Tell me a story

[jonny211]

Captain Smith stood on the bridge, below him the Yorktowns deck was full of Wildcats and Dauntless bombers being fueled and armed. He knew the Japanese carriers were out there somewhere, probably covering the invasion group ferrying enemy troops to Gili Gili, but where??

Then the radio call came "PBY 13 to Yorktown.... enemy carrier group sighted at grid 12,24... it looks like at least two carriers plus capital ships as escorts"

Smith knew the time had come, a voice in his head told him that he had to act first no matter what the cost - a decisive first strike would surely bring victory. Ordering the Yorktowns carrier group to full speed he headed west - waving goodbye to the Lexington and land based air cover - he knew he could take the Japs alone. As if to justify his decision he pushed the orders sheet under his desk, hiding the clearly marked line 'Do Not React to Enemy'

Six hours later the Yorktown was mortally wounded - the Wildcats had been unable to defend against the huge Japanese onslaught that came from above. The wooden deck was shattered and his remaining planes had been forced to ditch, they're crews probably falling into the hands of the enemy. If only he'd obeyed his orders.


The moral of the story is.... WHY WHEN YOU TELL YOUR GROUPS NOT TO REACT TO THE ENEMY CARRIERS DO THEY STILL CHARGE TO THEIR DEATHS!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH

[Gecko]

unfortunately I cannot give you an answer to your question, but I have encountered similar problems. My AP/AK TF is retreating from an enemy carrier TF that HAS NOT BEEN SIGHTED by my recon yet! That's annoying - and is is unrealistic either. So I have to call it (another) bug.

bye, Gecko

[mogami]

Hi, Your recon may not have spotted the enemy CV but your radio intercept people have detected carriers in the area. Just put the transports on "do not retire." (and watch them get caught by enemy carrier strikes)

[von Murrin]

To keep two or more CV TF's in the same hex from reacting when set to "Do Not React", order them to the same destination hex. Do NOT use the "Follow TF" command. Any CV TF set to "Follow TF" WILL react.

[Admiral DadMan]

To keep two or more CV TF's in the same hex from reacting when set to "Do Not React", order them to the same destination hex. Do NOT use the "Follow TF" command. Any CV TF set to "Follow TF" WILL react.

Ummm... that's wrong:

Uncommon Valor v2.10 Changes - Released 11/13/2002
[left]13) When a carrier task force is assigned to follow another task force and ordered not to react to enemy task forces, the task force should no longer close range by one hex, if it spots an enemy carrier task force. This will allow the player to move a carrier task force with some other task force, such as a transport task force, and the carrier CAP will also provide area CAP to the other task force.

[/left]

[Mr.Frag]

Well put Dadman ...

Best way of running CV's is to have a AO Replenishment TF with some DD's and have your CV's follow that TF. It not only keeps your TF's together, but reduces fuel burn rates on the CV TF's because they are not zooming around burning fuel at full speeds. This has the added benefit of allowing you to only have to order around the one TF and the others just tag along. You'll also notice that because the other TF's leach fuel off the replenishment TF, it always runs out of ops points first, meaning they NEVER separate from each other...

[von Murrin]

Ummm... that's wrong:

No, it's not.

A CV TF following another CV TF WILL react. Happened to me several times, with v2.10.

[pasternakski]

A CV TF following another CV TF WILL react. Happened to me several times, with v2.10.

This remains correct in v. 2.30. The best solution, I think, is to send out your air combat TF or TFs with a surface combat TF and order the air combat TFs to follow the surface combat TF. Your air combat TFs stay put where you want them, your surface combat TF may absorb some of the enemy air strikes, and you have not only protection for your carriers from the chance encounter with an enemy surface combat TF, you have a force ready at hand for bombardment or commitment to night surface action.

The horror story from having one air combat TF follow another, of course, is when one of them reacts one hex toward the enemy and the other does not, with the ensuing disastrous consequences.

[Admiral DadMan]

This remains correct in v. 2.30. The best solution, I think, is to send out your air combat TF or TFs with a surface combat TF and order the air combat TFs to follow the surface combat TF. Your air combat TFs stay put where you want them, your surface combat TF may absorb some of the enemy air strikes, and you have not only protection for your carriers from the chance encounter with an enemy surface combat TF, you have a force ready at hand for bombardment or commitment to night surface action.

The horror story from having one air combat TF follow another, of course, is when one of them reacts one hex toward the enemy and the other does not, with the ensuing disastrous consequences.

My bad, I omitted the part about not following another CV TF...

[von Murrin]

No biggie. That's often just the logical way to get two or more CV TF's to operate in concert. Unfortunately, if you don't know about it... heh.

It took me several tries before I figured it out and started doing what Mr. Frag and pasternakski said.

[RevRick]

put that commander in OTC. If he is SOPA and they are following him, and he is told not to go off chasing bird farms, you have a potent strike force hanging around together relatively well.

[marky]

makes u wonder y a game with so many bugs shipped doesnt it ?




[:'(]

[sven6345789]

1. i guess the reaction of a CV TF has to do with commander agressiveness too. they sometimes seem to overrule the commands given
2. reacting merchant TF to undiscovered CV's has been changed in WITP, as much as i know

[pasternakski]

Gentlemen, we are not talking about bugs here. The whole quandary you wind up in over what your subordinates do or plan to do was intentional. That was how the game was supposed to act. Unfortunately, your AI subordinates are about as sharp as Karl Malden's nose.

If you want to avoid any possibility of CV TFs reacting toward the enemy or otherwise splitting up in ways you didn't intend, all you have to do is create a surface TF and order your CV TFs to follow it (do not react, patrol).

Since I realized this a year and a half ago, I have no problems with my nasty little AI wannabe admirals.

The "jeez, we'd better get out of here because there are enemy carriers within 2,000 miles - even though nobody has seen them" weirdness has, as I understand it, disappeared with WitP and we hope that a retrofit will follow for UV.

You are seeing the splinters of a shattered design idea. I trust that Matrix/2by3 have learned from this, and future games will not leave you scratching your head (or other anatomical parts) the way UV did when it first came out.

[Maserati]

A three-man programming and QA team might also have something to do with the "bugs".

[Veer]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

Gentlemen, we are not talking about bugs here. The whole quandary you wind up in over what your subordinates do or plan to do was intentional. That was how the game was supposed to act. Unfortunately, your AI subordinates are about as sharp as Karl Malden's nose.

The "jeez, we'd better get out of here because there are enemy carriers within 2,000 miles - even though nobody has seen them" weirdness has, as I understand it, disappeared with WitP and we hope that a retrofit will follow for UV.

You are seeing the splinters of a shattered design idea. I trust that Matrix/2by3 have learned from this, and future games will not leave you scratching your head (or other anatomical parts) the way UV did when it first came out.

Yes... I also believe that UV sort of straddles the fence in whether it wants you to play an operational wargame, or a tactical wargame.

Certianly some of the orders you can give your units, like "Do not react to the enemy" are very general and seem meant to be dis-obeyed. Others like "naval attack" are so general as be more a parameter than an order. Like: "James, I know there is a large fleet of Jap troop transports off Lunga, so today I want you to attack only things that float. The target is upto you however, so feel free to attack that barge up in Lae if you want."
Yet the game also gives you the option of micromanaging everything so that you can 'trick' your units into doing something of what you wnant them to do, not what they think you have allowed them to do.

[scorryuk]

Never played a game like this before that I hate and love in equaly strong measures! The things your subordinates get up t omakes you wonder where they trained those retards. Did they go to some naval version of police academy?