TF following TF reacting?

[Sieppo]

Can a TF following another TF react? For example attack enemy TF further away?

[Chris21wen]

Yes, if you have set a reaction range. If you want to ensure a following TF only protects the TF it is following don't set a reaction range.

I don't konw it it is my imagination but changing a following surface TF to patrol the destination hex once it gets there seems to work better. Anybody else seen this?

[LoBaron]

Yes it does. But it produces a problem.

You see, to make a TF to follow another you need to set it to "remain on station". The reaction range setting contradicts the remain on station command, if triggered (because moving away to intercept a contact contradicts an order to hold position).
So what will happen is, the following TF will react (always depending on threat settings, TF type, DL of the enemy TF in question, TF commander attributes, yadda, yadda..) as this overrides remain on station command, but at the same time the TF will reset to "retirement allowed", and so it will not return to follow the TF it was tasked to, but it will return to base.


@Chris: you are correct, patrol destination hex works better depending on what you want to achieve, see above.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Yes it does. But it produces a problem.

You see, to make a TF to follow another you need to set it to "remain on station". The reaction range setting contradicts the remain on station command, if triggered (because moving away to intercept a contact contradicts an order to hold position).
So what will happen is, the following TF will react (always depending on threat settings, TF type, DL of the enemy TF in question, TF commander attributes, yadda, yadda..) as this overrides remain on station command, but at the same time the TF will reset to "retirement allowed", and so it will not return to follow the TF it was tasked to, but it will return to base.


@Chris: you are correct, patrol destination hex works better depending on what you want to achieve, see above.

LoBaron I don't think that's true. I set TFs to follow other TFs all the time without "remain on station" orders and have never had a problem with having those TFs following correctly.

I can also say that I have seen it stated multiple times in multiple threads that it is "remain on station" that overrides and prevents "reaction".

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Yes it does. But it produces a problem.

You see, to make a TF to follow another you need to set it to "remain on station". The reaction range setting contradicts the remain on station command, if triggered (because moving away to intercept a contact contradicts an order to hold position).
So what will happen is, the following TF will react (always depending on threat settings, TF type, DL of the enemy TF in question, TF commander attributes, yadda, yadda..) as this overrides remain on station command, but at the same time the TF will reset to "retirement allowed", and so it will not return to follow the TF it was tasked to, but it will return to base.


@Chris: you are correct, patrol destination hex works better depending on what you want to achieve, see above.

LoBaron I don't think that's true. I set TFs to follow other TFs all the time without "remain on station" orders and have never had a problem with having those TFs following correctly.

I can also say that I have seen it stated multiple times in multiple threads that it is "remain on station" that overrides and prevents "reaction".

Well the AE naval guru himself states different:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


"Remain on Station" means stay where I put you.

"React" means move to attack any detected enemy nearby.

The two orders are contradictory and the game will ignore "Remain on Station" if "React" is ordered. Reacting will clear the "Remain on Station" order so the TF will return to home port after reacting.

witpqs is right. If you want a TF to be in an area and to react if enemy are detected nearby, use a combination of "Patrol" and "React". You can use a single Patrol Hex to emulate "Remain on Station".

What you say about "retirement allowed" and follow is interesting though. I have never tried that in ages as I thought it does not work in combination (and I vaguely remember that it messed with my follow settings when I tried the last time). I will give it a try.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Yes it does. But it produces a problem.

You see, to make a TF to follow another you need to set it to "remain on station". The reaction range setting contradicts the remain on station command, if triggered (because moving away to intercept a contact contradicts an order to hold position).
So what will happen is, the following TF will react (always depending on threat settings, TF type, DL of the enemy TF in question, TF commander attributes, yadda, yadda..) as this overrides remain on station command, but at the same time the TF will reset to "retirement allowed", and so it will not return to follow the TF it was tasked to, but it will return to base.


@Chris: you are correct, patrol destination hex works better depending on what you want to achieve, see above.

LoBaron I don't think that's true. I set TFs to follow other TFs all the time without "remain on station" orders and have never had a problem with having those TFs following correctly ...

I can testify to that as well in AE.

[LoBaron]

Ok, thanks guys! Wow!

Sieppo, in this case the simple answer is "yes", and I have to grief on a couple of thousands mouseklicks I did for nothing. You never stop learning. Thats why I love this game! [:D]

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

Yes it does. But it produces a problem.

You see, to make a TF to follow another you need to set it to "remain on station". The reaction range setting contradicts the remain on station command, if triggered (because moving away to intercept a contact contradicts an order to hold position).
So what will happen is, the following TF will react (always depending on threat settings, TF type, DL of the enemy TF in question, TF commander attributes, yadda, yadda..) as this overrides remain on station command, but at the same time the TF will reset to "retirement allowed", and so it will not return to follow the TF it was tasked to, but it will return to base.


@Chris: you are correct, patrol destination hex works better depending on what you want to achieve, see above.

LoBaron I don't think that's true. I set TFs to follow other TFs all the time without "remain on station" orders and have never had a problem with having those TFs following correctly.

I can also say that I have seen it stated multiple times in multiple threads that it is "remain on station" that overrides and prevents "reaction".

Well the AE naval guru himself states different:

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


"Remain on Station" means stay where I put you.

"React" means move to attack any detected enemy nearby.

The two orders are contradictory and the game will ignore "Remain on Station" if "React" is ordered. Reacting will clear the "Remain on Station" order so the TF will return to home port after reacting.

witpqs is right. If you want a TF to be in an area and to react if enemy are detected nearby, use a combination of "Patrol" and "React". You can use a single Patrol Hex to emulate "Remain on Station".

What you say about "retirement allowed" and follow is interesting though. I have never tried that in ages as I thought it does not work in combination (and I vaguely remember that it messed with my follow settings when I tried the last time). I will give it a try.

Man I could have sworn it was the other way around on react and remain on station, but that is a pretty definitive quote you posted. Obtaining a mastery of this game is a vain pursuit I'll never realize........[:(]

Thanks for the clarification.

[Don Bowen]

The options here are pretty straight forward and, I think, very logical.

Remain On Station, No Reaction.
Orders the TF to stay somewhere, with no options. TF will remain "on station" until forced to retire by low fuel/ammo, accumulated damage, defeat by enemy, or orders by player. This was the only option in original WITP.

Remain On Station, Reaction ordered
Orders are generally contradictory but might be useful in some circumstances. TF will remain on station until something causes it to react (or any of the things above). Once it reacts it will retire. Sort of like a picket.

Patrol Zone(s), No Reaction
TF will patrol the specified hexes until forced to retire (damage, fuel, etc. - as above).

Patrol Zone(s), Reaction ordered
TF will patrol as above, will react to enemy as required. After reaction will either retire or resume patrol, depending on (you guessed it) fuel, ammo, damage.


A separate item is Reaction and follow. Follow is mutually exclusive with Patrol so there is no interaction there.

Follow with no Reaction
Just Follows, ignores enemy if possible and just tags along.

Follow with Reaction Ordered
Follows but will react to enemy when conditions are met. After reaction will return to follow.


Glad to know I'm a Guru. I'll bring that up next cocktail party.

[CyrusSpitama]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen


Remain On Station, Reaction ordered
Orders are generally contradictory but might be useful in some circumstances. TF will remain on station until something causes it to react (or any of the things above). Once it reacts it will retire. Sort of like a picket.



Glad to know I'm a Guru. I'll bring that up next cocktail party.

You need a proper "guru hat" for it to be official Bowen.

Good info here and I had been using the remain on station + react and never figured out exactly why my guys ported and sometimes they did not(except for the obvious fuel issues). I used this setting for my weaker, short-ranged ASW PB/SC ships to save fuel from constant patrol movements. Glad to know the mystery is solved.

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: Don Bowen
Glad to know I'm a Guru. I'll bring that up next cocktail party.

You could, without any preannouncement, turn the cocktail party into a spiritual ceremony (maybe starting with a monk choir as background music) where you mumble something incomprehensible for a couple of minutes, sprinkle salt water in all four cardinal directions, and then reveal the 1/350 model of a Fubuki class DD - or similar - to the sound of a gong.


Thanks for the straightforward summary Don, highly apprechiated!

[Sieppo]

Thanks everyone for the detailed answers !

EDIT: the reason for the question was, that even though I remembered it happening, I have not been getting reactions from high aggression commanders when I would have expected them. Bad rolls I guess [8|]..

[geofflambert]

A good question still unanswered is: Say you have a CV TF (I heard that) and it is following a scouting TF by 1 or more hexes. I presume it will react, but what will the scouting TF do?