Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message


Miller -> Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/22/2010 12:19:49 PM)

OK, sent several large surface combat fleets to attack a hex I thought my opponent was heading too, but I guessed wrong, and they got hammered by air attack in the process.

However, I had all the fleets with very high aggression comanders and "React to enemy" set to 4 hexes. My opponents actual target was within a couple of hexes of the path of my fleets, but despite plenty of floatplanes on search (at least 30) they did not react to the sighting. Is this working as designed? The only ships that seem to react to threats are PT boat Tfs.

PS> Not trying to blame the game, it was a screw up of my own making, I thought in the back of my mind before I sent the turn that they might react the right way if I choose the wrong hex to attack.........




n01487477 -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/22/2010 12:55:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

OK, sent several large surface combat fleets to attack a hex I thought my opponent was heading too, but I guessed wrong, and they got hammered by air attack in the process.

However, I had all the fleets with very high aggression comanders and "React to enemy" set to 4 hexes. My opponents actual target was within a couple of hexes of the path of my fleets, but despite plenty of floatplanes on search (at least 30) they did not react to the sighting. Is this working as designed? The only ships that seem to react to threats are PT boat Tfs.

PS> Not trying to blame the game, it was a screw up of my own making, I thought in the back of my mind before I sent the turn that they might react the right way if I choose the wrong hex to attack.........

I've been doing some testing of this for an upcoming video tutorial and I've not had many problems - this doesn't mean that it always works as intended - and I prefer it that way too ... 100% intercept might be overkill




castor troy -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/22/2010 1:26:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

OK, sent several large surface combat fleets to attack a hex I thought my opponent was heading too, but I guessed wrong, and they got hammered by air attack in the process.

However, I had all the fleets with very high aggression comanders and "React to enemy" set to 4 hexes. My opponents actual target was within a couple of hexes of the path of my fleets, but despite plenty of floatplanes on search (at least 30) they did not react to the sighting. Is this working as designed? The only ships that seem to react to threats are PT boat Tfs.

PS> Not trying to blame the game, it was a screw up of my own making, I thought in the back of my mind before I sent the turn that they might react the right way if I choose the wrong hex to attack.........



a couple of SC TFs were enough to totally kill off all my fleeing ships from the Philipinese, it was bullet prove. And from my experience in something like at least 90% of the time the mid ocean intercepts end up in engagememts. Thatīs my subjective experience though and not any testing. For me, itīs far too effective as a 45 mile hex is still quite big and not every single small AK or PT should end up in a fight with the hunting SC TF, especially at night.

So yes, it definetely is working, especially the magic spotting - reacting - engaging - killing routine at night. Thatīs what really makes me thinking about it, because I wonder what magically spots the ships a couple of hexes away. In my PBEM, everytime one of my ships ends up within a couple of hexes of a Japanese SC TF the ship is dead. I really liked the new feature of mid ocean intercepts, but as with many things, itīs just too much now. They happen far too often and the chance not to have an engagement is far too small IMO.




USSAmerica -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/22/2010 3:08:39 PM)

I know for sub patrol TF's, if you set a "destination" hex, then the reaction is ignored.  To get them to react, set the TF to "Patrol" in a hex or range of hexes, and set the reaction range.  I don't know for sure if SC TF's work the same way or not, but I'd bet they do.




freeboy -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/22/2010 3:36:51 PM)

mine works.. the tf itself seems to need t ospot the enemy with its own floats, and high rated commande rfor aggression also helps




Admiral Scott -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/22/2010 3:38:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: USS America

I know for sub patrol TF's, if you set a "destination" hex, then the reaction is ignored.  To get them to react, set the TF to "Patrol" in a hex or range of hexes, and set the reaction range.  I don't know for sure if SC TF's work the same way or not, but I'd bet they do.


This must explain why I havent had my Surface TF's and subs reacting! I dont have them set to patrol.
My ASW TF's which are set to patrol have reacted.




koontz -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/22/2010 5:22:37 PM)

[:@] no wondering ive have an hard time to get into surface action

can someone pls confirm?

Destination not reacting WAD?




Miller -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/22/2010 5:41:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: USS America

I know for sub patrol TF's, if you set a "destination" hex, then the reaction is ignored.  To get them to react, set the TF to "Patrol" in a hex or range of hexes, and set the reaction range.  I don't know for sure if SC TF's work the same way or not, but I'd bet they do.


That sounds like the problem in my case. Oh well, we learn from our mistakes....




freeboy -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/22/2010 8:11:45 PM)

I never ever set surface groups to patrol and can verify I have had multiple groups attack the enemy... pbem as allies




crsutton -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/22/2010 10:05:47 PM)

Yes, it works too well. Too many sucessful mid ocean intercepts. I am beginning to wonder if the real purpose of my carriers is to load them up with fighters to protect my surface forces......[&:]




Reverberate -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/22/2010 11:29:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: n01487477
I've been doing some testing of this for an upcoming video tutorial and I've not had many problems - this doesn't mean that it always works as intended - and I prefer it that way too ... 100% intercept might be overkill

1% intercept in open sea would be over kill, It just didn't (and shouldn't) happen.




CapAndGown -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/22/2010 11:35:48 PM)

I have not seen an intercept when I set a destination hex. Instead of setting the destination, what you want to do is set the place you want to go to as the first boundry of your patrol zone. No need to set other boundries, just that one will do. It acts the same as a destination hex, but now your reaction will work. I had a lot of intercepts using this method. Too many, if you ask me. I think they have swung from one extreme (almost no intercepts) to another (almost no misses).




John Lansford -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 12:35:00 AM)

I've seen both my surface TF's and the AI's conduct interceptions, as well as my subs and ASW TF's.  For a while the AI had a cruiser TF patrolling south of Timor, and every time I sent a force up from Darwin to bombard I'd run into them.




Reverberate -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 12:38:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown
I have not seen an intercept when I set a destination hex. Instead of setting the destination, what you want to do is set the place you want to go to as the first boundry of your patrol zone. No need to set other boundries, just that one will do. It acts the same as a destination hex, but now your reaction will work. I had a lot of intercepts using this method. Too many, if you ask me. I think they have swung from one extreme (almost no intercepts) to another (almost no misses).

Agreed. It is a potential game breaker. I hope nobody sees this thread.[8D]




Reverberate -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 12:41:07 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton
Yes, it works too well. Too many sucessful mid ocean intercepts. I am beginning to wonder if the real purpose of my carriers is to load them up with fighters to protect my surface forces......[&:]

Any of you 5-star posters have any pull with the devs? This needs to be changed!




vonTirpitz -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 12:44:26 AM)

And your opinion is welcome but I recall several U-Boat intercepts in mid-ocean and they are a bit slower than surface ships. Speaking in absolute terms does a disservice to everyone.




freeboy -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 1:11:49 AM)

I completely dis agree... the ships are not just steaming around... the yare set to react and the enemy is moving toward them... If we play ahistorically we should expect ahistorical results.. I remember in witp we could not ever get a mio, no it is about right, just don't steam near enemy ports wit hyour carriers




Reverberate -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 1:15:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vonTirpitz

And your opinion is welcome but I recall several U-Boat intercepts in mid-ocean and they are a bit slower than surface ships. Speaking in absolute terms does a disservice to everyone.

I have no problem with submarine intercepts--the can actually hold their breathe under water.

As for surface intercepts, I seem to share in the majority opinion of the experienced players.

I don't understand why so many want to change the War in the Pacific into WWI Atlantic.




freeboy -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 3:11:44 AM)

sorry, maybe in teh middel of the oceans faster ships should never be intercepted, and those with significant speed advantage, I am refereing to shore in shore in straights and closing on bases results.. and if you do not want your ships intercepted, don't go towards teh enemies bases! I remebe rwitp days, you could not buy a mio, they simply where coded out, so forgive me for lovign a game where yo still have to fear the enemy tfs enough to screen your fleats




AcePylut -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 4:21:48 AM)

I have to problem with surface intercepts in teh same hex. It's only a 40 mile wide hex after all... put two opposing sctf's into that...

NO, I think the problem is more that we think of ships and troops and planes as "units" not "people"... and as such, we throw them all over the place all willy-nilly, without a care for their mothers at home, or our political standing.




freeboy -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 4:48:34 AM)

yep, I just had my last in a series of terrible catastrophic oopsis in my pbem game.. I forgot to run cap over an invasion.. thought I did but realize I was so messmerized with trying to get my lba and subs to attack his spotted fleets I forgotthis one basic rule.. do the basics... so he showed up, and slaughtered twnty plus small invasion vessels! ouch, most of the troops landed, at least I am telling myselfthat! I am pushing hard into enemy territory before he can build up for my late 43 push, so losses are to be expected BUT not cause I am stupid, and back on track
MIO works.. If it needs be tweeked perhaps we can add a cv handle that says .. "run away" and then only cv groups with slower speeds will get bushwacked BUT I love have ca dd and cl raiders , I love threatening the enemies cv 's and in early war during jap expansion days running around causing him to use BB's to escort merchies!!!
Now its not the case...
so MIO should be governed by rules of aggression and speed.. but not iliminated.... squeek squeek squeek...




witpqs -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 5:22:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

I have to problem with surface intercepts in teh same hex. It's only a 40 mile wide hex after all... put two opposing sctf's into that...

NO, I think the problem is more that we think of ships and troops and planes as "units" not "people"... and as such, we throw them all over the place all willy-nilly, without a care for their mothers at home, or our political standing.



I think you're right. First, TF's are spread over some area. Second, we should not assume that a TF is automatically centered within the hex (the game code might use random factors for that). Third, TF's are moving thereby covering - and seeing - more ocean. Fourth, the same is true of enemy TF's. Some percentage of the time a TF would even have visual contact with a TF in an adjacent hex.

Here is a table of visibility over distance that helps to bear that out.



[image]local://upfiles/14248/5B9730808D904EC5BC98EF4BEEB67346.jpg[/image]




witpqs -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 5:28:10 AM)

Another factor for the difference between WITP and AE is that in WITP the code only checked for intercepts at the end of each movement phase. TF's that in theory had occupied the same hex at the same time were not checked for intercepts because movement was handled in 'jumps'. In AE they handle movement one hex at a time and check for possible intercepts every hex of the way. No more warp jumps!




crsutton -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 5:36:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Reverberate

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton
Yes, it works too well. Too many sucessful mid ocean intercepts. I am beginning to wonder if the real purpose of my carriers is to load them up with fighters to protect my surface forces......[&:]

Any of you 5-star posters have any pull with the devs? This needs to be changed!



None at all. But when you get your fifth star, they send you a toaster......




crsutton -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 5:40:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vonTirpitz

And your opinion is welcome but I recall several U-Boat intercepts in mid-ocean and they are a bit slower than surface ships. Speaking in absolute terms does a disservice to everyone.



Correct, and I don't want to see it go away. It should be a little better than it was in WITP-for game fun purposes more than anything else, but toned down a bit IMHO. Allies might get an edge in late war due to signet and radar but that is no big deal to me.




freeboy -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 5:50:08 AM)

mio comes in a veriety of packages.. sub intercepts imo should be totally seperate.. for surface mio, ie non subs... if a slower group was steaming towrds a known objective.. any reasonable observer would grant a mio.. its whne the two are equal or near equal in the middle ofteh ocean thatthings get trickey, night weather all come into play, BUT if they are looking for each other.. the ocean shrinks dramaticalluy, with larger tf having a somewhat larger footprint, if you will.. say 6-10 miles wide plus search planes and radar working.. so we are searching and covering a good deal with our efforts.. I  am trying to flee.. I am close in speed or have an advantage. UNLESS I turn tail and flee the area, there is always imo a chance of an engagment where a faster get "caught" by a slower... stumbles into would be a better way to put things..
One area we could resonable adress is in ai.. not the ai enemy but the friendly ai pathfinding and reacting ai, how it decides when to turn tail and ru nand when to advance into hells fury! I mean, a cv groups hould always turn tail... but not in my pbem game!
bye bye Yorktown.. for allies, and multiple engaged but not sunk Jap Cv's.. wow... that is something to look at...




castor troy -> RE: Is surface combat "React to enemy" working? (2/23/2010 9:58:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton


quote:

ORIGINAL: Reverberate

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton
Yes, it works too well. Too many sucessful mid ocean intercepts. I am beginning to wonder if the real purpose of my carriers is to load them up with fighters to protect my surface forces......[&:]

Any of you 5-star posters have any pull with the devs? This needs to be changed!



None at all. But when you get your fifth star, they send you a toaster......



must have missed mine and when I got my fifth star this was long before I pissed everyone off...




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.515625E-02