another Newby's questions...

[CaptainBokarati]

Hey blokes,

I'm new in the game and admittedly a bit overwhelmed by the complexity. Therefore I see a lot (and I mean a LOT... [X(] ) questions coming. Thereby my own thread, I don't want to clutter the forum...

Here's the first one:
Scenario Coral Sea, me playing Allies, the enemy invasion fleet is one hex away from PM. TF16 is five steps away, the KB is MIA, but probably somewhere in the Salomon Sea (has probably lost a CV and licking its wounds?), Soryu MIA for the whole scenario so far. I'd like to move TF16 to interfere with the landings. I have ordered them to steam with full speed to the PM hex. Direct approach, maximum threat tolerance. The TF finds the invasion fleet on the beaches, unloading. Expected my cruiser force to mop the floor with those transports, but to my surprise "both TFs evade combat". I tried this turn several times now, to the same results.

What am I doing wrong?

Edit: Has it something to do with the destination hex being a port? Does the engine think I want to go to port with the TF, therefore combat is to be avoided? I tried to move to the next hex instead, but then nothing happened at all, except for the Japanese unloading their LCUs.


Oh, and I'd like to post the combat report, but somehow I don't manage to copy/paste it... Any hints?

Thank you very much for your help!

Cheers,
Bokarati

[jdsrae]

Assuming your TF16 is an air combat task force, they try to avoid surface combat.
Your cruisers would need to be in a separate surface combat TF.

[CaptainBokarati]

Thank you for your answer! Yeah, guess I should have mentioned that TF16 is a surface combat TF, Fletcher's force. No carriers involved, lonely Lexington is maneuvering somewhere else, hoping not to be surprised by the missing Japanese CVs.

[Evoken]

ORIGINAL: CaptainBokarati

Thank you for your answer! Yeah, guess I should have mentioned that TF16 is a surface combat TF, Fletcher's force. No carriers involved, lonely Lexington is maneuvering somewhere else, hoping not to be surprised by the missing Japanese CVs.

If they are surface combat task force they are probably out of ammo

[RangerJoe]

It is also better to give them a patrol hex instead of trying to guess an intercept route. How do I know that? [8|]

[RangerJoe]

Here are some places to bookmark:

links and info for new players

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4726264

FAQ / Info for Newb's

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2260137

Tender and Support/Auxillary Ship Guide

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2920431

[Yaab]

Maybe the TF leader has low aggro rating?

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: CaptainBokarati

Hey blokes,

I'm new in the game and admittedly a bit overwhelmed by the complexity. Therefore I see a lot (and I mean a LOT... [X(] ) questions coming. Thereby my own thread, I don't want to clutter the forum...

Here's the first one:
Scenario Coral Sea, me playing Allies, the enemy invasion fleet is one hex away from PM. TF16 is five steps away, the KB is MIA, but probably somewhere in the Salomon Sea (has probably lost a CV and licking its wounds?), Soryu MIA for the whole scenario so far. I'd like to move TF16 to interfere with the landings. I have ordered them to steam with full speed to the PM hex. Direct approach, maximum threat tolerance. The TF finds the invasion fleet on the beaches, unloading. Expected my cruiser force to mop the floor with those transports, but to my surprise "both TFs evade combat". I tried this turn several times now, to the same results.

What am I doing wrong?

Edit: Has it something to do with the destination hex being a port? Does the engine think I want to go to port with the TF, therefore combat is to be avoided? I tried to move to the next hex instead, but then nothing happened at all, except for the Japanese unloading their LCUs.


Oh, and I'd like to post the combat report, but somehow I don't manage to copy/paste it... Any hints?

Thank you very much for your help!

Cheers,
Bokarati

1. The threshold for posting screenshots etc is 10 posts.

2. Read my posts in this thread:

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... =&#4725131

regarding the factors taken into account in whether a TF attempts to evade combat.

Alfred

[inqistor]

Surface Combat always fight, even with low aggression leader. They might retire early, but don't avoid completely. Your ships are either low on ammo, or low on fuel. Or some of them are heavily damaged.

If PM is still yours just set it as destination port for TF, and set no disband. They will stay there.

[CaptainBokarati]

Thank you blokes for the many answers!

The TF didn't engage in anything but AA activity yet, so definitely not out of ammo. No damage either. Homeport set to PM already. No change in behaviour.

Fletcher has Aggro 31. This is probably not much, but low enough for a cruiser commander to evade a more or less unescorted transport TF?

Patrol Hex: That did it! I don't really understand it (I mean, yes, guessing an exact hex for interception usually would be difficult, but since the scenario says the invasion fleet will go to PM and the fleet is one hex away from PM, THIS individual guess wasn't so hard), but it worked. TF engaged and destroyed some of the ships. However, in the reaction phase during the day my surface combat TF tried to engage the enemy transport TF again, with both sides evading again.

Bad visibility? Rain, bad visibility, in the former examples engagement never got into that visibility rate mentioned. Maybe the TFs never spotted each other? But why a combat report at all? Why write "both TFs evade combat"? And in that reaction day engagement, both TFs were inside visibility range for a short time - which was the time when "Allied TF attempts to evade combat". The cruiser fleet which initiated the engagement by reacting to the shot-up and fleeing and fully-loaded transport TF evades the said transport TF. Enough ammo, enough fuel, set to never retreat... [&:] Surprisingly enough the surface combat TF reacted a second time, this time engaging. This time the Japanese TF tried to evade, but got shot up again.

at Alfred (seems I can't post the at-sign either): Threshold for posting screenshots is 10 posts... Yeah, explains why I can't attach anything. But I didn't get that far yet, at the moment I'm trying to copy and paste the combat report texts out of the program. So you mean all those combat reports I read on the forum are not just copied and pasted but screenshot? Weird... Should have thought a fancy program like that would somehow allow to copy and paste those huge text chunks.
About your "How the evade battle works": Interesting... Yes, some of my ships are missing some ammunition from their earlier AA activity. So they fail a roll, disengage, only to re-engage later and pass their roll? Weird programming, but that would explain... some of it. It would explain the "reacting-disengaging, then reacting-engaging" behaviour. It wouldn't explain why with no patrol-but-straight-move set there never was combat.



So...
Straight-move engagement didn't happen because of ... what exactly? Sorry, this game is awfully complicated and I'm trying to learn, so I'd like to get it right now... Surface fleet not attacking an unescorted transport TF is a problem I'd like to solve as early as possible...

THank you again for your help and reading to my rambling musings!

Cheers,
Bokarati

[inqistor]

Check every ship in TF. Maybe those air attack destroyed all large guns on one of your CAs? Look for any numbers in red.

One of the indications of somethings wrong is if TF changed into Escort after turn execution. How many ships are there in TF? I don't think there is possibility to completely evade engaging Transport TF, no matter the settings.

Your ships could have collision at sea, and now some of them might be seriously damaged. It's easy to overlook such events, so you have to check your vessels in upper menu, sorting accordingly before you issue new orders for turn. Anyway, remember any numbers in red indicate something serious.

[RangerJoe]

Aggression of 31 is way to low for a surface task force commander. Use that one for troop loaded convoys or a desk job. Also set the task force aggression to high if it is a large and powerful surface task force. If it is just a couple of DDs that you want to run in, launch torpedoes, and una$$ the area of operations, set the aggression to low. They will stay to destroy the transports and cargo ships but should not stay and play with combat vessels, if at all possible.

Also, try to have at least one ship with a working surface radar if available. If there are float planes, set up a Naval Search and the plane will automatically detect any ships within 4 hexes. If there is more than one float plane available, set up a night search as well but the pilot experience must be above 50.

Land bases search will help as well. There is some carryover from the previous day for detection levels, if I remember correctly.

[John B.]

Don't even get me started on how this game will drive you crazy! (and yet I"m obsessed with it and it's a great game because there are no perfect plans).

The 31 aggression does seem very low and likely to not want to be in combat. If you want to try an experiment, take your existing surface TF and form a new one with some, but not all, of the ships. Check to make sure there is a new TF commander with a higher aggression rating and send it in.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

It is also better to give them a patrol hex instead of trying to guess an intercept route. How do I know that? [8|]

Because I have pounded it into the heads of everyone on the forum for years now.

Surface interceptions are best facilitated with a Patrol order with an appropriate reaction range.

Set a one hex patrol pattern in the target hex, with a TF commander with a high aggression level.

Sending a TF to a destination hex, with a Remain on Station order (not saying this is what was done here) in the hope of pulling off an interception in that hex is not the best way to execute an interception. Remain on Station orders negate Reaction.

With a one hex Patrol Pattern and reaction active you maximize your chances for the intercept because the TF will not only engage any TF in the hex, but will react to other hexes as well.

You also need to set Threat Tolerance to maximum as that is another possible reason, in addition to TF leader aggression level, that could cause the TF to evade and avoid combat.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: inqistor

Surface Combat always fight, even with low aggression leader.

No, that isn't 100% accurate, if I understand what you are saying which I am probably not.

Pay attention to the messages that flash up in the lower left of the screen during replay, and you will see many instances of a surface combat encountering an enemy task force and yet there is no engagement. Then there is the fairly common instance of the enemy task force eluding before shots are fired in a combat replay.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

With a one hex Patrol Pattern and reaction active you maximize your chances for the intercept because the TF will not only engage any TF in the hex, but will (scratch that) MIGHT react to other hexes as well.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: inqistor

Surface Combat always fight, even with low aggression leader.

No, that isn't 100% accurate, if I understand what you are saying which I am probably not.

Pay attention to the messages that flash up in the lower left of the screen during replay, and you will see many instances of a surface combat encountering an enemy task force and yet there is no engagement. Then there is the fairly common instance of the enemy task force eluding before shots are fired in a combat replay.

+1

must see that several times per turn …

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: inqistor

Surface Combat always fight, even with low aggression leader.

No, that isn't 100% accurate, if I understand what you are saying which I am probably not.

Pay attention to the messages that flash up in the lower left of the screen during replay, and you will see many instances of a surface combat encountering an enemy task force and yet there is no engagement. Then there is the fairly common instance of the enemy task force eluding before shots are fired in a combat replay.

It is also fairly common to get a message about "TF declines combat" - usually when it is nearly out of ammo.

I have no data to support it, but I suspect that a high aggression leader is more likely to follow up on those passing-in-the-night encounters by steering after the other TF and initiating combat. Low aggression leaders are more likely to let it pass without trying to find out what it was.

[CaptainBokarati]

Hey guys,

thanks again for all your answers!

Both variants seem to work: More aggressive TF leader leads to combat even when moving instead of patrolling, and patrolling with the defensive-minded leader leads to combat as well. Only the combination, apparently, results in mutual evasion.

Collecting questions:
#01: Why does my surface TF evade combat? Answered.

#02: How do I copy/paste combat log results (or can I do it at all)?

New questions:
#03: Task Force commanders
Can I really build and disband TFs at high sea until I get a TF commander I like and merge everything into that commander's TF?

..... breaking up post because the site thinks I'm trying to post an adress, link or telephone number .....

[CaptainBokarati]

... well I give up on my question number #04; took me an hour to write, now cannot find a formatting that the site will handle without the above-mentioned warning...