LRCAP behaving strangely

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

So what you are saying is that it is impossible to keep LRCAP in the target hex by setting range to 0 because the range will automatically reset to the distance to the target, which means that LRP will always have 3 hex radius from the target hex.

Seems a little strange that LRCAP would a have any radius greater then 0 as you are targeting a specific hex or TF for the purpose of covering THAT hex or TF.

What good is it to assign LRCAP to cover a TF if the CAP is simply going to stray 3 hexes away and leave the TF exposed (hex in this case)?

I doubt the explanations given to you and Lokassena are really correct and WAD. Personally I can see how a small bug may have crept in to the code.

Alfred

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

So what you are saying is that it is impossible to keep LRCAP in the target hex by setting range to 0 because the range will automatically reset to the distance to the target, which means that LRP will always have 3 hex radius from the target hex.

Seems a little strange that LRCAP would a have any radius greater then 0 as you are targeting a specific hex or TF for the purpose of covering THAT hex or TF.

What good is it to assign LRCAP to cover a TF if the CAP is simply going to stray 3 hexes away and leave the TF exposed (hex in this case)?

I doubt the explanations given to you and Lokassena are really correct and WAD. Personally I can see how a small bug may have crept in to the code.

Alfred

Well, as long as we know how it's working now, we can adjust for it.

I am of the opinion that the range setting should apply to the base of origin as it does in every other case rather than the LRCAP target hex, but I can see how it would be useful to set "leaky" LRCAP at times (if perhaps a bit ineffective).

[Jorge_Stanbury]

It allows interesting splits between CAP and LRCAP percentages.

Mainly allows you LRCAP over a far away hex while keeping a close CAP cover on your own base/ TF; this having optimal results for both in terms of # of planes avaiable and less fatigue

Looks like a bug to be, but at least it goes for both sides

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

So what you are saying is that it is impossible to keep LRCAP in the target hex by setting range to 0 because the range will automatically reset to the distance to the target, which means that LRP will always have 3 hex radius from the target hex.

Seems a little strange that LRCAP would a have any radius greater then 0 as you are targeting a specific hex or TF for the purpose of covering THAT hex or TF.

What good is it to assign LRCAP to cover a TF if the CAP is simply going to stray 3 hexes away and leave the TF exposed (hex in this case)?

I doubt the explanations given to you and Lokassena are really correct and WAD. Personally I can see how a small bug may have crept in to the code.

Alfred

Well, as long as we know how it's working now, we can adjust for it.

I am of the opinion that the range setting should apply to the base of origin as it does in every other case rather than the LRCAP target hex, but I can see how it would be useful to set "leaky" LRCAP at times (if perhaps a bit ineffective).

Too late to comment on your earlier reply to me so both here (plus ot other comments):

Yes, I understand, but CAP/LRCAP has always leaked beyond the range setting (in my view the term "leak" means beyond the range orders, so you and I were out of sync in terminology here). It's one of those orders that is a 'strong suggestion' and usually obeyed although not always, and to different degrees by different leaders. Think of TF commanders that go charging off after surface contacts, carriers that react when react range is 0, and so on.

I too figure the range circle should be centered on the base. I have no reason to believe it gets set to the LRCAP target. As pointed out, CAP and LRCAP (and attack orders) share the range setting, so anything other than around the base would be arcane and hard to understand.

With the intended variability in this game it is often really hard for us to know when a bug has crept in or finally shown itself.

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Alfred




I doubt the explanations given to you and Lokassena are really correct and WAD. Personally I can see how a small bug may have crept in to the code.

Alfred

Well, as long as we know how it's working now, we can adjust for it.

I am of the opinion that the range setting should apply to the base of origin as it does in every other case rather than the LRCAP target hex, but I can see how it would be useful to set "leaky" LRCAP at times (if perhaps a bit ineffective).

Too late to comment on your earlier reply to me so both here (plus ot other comments):

Yes, I understand, but CAP/LRCAP has always leaked beyond the range setting (in my view the term "leak" means beyond the range orders, so you and I were out of sync in terminology here). It's one of those orders that is a 'strong suggestion' and usually obeyed although not always, and to different degrees by different leaders. Think of TF commanders that go charging off after surface contacts, carriers that react when react range is 0, and so on.

I too figure the range circle should be centered on the base. I have no reason to believe it gets set to the LRCAP target. As pointed out, CAP and LRCAP (and attack orders) share the range setting, so anything other than around the base would be arcane and hard to understand.

With the intended variability in this game it is often really hard for us to know when a bug has crept in or finally shown itself.

I have never, ever had CAP go beyond its range setting. Ever. It's not a suggestion, it's hard and fast. Where/when has it happened otherwise?

CV TFs with react 0 will react towards enemy air combat TFs, regardless of reaction setting, and that's documented in the game's documentation ([:D]). Other TFs will react within their reaction range. If you don't want them to react, don't set their reaction above 0. I've never had TFs react with reaction 0. The only "strong suggestion" thing I've seen is threat tolerance and routing, and leaking CAP (with the range setting above 0, of which this OP would be a sterling example). If I'm OK with TF variability, I will leave the settings at default, however I've never had TFs set to Direct and Absolute vary from the paths I have set for them unless they were changed to escort TFs and diverted to a nearby port, which is what escort TFs do.

Anyway, with the way it's working on "moving the bubble" so the range setting is centered on the LRCAP target, could you then LRCAP something at the very edge of a plane's range and set it to a large range for leaking CAP, and get planes to essentially fly out to "leaky LRCAP" a hex at double the normal range? That would be just silly.

[urtel]

i can just share mine 100+ turn fell with LRCAP and max rage = 0, it works!

LRCAP do no leak, ye maybe they leak 1 in 50 cases, but in general they not leak and if those group fly at all it will fly to target hex.
actually even max rage = 1 work, which mean if they fly they will been in target hex or some of neighborly hexes, in this case chance for them to show is much lower because that type of LRCAP i put over troops, not bases, and that mean no radar so they have slim chance to spot incoming raid and have little time to get into hex but this work too i m try it at last 10-20 times...

I think this is WAD, pretty sure i was not start use LRCAP in this maner before i read about it, maybe in forum or in some beta changes, now i can't find it but i'm 99% sure i read about this feature somewhere...

and i also think this is good feature it is bad in cases when u use same group for cap or escort but i never use it that way so for me results are great..just look that mine LRCAP to chichi-jima(4 hexes) (25+24)*0.9*2/3 = 14 planes guess how many i get on target even with storms in hex?

if this feature exists i hope u will not find it is bug and remove it, for me that is logical feature for LRCAP i set target hex and max rage from target hex and planes flay in that area, simple...
problem begins only if u use same group for other missions, but even that is not problem for most cases because if u use them for escort/cap plane will use max rage from base, and rage will be auto set to rage to target at least, so only if u manually set rage to 0 after u already set target then u can have trouble - read no escorts..

[Yaab]

Fascinating info. Thanks!