Covering the bases

Nikademus · Post by **Nikademus** » Tue Oct 10, 2000 4:31 pm

An intersting tidbit i picked out of the thread on Japanese strategy was the use of 'Reaction Movement'

Historically, i hav'nt had alot of luck with this feature, and my current game seems to be continuing this trend.

Any suggestions would be appreciated. I am making generous use of recon planes and they seem to be doing a good job of tracking enemy movements. i've checked and double checked the settings for my TF's and have them as close as possible to potential hotspots and have the best leaders onhand that i have avail. Finally, PP levels seem to be good. oh and yes, i've got the reaction range setting at more than enough hexes, in some cases more than double than the range needed.

Yet....i never seem to get a reaction response forcing me to keep some TF's at the base in question, which is sometimes a good thing but sometimes not so good as one unfortunate weekly turn resulted in an AI battleship force having a target practice session on a CL led force of mine attempting to block several Transport TF's heading my way (and again, well tracked by my PBY squadrons)

Drex · Post by **Drex** » Wed Oct 11, 2000 3:44 am

I have the same problem with reaction movement too, although Admiral Doorman has performed well for me. It should have much to do with the leader but this could be offset by AZOC's. Do you check your zones?

Rich Dionne · Post by **Rich Dionne** » Wed Oct 11, 2000 4:59 am

Sounds like you're doing everything right. Hmmm...

Although the rulebook is unclear on this point, you do not need to have both home and destination set to same location to get a reaction strike.

My best reactions have occurred where my TF has a well built up home base, a target base the same as the HQ target, and a stand-off range greater than my TF's actual distance from the target. The closer I am to the target base, the better. The enemy better watch out if he goes for the target in these conditions!

As for TF leader orders, 'Leaders Choice' or 'Remain on Station' tend to do better than 'return to home port'.

I have actually had 2 and 3!? reaction strikes from the same TF using this method. It'll blow you away when you see your TF go on one of these rampages!

Regards,

Rich

mogami · Post by **mogami** » Wed Oct 11, 2000 5:25 am

Hi Rich interesting answer but I have a couple of questions. How do you set both reaction range and standoff? And you make target base one of your own? (I understand how to do this just want to make sure as to procedure.) Also can you (the player) set up a reaction TF to react to other players reaction TF? If so please explain method. Do TF's move by speed or TF number? (faster TF move first or lower numbered TF's) I am learning alot of things I think I should have learned along time ago.

------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!

David King · Post by **David King** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 2:30 am

If a TF is set to standoff a set distance (say 2hexes) from another base (enemy or friendly). It will move to that position on first turn it has those orders. If left unchanged it will then have chance to react to any enemy TF moving within 2 hexes of that TF. On next turn the standoff can be changed. If standoff increased then TF won't move. It will still 2 hexes off base but now capable of reacting to any move inside that increased standoff range. hence the new standoff range becomes a reaction range although listed as standoff in the TF orders. Of course the TF must have remain on station set for the TF otherwise it will return to port. My experience is that AC TF will remain at sea if leader decision set but others normally return.

Most reactions I have seen are AC TF. I think best to have destination different from base as it gets more PP as described in manual. I have only seen SC TF react twice and that was for intercepting transport TF which came too close.

I have seen the multiple reactions and they can be very devestating as it usually involves surprise attack and I have seen an entire AC TF from japan (4CV) sunk without loss or damage by 3 US carriers.

David King · Post by **David King** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 2:43 am

Another thing. Details a bit hazy but the answer to whether a TF can react to another reaction is yes. I saw the situation where a japanese AC TF was in ocean between Australia and New Zealand. Japan was invading Australia and the CV TF was in Pacific to isolate Australia. I moved 2 US CV TF to Auckland and put to sea to also move into Pacific ocean.

Now it gets a bit hazy but I think the japanese TF 4 CV reacted to movement of one of the US CV TF (2CV). It badly damaged both CV. The 2nd US CV was in same hex. In fact all 3 TF were in same hex. There was no attack on 2nd US CV TF nor did it attack the japanese. Then at end of japan turn the japan AC TF retired. first hex it entered triggered a reaction from the 2nd US CV TF. I think this was a surprise attack and all 4 japanese CV sunk. Then the japan CV TF retired one more hex and there was another reaction which sunk a BB and a CA. There may have been a further reaction but minimal damage.

So bottom line is that TF can react to reactions. This one was disaster for japanese. It was in an area far from base so patrol ZOC unlikely to spot TF. this makes surprise very likely which can produce total destruction of surprised TF. Take care when operating beyond range of patrol. Also patrol planes don't spot too well near their max range.

mogami · Post by **mogami** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 3:13 am

David those were superb answers and clearly stated I am in awe and now have begun massive rethink of stratagy to incorperate this new knowledge. (It explains a few disasters I always puzzled over [Adm Brown's asounding surprise attack on turn 2 where I lost 3 CV's]) One more question would makeing a TF containing CS (floatplane tenders) and standing it off somewhere provide any sort of airzone?

------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!

[This message has been edited by Mogami (edited October 11, 2000).]

David King · Post by **David King** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 3:55 am

I don't believe CS have air group. They did not used do in pre ver 2 so I would say a TF containing only CS can only transport planes to another base. CS can also transport LCU too.

Rich Dionne · Post by **Rich Dionne** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 5:31 am

David,

You have explained the reaction moves when using a stand-off range perfectly! As you indicated, this is by far the best method of reaction, because your TF has a lot more PP's than when it is only set to react (same destination and home). You get the most PP's when the TF target is the same as the HQ target.

I myself have never seen a reaction to a reaction strike, and the second reaction you talk about, David, was a U.S. reaction movement to the IJN TF normal move in its return to port, not the actual IJN reaction move.

The CS does not carry aircraft in version 2.1 either, so it does not provide an air zone useful for detecting enemy TF's.

Regards,

Rich

mogami · Post by **mogami** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 6:00 am

Hi when IJN TF with CS and no CV is attacked by air 4 zero per CS are present. In WITP I hope CS have aircraft assigned (CS zero are in reality the "Pete" floatplane zero)

------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!

David King · Post by **David King** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 7:01 am

Rich
I stand corrected about the US CV reacting to the japanese return to port.

One of my hates in the pre ver2 pacwar was the enthusiasm CV TF had for reacting to moves of PC TF. Twice I saw AC TF move to attack PC TF. Back then the planes only attacked with mg and did minimal damage but it exposed the AC TF to a counter strike from either land base or enemy AC TF which could cause real damage. Also the move of AC TF left the transport and SC TF it was covering with AZOC uncovered and easy targets for land based air. On that occaision the AZOC of AC TF was covering units involved in amphibius invasion of Ceylon.

Both occaisions made me pretty fed up of PC and they were edited out of database.

Now they have re-appeared will they still be as attractive distractions to CV TF when in fact they should be lowest of all priority for attack by CV TF.

Rich Dionne · Post by **Rich Dionne** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 8:10 pm

Mogami, the aircraft you're seeing over your CS group are most likely zeros from a nearby airfield flying CAP. The Pacwar code does allow land based air to fly CAP over TF's.

David, yes, the PC's are back, although they are now much more vulnerable to air attack. So Allied players may be a bit more reluctant to send them out a attack magnets. I do beieve, however, that reaction strikes may still be attracted to PC groups.

Regards,

Rich

Doug Olenick · Post by **Doug Olenick** » Fri Oct 13, 2000 6:54 pm

I manage to get quite a few surface combate units to react. After years of practicing what I do is set the stand off range, and then send the TF shuttling back and forth between two friendly bases. For whatever reason this illicits a reaction more so than having the force remain in or near a base.

This works real well early in the game in the Java/Borneo area and I'm usually able to stave off several small invasions with small surface TFs. This is usually only temporary as sooner or later one will react into the range of some IJN aircraft and get destroyed.

Doug O.

Nikademus · Post by **Nikademus** » Fri Oct 13, 2000 7:11 pm

thanks for all the replies

Never thought to implement Reaction Movement with a TF at sea. Interesting!

now can anyone answer why i let this great game fall into the archives of lost software for so long??!!

Skyros · Post by **Skyros** » Fri Oct 13, 2000 7:31 pm

I may be wrong but I think CS units will use Aircraft that they are transporting in the CAP. I would need to test this but I recall seeing it. Maybe it was unique to v1.22?