his too damaged to fly planes carriers, instead heading due north. At the end of the Japanese moving north and the Allies moving east-southeast, the Allied carriers were just within scout plane range of the Japanese carriers. The Japanese ships were clearly not being moved towards the current position of enemy ships that they couldn't physically know about, but directly towards their future position. Not only did the IJN ships react to Allied ships they hadn't spotted, they moved to intercept them where they were going to be 12 hours later.

Sorry, it was NOT a fudgable situation at all.

_____________________________

This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.

"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy

Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.


(in reply to Ursa MAior)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Reaction closing and distancing - IJN point of view Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
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

0.656