ORIGINAL: witpqs
Most excellent!!!
I must make comment on two sections as my information differs somewhat.
7. Naval reaction is not dependent on the TF's movement orders. A TF with "remain on station" orders but also given a reaction range, will react and override the remain on station order and return home after the reaction (which is why one should never give a reaction range to a remain on station TF) whereas other movement orders (eg patrol, follow, waypoints) would see the TF react and subsequently return to its previous movement orders. In all instances a naval reaction move is possible only against a detected enemy TF, the higher the DL, the more likely reaction will result.
A clarification.
When discussing surface combat reactions, Don Bowen made it quite clear that Remain on Station overrides the React setting. My experience both before and after that revelation bears that out. His disclosure immediately cleared up problems getting surface combat TFs to react.
Carrier reaction does override Remain on Station at times, as you say.
I'll see your clarification and raise you a clarification.
Completely correct to point out that Don Bowen has in the past has often stated that "remain on station" and a reaction range are incompatible orders. His terminology has usually been "incompatible", "contradictory", "nullify each other" and similar. But ... [;)] ... he never stated that the remain on station setting overrides the reaction setting. In fact it is the other way around which is why the two settings are incompatible.
IOW, a TF set to remain on station but with a reaction range set to >0, can react away from it's stationary location. In doing so it clears the remain on station setting and once the reaction is over, will return to it's home port, not the previous stationary hex. There are many threads where Don Bowen states this but I provide the following one where he confirms your earlier statement in that thread was correct.
tm.asp?m=3292583&mpage=1&key=react�
Look for post #9 dated 25 March 2013 from Don Bowen.
2. Due to technical coding issues, there is no reaction towards a sub TF. An ASW TF will not react towards a detected sub TF. The ASW TF may engage in combat with a detected sub TF if it comes across it in a hex traversed during the ASW TF normal or patrol movement path but it will not deviate from it's normal or patrol movement path towards the sub TF.
This surprises me. On a number of occasions I have seen ASW TFs pursue subs well outside of their patrol areas (and not on their way to/from patrol/port). I don't know what mechanism is at play but I have seen it a number of times.
See my response to rustyi and comments re Lokasenna's point about ASW not prosecuting an ASW attack. Players don't normally get to see the actual hex by hex movement of a TF so it is very difficult to see whether an ASW has really deviated from it's scheduled path, and if it has deviated, non prosecution of an ASW attack outside of the regularly scheduled travel path would be consistent with what Don Bowen has said. Bear in mind that an ASW TF which returns fire outside of it's scheduled travel path is not operating within the naval reaction constraints.
Of course if someone can document a specific case where an ASW TF reacts to a sub TF and then initiates an ASW attack on a sub TF in a hex outside of the scheduled travel path, then either a bug exists or there has been some recoding done since mid 2009 which has escaped my (and Don Bowen's) attention.
Alfred
