Interception?

[Mike Carroll]

What is the feasibility of allowing a surface combat task force on patrol make a check to see if it can intercept a spotted enemy task force - say 1 or 2 hexes away?

I know they will respond to protect a friendly base. This would be different. This would allow commerce raiders to chase down an enemy convoy near by. Or a Surface Combat TF to blockade an enemy port.

[crsutton]

I am thinking that would require a game code modification.

[Mike Carroll]

I agree but it would allow some neat things. Blockades and Commerce Raiding. Probably something for a future patch. I am wondering if the same routines that allow a surfact combat TF to react to defend a friendly base could be used for this.

[Pkunzipper]

I'd like very much the idea!
Mabe if the react range of a surface combat TF is > 0 and the is an enemy TF on a adjacent hex, then there should be a chance (where the difference on speed between the 2 TF would the main modifier) to intercept...

I understand that this would mean writing some code, but we paid this game as a full game, not an expansion pack...
Don't get me wrong, I like the game and think Tankerace and others did a wonderfull job, but I also think that the game engine is too carrier-oriented... Look at the patches... they only contain (IIRC) only database changes, but there are some problem or features that could be only fixed/added writing some code...

[Rysyonok]

ORIGINAL: Mike Carroll

What is the feasibility of allowing a surface combat task force on patrol make a check to see if it can intercept a spotted enemy task force - say 1 or 2 hexes away?

I know they will respond to protect a friendly base. This would be different. This would allow commerce raiders to chase down an enemy convoy near by. Or a Surface Combat TF to blockade an enemy port.

Just keep it undocked and with react = 6 and watch the magic...

[crsutton]

Well, if you look at the reality of 1920s naval war, I think it might be unrealistic. In the era before reliable air to ground radios, radar and sophisticated air search doctrine, the possibility of a task force sucessfully intercepting another-even spotted is just about impossible.

First you have to realize that we are talkng about TFs that are 50- 100 miles away.

Let me use as an example the spotting and coordination efforts of the Kriegsmarine in WWII. Admiral Donitz advocated heavily for the coordination of Luftwaffe long range search planes with his submarines. The idea was for the FW Condors to find Allied convoys A (very large slow targets) and report their location in to HQ and then shadow the convoys. In theory it was a good idea. In practice, it rarely did work. Three things worked against this coordination. One, the spotting plane all to frequently failed to give the correct coordinates, speed or course. Any slight inaccuracy in any one of these items would have meant a failed intercept. Two, once they knew that they were spotted, Allied TF could simply alter their course and speed slightly and this would throw off any intercept. Three, the condors frequently would attack with bombs-alertting the convoy to the danger and causing them to call up extra defensive forces.

All of these limitations could be applied to spotting with submarines and to some effect surface ships.

Now all you have to do is roll back the clock to an earlier generation of naval ships, planes and communication and you can see how any sort of interception in open waters would have a very marginal chance of sucess. In fact, it rarely did happen-and even in WWII when technology and air power was so much more capable, was a chancy thing. If a naval force really wanted to find the enemy, they pretty much were limited to guessing where the enemy was headed and then they positioned the fleet at some critical choke point, say a straight, or destination hex and hoped that they guessed right.

That said, there was better cooperation between German submarines and surface raiders. A shadow command, for a sub or surface ship would be nice, but then again the roll would have to be fairly low due to the very difficulty of that job as well. Shadowing was very difficult even in WWII.

As for open sea Tf intercepts, I don't think it is a good idea.

[Mike Carroll]

Well I am not talking about a 6 hex interception. But it would be good to have something where you could place your Surface combat group off a port and intercept into adjacent hexes. Or as a commerce raider if you are one hex away from a convoy spotted by a sub, I think it is realistic for the convoy to move to interecept. Even if there was only a 30% chance of forces moving through the same hex actually engaging.

[Rysyonok]

ORIGINAL: Mike Carroll
Well I am not talking about a 6 hex interception. But it would be good to have something where you could place your Surface combat group off a port and intercept into adjacent hexes. Or as a commerce raider if you are one hex away from a convoy spotted by a sub, I think it is realistic for the convoy to move to interecept. Even if there was only a 30% chance of forces moving through the same hex actually engaging.

Well you do intercept into adjacent hexes... sometimes.

And sometimes you're just not fast enough for that. By the time you make it there, your opponent moved on to another hex, and you got no ops points left. Or you lost them in heavy rain. Or your commander wasn't aggressive enough. Half your ships' captains need to be replaced in the beginning of the game to achieve proper results... typical 53 naval / 41 aggressiveness DD COs just don't cut it :p

[Mike Carroll]

I was not aware that you intercepted into adjacent hexes. I agree on the destroyer skippers!