Matrix Games Forums

One last point that, if replays were re-watched, would put it to bed for sure: the reaction message tells you which TF your TF is reacting to (at least by range). If you push Ctrl-P during the replay, it will pause at each message.

Thanks, Loka. I'll see if I have that turn file and re-play it.

I appreciate everybody chiming in, especially those who've had experience with this and can offer counsel from that perspective. Sometimes it may come across as if I am disagreeing or disputing things, but I'm trying to test the various hypotheses and theories against what I know or think I know or wonder about.

I'm pretty uncertain of what the realities are here. But that's kind of cool too. If every aspect of the game is understood, eliminating some of the surprise or mystery, the game loses some of its mystery.

Here's the initial Death Star position on the morning of June 15, 1944 - having just exited the sea to the west.

In the A.M. phase, DS begins just five hexes from KB. DS CV TFs react one hex south, closing the distance to four hexes. CVE TFs (which are carrier TFs) don't react. KB doesn't launch air strikes, presumably due to weather. DS doesn't launch, because strike aircraft were set to range two for important reasons.

In the PM phase, the Allied CV TFs react another hex to the south, closing to within three hexes of KB. This time, KB launches a full strike.

What I take from this: (1) This supports Loka's contention that reaction is limited to one hex per phase; (2) Reaction occured at two different opening distances in my June turns: once at ten hexes and this one at five, leaving me uncertain as to what opening ranges will trigger reaction.

In this clash, the Allied CVs had 975 fighters on CAP, of which 700 were Hellcats. There were 31 CVEs and RN CVLs that didn't react, carrying roughly 600 additional fighters. Some of these were set to range two and probably supplied some LRCAP to the react CV TFs.

In the next clash, the CV TFs will be a bit larger. I lost CV Essex and CVL Cowpens; CV Lexington won't be repaired in time to participate. Offsetting those losses, I have received CV Hancock and will soon receive CV Ticonderoga, CV Franklin will be present (she was damaged during the first clash and didn't react), and I'll have an additional CVL and two RN CVs. So the fleet carriers should carry roughly 160 additional aircraft.

But the CVE lineup will be greatly enhanced. There will be 58 this time as opposed to 31. All 58 will be carrying Hellcats or Corsairs or relatively modern RN fighters.

The fight will take place at or near the Kuriles. Erik now has multiple big airfields there. I think I can suppress those, limiting their contribution to the battle. KB should be about the same size.

What this tells me is that I definitely want to maximize the chances that DS will include the CVEs. I'll give thought to weather the "two-hex max" reaction feature is acceptable or whether I need to sprinkle CVEs in with the CVs to ensure all flattops are present for what may prove to be the decisive battle. 58 CVEs and RN CVLs means more than 1,000 fighters.

You are not the only one that has a problem with coordination between CVE's and CV's when the CV's TF reacted to an enemy fleet.

"That son a bitch Halsey, has left us bare-assed" - Adm Clifton "Ziggy" Sprague

I am in a total nightmare with the owner of this thread over in the Opponents Wanted area!

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

What I take from this: (1) This supports Loka's contention that reaction is limited to one hex per phase; (2) Reaction occured at two different opening distances in my June turns: once at ten hexes and this one at five, leaving me uncertain as to what opening ranges will trigger reaction.

The 10-hex distance leading to a reaction is very odd to me, but I'll take your word on it.

I'm also pretty sure that the hexes quotes as the reaction range in the manual are old WITP hex ranges.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Looks like I am playing the up-to-date version.

...

Isn't the Japanese side's combat resolution that matters in PBM? May be you should ask Obvert for what version he is using.

Disclamer: I haven't played a single PBM, but from the forum I get that the the Allied combat resolution is only for potential synch bugs and doesn't matter in the real state of the game.

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

The 10-hex distance leading to a reaction is very odd to me, but I'll take your word on it.

I'm also pretty sure that the hexes quotes as the reaction range in the manual are old WITP hex ranges.

First, a disclaimer: I did not follow any modifications in betas and refer to the original manual below, so this may be off. I appreciate any correction of my statement if it is incorrect.

But I always believed there are different reaction routines at work.

The AM/PM reaction corresponds to what is described in section 6.3.4 of the manual (special CV movement), eventually involving modifications and with the (to me open) question whether the override by aggressive commander is a die roll vs aggressiveness or involves also a threshold value.

But there is also the reaction triggered in resolution of night phase and day phase, which refers to sections 8.7 (for night and day phase) and 6.2.5. (for day phase only).I always thought (which may be wrong) that the header means (coastwacher check) and (trigger reactions) not coastwatcher (check and trigger reactions), meaning that also if no coastwatchers are present a reaction may be triggered in this phase, but I may be wrong here.

If this assumption is correct, 10 hex reaction may be induced during night phase processing and, at least if it occurs according to 6.2.5, should be suppressed if following another TF as per 6.2.5. Conversely, reaction after air search in AM/PM phase is controlled by another routine and likelihood reduced by less aggressive TF commander, but maybe not ruled out.

Hartwig

(edited for precision of statement)

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

This game must be using an old EXE, because my carriers reacted three or four hexes in the previous carrier battle. (I'm computer illiterate, so I don't actually know how to check, but I do know the reaction covered multiple hexes.)

Limiting reaction to just one hex is a most outstanding modification. I look forward to playing an up-to-date game one of these days. It'll be nice not to have to worry about carriers suddenly steaming 200 miles in the wrong direction, against orders, leaving critical combat ships and amphibious TFs unguarded and much-needed CVEs out of position.

Like most players, I hate the old reaction modeling.

If you were running this game version when the multiple hex reaction happened, I want to see it... I'm pretty certain Michael put a hard stop on limiting the special CV reactions to 1 hex per TF.

As mentioned, I still think reactions only occur at 5-6 hexes (maybe 4 but I don't think so). I've never had them occur at 7 hexes (as either side). Again, I think this is an artifact of legacy coding from WITP with more miles per hex. My multiple reactions occurred because the first reaction put the CV TF within reaction range of a second detected enemy CV TF (I slowed it down and watched the messages individually IIRC; it's been a while. I did put it all on YouTube).

I want to note also that that was the only time I ever had the much-maligned reactions occur (and it worked out for me, really). My advice on that is simply to do what I always did: don't be coy about CV battles. You're either all-in, ensuring it happens, or all-out. Never be a 'tweener.

Shows you where my head is at. I was moaning over a recent reaction yet checked and my version dates back to 2014. I suggested to my opponent that we patch up to the latest version.....[8|]

ORIGINAL: hartwig.modrow

If this assumption is correct, 10 hex reaction may be induced during night phase processing and, at least if it occurs according to 6.2.5, should be suppressed if following another TF as per 6.2.5. Conversely, reaction after air search in AM/PM phase is controlled by another routine and likelihood reduced by less aggressive TF commander, but maybe not ruled out.

Hartwig

(edited for precision of statement)

This would normally be possible, however CV TFs do not (to my knowledge) use the reaction "spinner" that is in the lower right of the TF screen, except as one part of the check to see whether they do the special CV TF reaction that occurs after the air search phases.

Somewhere, there is documentation that only certain TF types react using the Reaction (0-6) setting. AFAIK, CV TFs are not among them.

CV TFs and reaction - is this normal?
tm.asp?m=3981268&mpage=1&key=reaction�

...
3. There are 2 distinct types of naval reaction. Type (A) is based on seahex range and applies to all types of combat TF, be they surface, carrier, sub et al task forces, whilst type (B) is based on hex range and applies only to a carrier TF. It is type (B) which is meant to be explained by s.6.3.4 of the manual. Much of the confusion expressed by players over carrier TF reacting is due to the fact that both types of reaction are in play and not just s.6.3.4 of the manual.

4. The max react button on the TF screen is misunderstood. It's primary function is to toggle on/off whether a naval reaction might occur. Set the reaction button to a 0 range setting tells the code to not check for a type (A) reaction BUT remember that a CV TF also answers to a type (B) reaction where the 0 range setting can be overridden.
...
Alfred

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

CV TFs and reaction - is this normal?
tm.asp?m=3981268&mpage=1&key=reaction�

...
3. There are 2 distinct types of naval reaction. Type (A) is based on seahex range and applies to all types of combat TF, be they surface, carrier, sub et al task forces, whilst type (B) is based on hex range and applies only to a carrier TF. It is type (B) which is meant to be explained by s.6.3.4 of the manual. Much of the confusion expressed by players over carrier TF reacting is due to the fact that both types of reaction are in play and not just s.6.3.4 of the manual.

4. The max react button on the TF screen is misunderstood. It's primary function is to toggle on/off whether a naval reaction might occur. Set the reaction button to a 0 range setting tells the code to not check for a type (A) reaction BUT remember that a CV TF also answers to a type (B) reaction where the 0 range setting can be overridden.
...
Alfred

Thanks for providing this link.

Based on the wording of section 6.2.5 of the manual (to which the type A reaction, which seems to correspond to the night/day phase reaction in my post refers), I would not have concluded that setting the reaction setting to 0 will override the check, but maybe I put too much meaning to this wording (emphasis added):

"Unless set to follow another Task Force, Carrier TFs will react to enemy carrier forces and try and avoid enemy surface combat forces. Carrier TFs set to follow another TF are assumed to be providing air cover to that TF."

Hartwig

ORIGINAL: hartwig.modrow

"Unless set to follow another Task Force, Carrier TFs will react to enemy carrier forces and try and avoid enemy surface combat forces. Carrier TFs set to follow another TF are assumed to be providing air cover to that TF."

Hartwig

I have documented CV TFs reacting with the special CV reaction move while set to follow other TFs.

Also note that the patch notes provided by Michael (which I quoted above) override anything in the manual that they contradict or add on to.

9/1/44

A titanic battle just took place at Shikuka. Erik brought everything he had against the base - subs, combat ships, LBA, carrier air.

The defenders performed very, very well until the tail end of the battle. Allied mines took a heavy toll on enemy subs and, to a lesser extent, his combat ships. Allied combat TFs dished out more than they took, especially to enemy CAs, CLs, and DDs.

As best I can piece together from the combat report (I haven't run the turn yet), the long series of surface combats flushed my navy out from under protection of LBA, resulting in a bunch of my capital ships getting heavily damaged or sunk by enemy LBA and carrier air towards the end of things. Then, Erik's bombardments got to the airfield and wrought havoc, destroying hundreds of planes on the ground (including a lot of B-29s).

If my level nine airfield is closed, I'm in trouble. Heck, I'm probably in trouble anyway. I probably don't have anything much in the way of capital ships left. My massive merchant fleet is thus susceptible to annihilation. This is very, very bad.

On the other hand, Erik took a lot of damage, especially to subs and combat ships (and, to a lesser extent, to his air forces).

On yet another hand, this is the 9/1/44 turn, so all my CVEs just went into upgrade mode for three weeks! This leaves me in a poor position to send the cavalry into play to draw Erik's attention and keep him more honest. My CV/CVL fleet is pretty stout, but I'd prefer not to use them, too, for about three weeks. By then, I'll have four additional CVs available.

Sometime tonight, I'll run the turn and take measure of the carnage. The biggest decision to make will be whether to sortie the CVs and CVLs, hoping to draw Erik's attention for a time.

I could lose a vast, vast number of ships here, but there is no danger of losing Sikhalin Island (unless I truly lose the carrier battle that will eventually take place). In some ways, I think what happened today at Shikuka will have seriously eroded Erik's ability to wage war. He'll harvest a great deal of points (and that's serious) but he won't be able to counterinvade and he'll probably be in a poorer position to withstand the battles yet to come.

From Beta2 readme1126.pdf

V1.01.26– 17 September 2016 (Game version shown as 1.8.11.26b)

36. Tweak DL on enemy CVTF to be 3+ to trigger CV reaction; was non-zero DL
37. Fix CVTF reported reacting to enemy CVTF more than once per phase


How does this impact the info from the link I provided above?

2 distinct types of naval reaction.
The naval reaction algorithm is checked every single hex traveled through.
etc.

I'm running 1126 and still getting more than 1 hex of reaction per phase. No one wants to believe me so this weekend I'll search for a saved game of the turn where it occurred and post that save for others to run, If I can find it.

Limiting CAP to zero range has it's drawbacks. If CAP had been set at normal three hex range those ships that retreated away from the Port would have had air cover.