Automatic carrier strike

[fulcrum28]

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.

[bradfordkay]

Are you thinking that the "reaction" setting controls the range at which your carrier aircraft will strike?

The "reaction" setting is how far a carrier TF (or any combat TF) will move to close the distance with a sighted enemy. It does not control how far your aircraft will fly, other than giving them a closer distance to make it easier to reach the enemy.

If you are trying to prevent your carrier aircraft from attacking beyond a certain range you also need to limit the range setting for each squadron. Are you saying that you are doing this and your aircraft are still attacking at a distance beyond that set range?

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.

The setting you are talking about governs surface/sub/ASW reaction ranges. It determines up to what distance to a hostile contact the TF moves to engage in the reaction phase of the turn resolution. If, for example, you set an ASW group to react '3', it will react (and hopefully engage) towards any sub detected within 3 hexes - naturally this also depends on a couple of other parameters as usual in WitP.

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.

Note that the above is in no way related to 'the distance from which a carrier strike can occur'. This can only be influenced via the Air Group range settings.

[btd64]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.

The setting you are talking about governs surface/sub/ASW reaction ranges. It determines up to what distance to a hostile contact the TF moves to engage in the reaction phase of the turn resolution. If, for example, you set an ASW group to react '3', it will react (and hopefully engage) towards any sub detected within 3 hexes - naturally this also depends on a couple of other parameters as usual in WitP.

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.

Note that the above is in no way related to 'the distance from which a carrier strike can occur'. This can only be influenced via the Air Group range settings.

Plus One....GP

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.

You seem to be asking the AI to stop processing the turn and ask you for permission to carry out a strike you did not plan on. This is the equivalent of a Naval HQ on land not allowing the TF commander at sea to use his initiative - something that has proven disastrous time after time IRL.

Apart from interfering with turn processing (by requiring you to monitor turn execution) this would also remove one of the variables that make the game exciting and realistic. You have picked your TF commander and given him his command. When unexpected situations occur it is the commander's job to figure out how to handle it. I say - "hands off".

[bradfordkay]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.

You seem to be asking the AI to stop processing the turn and ask you for permission to carry out a strike you did not plan on. This is the equivalent of a Naval HQ on land not allowing the TF commander at sea to use his initiative - something that has proven disastrous time after time IRL.

Apart from interfering with turn processing (by requiring you to monitor turn execution) this would also remove one of the variables that make the game exciting and realistic. You have picked your TF commander and given him his command. When unexpected situations occur it is the commander's job to figure out how to handle it. I say - "hands off".

His request would also make the game impossible to play by e-mail, thus removing the best way to enjoy this masterpiece.

[rustysi]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.

The setting you are talking about governs surface/sub/ASW reaction ranges. It determines up to what distance to a hostile contact the TF moves to engage in the reaction phase of the turn resolution. If, for example, you set an ASW group to react '3', it will react (and hopefully engage) towards any sub detected within 3 hexes - naturally this also depends on a couple of other parameters as usual in WitP.

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.

Note that the above is in no way related to 'the distance from which a carrier strike can occur'. This can only be influenced via the Air Group range settings.

Just one caveat here, ASW TF's won't react to subs. They will chase those that are detected when they pass through the ASWs' hex, but they will not react toward them.

[geofflambert]

ORIGINAL: rustysi

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.

The setting you are talking about governs surface/sub/ASW reaction ranges. It determines up to what distance to a hostile contact the TF moves to engage in the reaction phase of the turn resolution. If, for example, you set an ASW group to react '3', it will react (and hopefully engage) towards any sub detected within 3 hexes - naturally this also depends on a couple of other parameters as usual in WitP.

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.

Note that the above is in no way related to 'the distance from which a carrier strike can occur'. This can only be influenced via the Air Group range settings.

Just one caveat here, ASW TF's won't react to subs. They will chase those that are detected when they pass through the ASWs' hex, but they will not react toward them.

Actually, I don't believe that is true. For instance, if your land based search planes or ASW planes spot a sub, an ASW TF patrolling in the area may well move to that hex.

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: rustysi
Just one caveat here, ASW TF's won't react to subs. They will chase those that are detected when they pass through the ASWs' hex, but they will not react toward them.

Reasons why they do not show this behaviour in your games might be due to

- react range set to 0
- too low dl on subs
- too low leadership/agg rating of TF commanders
- suboptimal PZ positioning

[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...

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: rustysi

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.

The setting you are talking about governs surface/sub/ASW reaction ranges. It determines up to what distance to a hostile contact the TF moves to engage in the reaction phase of the turn resolution. If, for example, you set an ASW group to react '3', it will react (and hopefully engage) towards any sub detected within 3 hexes - naturally this also depends on a couple of other parameters as usual in WitP.

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.

Note that the above is in no way related to 'the distance from which a carrier strike can occur'. This can only be influenced via the Air Group range settings.

Just one caveat here, ASW TF's won't react to subs. They will chase those that are detected when they pass through the ASWs' hex, but they will not react toward them.

This is not my experience at all. I have had ASW TF with high skill and aggressive commanders react multiple times in a turn to enemy sub threats. In fact it is my policy not to set reaction ranges above 2 or 3 because I have had them react clear out of air cover range into enemy territory and get clobbered by an airstrike.

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: rustysi

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

ORIGINAL: fulcrum28

I know that we can set up the attack range of carrier TF to limite the distance from which a carrier strike can occur.
However, I have experienced situations in the game in which even though the range is set to zero the strike is performed.

are there some mods (or could be implemented ?) in which a confirmation order window is shown so you can finally approve or reject such as strike? it could really be very convenient.

The setting you are talking about governs surface/sub/ASW reaction ranges. It determines up to what distance to a hostile contact the TF moves to engage in the reaction phase of the turn resolution. If, for example, you set an ASW group to react '3', it will react (and hopefully engage) towards any sub detected within 3 hexes - naturally this also depends on a couple of other parameters as usual in WitP.

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.

Note that the above is in no way related to 'the distance from which a carrier strike can occur'. This can only be influenced via the Air Group range settings.

Just one caveat here, ASW TF's won't react to subs. They will chase those that are detected when they pass through the ASWs' hex, but they will not react toward them.

Pay close attention to the replay when you have ASW TFs on patrol with a reaction setting. You will see them react to detected enemy subs. This doesn't mean that they start combat with them, but they will react and move in to the hex the sub is in (if they can), which may trigger the sub to attack them.

[rustysi]

OK, look here.

tm.asp?m=3981268&mpage=2&key=ASW%2Creacting%2Csub&#

Edit:Check Alfred's post 41.

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: rustysi

OK, look here.

tm.asp?m=3981268&mpage=2&key=ASW%2Creacting%2Csub&#

Edit:Check Alfred's post 41.

Hey rustysi, thanks for the link.

Interesting read, I was not aware of this discussion up to now.

So combining what I read in that debate and what my personal expeerience is this sums up like below:

In my games I use ASW TF´s set with 2 or 3 PZs and react 2-4 depending on the situation. In areas where it is possible I put up a lot of NavS to vector the ASW TF´s on possible contacts.
My empirical data is that a) I get the `TF xyz reacts to enemy TF` message during the reaction phase on a regular basis where xyz is referring to the ASW TF. On multiple instances I then see b) combat initiated by the same TF xyz that was reported to react to a contact.
What I did not verify is whether the reaction of TF xyz actually resulted in a genuine deviation from the designated path between PZs to intercept a sub contact and a subsequent attack on that contact, or whether it was just a correlation and TF xyz did not deviate but rather attacked a sub in a hex that was part of the designated path anyway.

So I know that a) and b) happen sequencially for a specific TF, but what I do not know is whether
1) b) is technically a result of a) or
2) b) is just an independent event without any causal relation to a).

From the link you provided Alfred seems to be convinced that 2) applies. This alone makes 2) a real possibility, backed up by the usual extensive research Alfred does before making such statements. But this would at least mean we are experiencing either a bug or at least an inconsistency in messages the game provides to the player (react message although the TF doesn´t react).

Actually it would be pretty easy to sandbox a Scenario to verify what happens:

1) Position a sub TF with react 0 into a hex.
2) Put an ASW TF with high skill commander in a neighbouring hex, single PZ, set to react 1.
3) In a nearby base set up extensive airborne NavS to max out DL on the sub.

Run that setup for a while without changing anything. Any combat initiated by either ASW TF or sub TF will indicate that the ASW TF reacted into the sub TF hex.

[Alpha77]

For ASW in my last game vs. the AI I got a lot of re-act to sub messages starting in 43 or so (guess better exp then), but never or very rarely saw a ASW TF fight subs to which the message stated it re-acted. In the current PBM I have not seen it yet (up to May42). Also LoBaron why do you use nav search and not ASW ? For the longer range?

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

ORIGINAL: rustysi

OK, look here.

tm.asp?m=3981268&mpage=2&key=ASW%2Creacting%2Csub&#

Edit:Check Alfred's post 41.

Hey rustysi, thanks for the link.

Interesting read, I was not aware of this discussion up to now.

So combining what I read in that debate and what my personal expeerience is this sums up like below:

In my games I use ASW TF´s set with 2 or 3 PZs and react 2-4 depending on the situation. In areas where it is possible I put up a lot of NavS to vector the ASW TF´s on possible contacts.
My empirical data is that a) I get the `TF xyz reacts to enemy TF` message during the reaction phase on a regular basis where xyz is referring to the ASW TF. On multiple instances I then see b) combat initiated by the same TF xyz that was reported to react to a contact.
What I did not verify is whether the reaction of TF xyz actually resulted in a genuine deviation from the designated path between PZs to intercept a sub contact and a subsequent attack on that contact, or whether it was just a correlation and TF xyz did not deviate but rather attacked a sub in a hex that was part of the designated path anyway.

So I know that a) and b) happen sequencially for a specific TF, but what I do not know is whether
1) b) is technically a result of a) or
2) b) is just an independent event without any causal relation to a).

From the link you provided Alfred seems to be convinced that 2) applies. This alone makes 2) a real possibility, backed up by the usual extensive research Alfred does before making such statements. But this would at least mean we are experiencing either a bug or at least an inconsistency in messages the game provides to the player (react message although the TF doesn´t react).

Actually it would be pretty easy to sandbox a Scenario to verify what happens:

1) Position a sub TF with react 0 into a hex.
2) Put an ASW TF with high skill commander in a neighbouring hex, single PZ, set to react 1.
3) In a nearby base set up extensive airborne NavS to max out DL on the sub.

Run that setup for a while without changing anything. Any combat initiated by either ASW TF or sub TF will indicate that the ASW TF reacted into the sub TF hex.

I would say that this is my experience. However, I am certain that I have ended up with ASW TFs well out of their assigned patrol zones at the end of the turn. This is back when I set every ASW TF to six hexes reaction range. I do not do that any more so the behavior has changed. Perhaps is is a factor of range and operation points expended. That is a ASW TF with operational points left over will return to it's normal patrol zone before the turn has ended but one that made multiple reactions over a longer range will not have the points to fully return to its patrol zone. So, the test should be done with a few ASW TFs with very high aggression leaders against a few subs. The area should be saturated with air search and the subs should be five to six hexes away. The test then should be rerun with the subs in a stepped progression of 2, 4 and six hexes away. So the ASW TF might only be reacting a few hexes each time but bounce further out with multiple reactions.

[HansBolter]

My experiences jive with what crsutton states.

Have seen ASW TFs vectored several hexes out of patrol patterns reacting to subs many times.

Get the 'reacting' message quite regularly.

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: Alpha77
Also LoBaron why do you use nav search and not ASW ? For the longer range?

For the sake of simplicity of the example I emphasised NavS to max DL.

In my games I use a mix of NavS and airborne ASW and ASW TFs. The mix depends on region priority, type/distance of threat, area to cover, plane types available, pilot skill and training, surface ships available, other threats in the reagion, and the logistics situation. As with all things in WitP AE there is no easy answer to a complex challenge.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

ORIGINAL: Alpha77
Also LoBaron why do you use nav search and not ASW ? For the longer range?

For the sake of simplicity of the example I emphasised NavS to max DL.

In my games I use a mix of NavS and airborne ASW and ASW TFs. The mix depends on region priority, type/distance of threat, area to cover, plane types available, pilot skill and training, surface ships available, other threats in the reagion, and the logistics situation. As with all things in WitP AE there is no easy answer to a complex challenge.

+1

[rustysi]

I chose the post I did because of the quote Alfred had put in there from Don Bowen. What Don explains in his post has been what I've experienced with some very limited tests. The ASW TF does seem to be 'reacting' to a sub TF that has passed through the ASW TFs' hex. I have seen said ASW TF 'follow' the sub TF through several hexes. That's good enough for me.