Matrix Games Forums

Thanks for all your interesting and useful comments.

This issue is important to understand well the game mechanics. I have improved the management of the task forces thanks to your comments. However, specially when CVTFs are involved I still faced situations like the ones described above by Alpha77. So I feel like losing control of important task forces.

Let me summarize the concepts and please correct if i am wrong:


1) For non-CVTFs: A TF will move to the ordered/indicated location "L1" by the player during the phase movement. Suppose it has a maximum reaction range set up (eg. 3 hex), when it arrives to the location L1 (perhaps even before arriving to L1), and, if and only if, the friendly TF has spotted an enemy TF, the enemy TF will be evaluated and it it is a similar or weaker force and the commander of the friendly TF has enough aggressive skills, it will move again up to 3 hexes in order to intercept the enemy TF. This can also occur more than one time in the same movement phase. (I wonder if it does not violate the maximum speed (space/time allowed) by each ship. It looks that ultra-high speed could be achieved if you move with reaction movement several times which could be not realistic, assuming the location "L1" was the maximum distance you could reach in a turn and you are, in addition, moving forward several times 3 hexes.

2) For CVTFs: The maximum reaction range will be "ignored" if the friendly CVTF identifies an enemy CVTF. Then, automatically, and based on the aggressive skills of the commander, the friendly CVFT will approach to the enemy CVTF (a maximum movement of 4 hex for the Japanese and 3 hex for the US Navy ?) in order to perform an aerial strike. Another question here is: If you still have a zero range setting for the torpedo and dive bomber squadrons, could the commander still order/perform the attack?

looking forward to your comments, thanks!

I think the 1000 ops points per phase is part of the equation for reactions. If a TF uses up all of its ops points moving at normal speed it should not be able to react - reaction being an increase to flank speed to cover extra distance.

The ops points for launching aircraft seem to be independent of TF movement - the TF can use all the ops points getting to the launch hex and the aircraft will still take off (if there are no problems like weather cancelling strikes).

I believe it's been stated by at least Alfred, if not also a Dev, that units with very high experience can, very rarely, exceed the maximum range limitation, so it may also be that they can also exceed a player restricted range setting.

One of the aspects of this game that give many people grief, is the lack of tactical control.

It's a strategic game, ordered operationally and executed tactically.

We, as players, get control over the strategic and operational, but not the tactical.

Not having tactical control is one of the endearing aspects for many of us who have come to love the game.

Nothing can be predicted absolutely.

This is also a hallmark of Gary Grigsby games.

He puts so many variable factors into things for that very reason.

thanks for your valuable comments. bbfanboy, where can you read the ops points you still have?

For ships it shows in the TF list.
Not sure it shows anywhere for ports.

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

It does not help with carrier battles in general because there additional parameters that ignore (or overrule) the reaction range setting come into play. A CV TF will always react in a specific way (see manual) to an enemy CV TF based on their nationality.

Aha, so the CV fleet re-act setting can be overruled. I had this happen to bad effect, I thought the commander was the culprit. I had a 2CVL fleet following a 4CV fleet and the best and biggest Zero CAP unit was on the CVLs. They were set to follow in the same hex and react "0". But the 4CVs reacted a hex and the CVL not dividing my power and left the CVs without the most important CAP unit. Also the Kates from the CVLs would then go in without escort and apart from the CV planes. Not good, first I did not want any reaction (was overruled) and second I wanted both in the same hex - but the CVLs did not follow the react of the CVs....if they had ended up both in the same hex, ok this particular battle had probably sunk 3 enemy CVs with perhaps no own or light losses. The CAP unit on one of the CVLs was 36 x Zero with "0" range dedicated to protect. They did nothing during the whole batte, the CVLs were not attacked and with range "0" they did not protect the CVs.

Not to mention all the AA guns lost in the CVL fleet...

Wow. This would spoil anyone's day, I'm sure.

So, just to clarify: a TF with "follow" orders will not necessarily comply if the followed TF reacts-moves (as opposed to just a move)?

(1) Is this absolutely/confirmed/state to be true in some documentation?

(2) Would this hold if the following TF has a "react" > 0? I.e., if the following TF has the same "react" range as the followed TF, can we count on the following TF following the followed TF through a "react" move?

(3) If [2] above is True, is there a risk that the following TF will react move on its own even if the followed TF does not, thus disregarding the "follow" order?

(4) If either [2] is not True or [3] is True, then it seems that the only way for multiple CV TF's to consistently maintain a mutually supporting same-hex relationship with each other is to set react 0 for both?

ORIGINAL: glyphoglossus

So, just to clarify: a TF with "follow" orders will not necessarily comply if the followed TF reacts-moves (as opposed to just a move)?

(1) Is this absolutely/confirmed/state to be true in some documentation?

(2) Would this hold if the following TF has a "react" > 0? I.e., if the following TF has the same "react" range as the followed TF, can we count on the following TF following the followed TF through a "react" move?

(3) If [2] above is True, is there a risk that the following TF will react move on its own even if the followed TF does not, thus disregarding the "follow" order?

(4) If either [2] is not True or [3] is True, then it seems that the only way for multiple CV TF's to consistently maintain a mutually supporting same-hex relationship with each other is to set react 0 for both?

Ah, just found the Alfred-post on "reacts":

fb.asp?m=3981586

In particular, the illustrative example given is relevant:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
TF #1 is an amphibious TF.
TF #2 is a surface combat TF. It has been given movement orders to follow TF #1 and has also been given a naval reaction range of 6.

If an enemy surface TF is detected and all the relevant boxes are ticked, TF #2 will react towards the enemy because the follow order tells it to protect TF #1 and it's own reaction range tells it to move towards the enemy anyway. Remember a reaction move overrides existing movement orders (see point 7 above).

If, however, TF #2 does not have a follow TF #1 order, then it will not react towards the enemy in order to protect TF #1 but will only react on the basis of the threat/opportunity to itself alone. Most players will not notice this situation because they usually set following TFs at a range of zero and hence any enemy TF is simultaneously a threat to both friendly TFs which are in the same hex.

However, the example discusses the behavior of a surface combat TF tasked with protecting the followed amphibious TF. It seems that the behavior of two Air Combat TF's might be different, otherwise Alpha77's situation would not have occurred?