WitP II Surface Combat Model Discussion

[TheElf]

Just what it says. Matrix has always been responsive to their customers. What Say we start brainstorming in case this becomes a reality?

Let's keep it to constructive comments/criticism. I am starting this thread but hope the Mods will patrol it and keep things positive.

Ideas for the new model and limitations of/gripes about the old one are welcome. limit your post to posting ideas/gripes not engaging each other in pointless arguements. Feel free to agree and expand on each others concepts!

[GaryChildress]

I would like to see a little more probability of open ocean intercepts between surface combat TFs which have been spotted by scout planes, etc. Granted they should still be rare but right now it seems almost impossible to make an intercept. On the other hand, if others think it is unrealistic to increase this probability then I will (somewhat reluctantly in this case) go with the realism camp.

[witpqs]

I go with the realism camp as Gary noted, but he still has a point. The problem is that right now those intercepts only take place if TF's end the phase in the same hex. Even if they passed each other on opposite courses, there's only an intercept if the end in the same hex.

Perhaps there could be a check to see if TF's intercept during transit rather than just at phase end.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

I would like to see a little more probability of open ocean intercepts between surface combat TFs which have been spotted by scout planes, etc. Granted they should still be rare but right now it seems almost impossible to make an intercept. On the other hand, if others think it is unrealistic to increase this probability then I will (somewhat reluctantly in this case) go with the realism camp.

I agree. Mid-ocean intercepts should be assesed per hex during the movement of TFs, not just at the end of the turn. This would require a more sophisticated movement model for TFs - I guess that currently in WitP the TFs are moved one at a time, and not concurrently, which is why intercets are only assessed at the end of a turn at the moment.

Another addition could be a "shadow" option, in which a SCTF can be set to follow, but not engage, an enemy TF. Again this should be a rarely used option, and difficult to achieve, requiring advantages in TF speed and radar, co-operative weather and skillful commanders/crew, but should at least be possible.

[TheElf]

I have also felt that if two SFC TFs WANT to engage in a mid Ocean intercept then it should be a lot easier. Spotter plane sends "they are here." Opposing Spotter sends "They are here". Admirals say "Go toward the enemy" - Combat occurs.

[JeffroK]

To steal an idea from a totally differnt genre.

In a Napoleonic Game during enemy movement it asked whether you wanted to counter-charge enemy Cavalry. You had a chanc to look at the situation and decide whether you wanted to risk it.

In WITP, while you might have wanted to intercept at the start of the turn, the CV TF's lurking nearby might make you change your mind, or allow you to choose what TF you want to hit.

But it wouldnt work in PBEM, so when you set a TF to intercept you could also set priority of target and other variables.

[1EyedJacks]

I would like my warship TFs that are on Surface Patrol to really be able to "spank" the cargo/transport convoys I run into every now and then. I just don't see why a warship TF would disengage from attacking an easy target - specially during the day. Maybe they might stop due to lack of ammo...[:D]

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Andrew Brown

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

I would like to see a little more probability of open ocean intercepts between surface combat TFs which have been spotted by scout planes, etc. Granted they should still be rare but right now it seems almost impossible to make an intercept. On the other hand, if others think it is unrealistic to increase this probability then I will (somewhat reluctantly in this case) go with the realism camp.

I agree. Mid-ocean intercepts should be assesed per hex during the movement of TFs, not just at the end of the turn. This would require a more sophisticated movement model for TFs - I guess that currently in WitP the TFs are moved one at a time, and not concurrently, which is why intercets are only assessed at the end of a turn at the moment.

Another addition could be a "shadow" option, in which a SCTF can be set to follow, but not engage, an enemy TF. Again this should be a rarely used option, and difficult to achieve, requiring advantages in TF speed and radar, co-operative weather and skillful commanders/crew, but should at least be possible.

Instead of having the generic Surface TF create several more mission specific TF's - ie shadow, merchant raider, intercept, main battle fleet etc.

Idea which has come up in the A2A thread - by breaking down the turn into discrete impulses- if a TF is in the same hex as another during the same impulse - BAM combat depending on the assigned missions of the TF's.

[Sonny]

During daylight hours mid-ocean intercepts should be somewhat easy. But then you would have surface battles which take place in the middle of movement, lets say at 10 am, when in fact an air attack at 9 am should have already happened to one (or both) of the TFs. So unless you integrate all movement, both air and sea, instead of the way it is now, you can't have realistic results.

At night it is different. I would say there are no night attacks on moving naval vessels (someone will of course complain about this I'm sure). So surface and sub-surface intercepts should be possible - but not as likely as the 100% it currently is in 60 mile hexes. The hex size as you might expect should be a factor in the likelihood of interception as well as whether the hex is mid-ocean or shore. This would mean in a truly mid-ocean hex you would not necessarily find the other task force (again depending on what hex size is used) but you would always find the other task force who is making a landing or most likely find a task force passing through a straight.

[mogami]

Hi, I'm beginning tio see that many complaints/problems are simply as a result of the system doing 12 hour phases that do not run simultainously. We need a time scale where aircraft are in the air longer then a single turn with TF and LCU moving at the same time.

WITP is 1600 turns long. How many turns are we willing to play?
The more tactical you make the game the harder it is to make a good AI.

Currently one type of unit (ship/air/land) functions either before or after the other type has executed it's turn. So ships fight other ships after they have used all their movement. And then Aircraft operate and then land units operate. when really aircraft should be looking for ships and attacking while the ships are still moving. And one type of aircraft (fighter) should be able to intercept other air missions while they are in flight going to or returning from targets. Ever notice that if you fly LRCAP over enemy airfield you do not intercept strikes leaving or returning to the airfield?

[Distiller]

If your ship is faster and the enemy's location is known (say, by floatplane) i see no reason not to allow a chase, tbh.

Just use the 'follow TF' command on enemy forces. Intercepting carriers with BBs will remain next to impossible, but unexpectedly running into a squadron of CAs with a fleet of 20 AKs and 5 DDs as escort would be very bad news indeed - as it should be, imho.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: Mogami

Hi, I'm beginning tio see that many complaints/problems are simply as a result of the system doing 12 hour phases that do not run simultainously. We need a time scale where aircraft are in the air longer then a single turn with TF and LCU moving at the same time.

WITP is 1600 turns long. How many turns are we willing to play?
The more tactical you make the game the harder it is to make a good AI.

Currently one type of unit (ship/air/land) functions either before or after the other type has executed it's turn. So ships fight other ships after they have used all their movement. And then Aircraft operate and then land units operate. when really aircraft should be looking for ships and attacking while the ships are still moving. And one type of aircraft (fighter) should be able to intercept other air missions while they are in flight going to or returning from targets. Ever notice that if you fly LRCAP over enemy airfield you do not intercept strikes leaving or returning to the airfield?

The same number as now. I think you are misunderstanding - there should be impulses during turn-resolution (all computer driven), not more turns.

[spence]

How about this (to allow mid-ocean intercept in daytime)???:

Between the end of the PM airphase resolution and Daytime Surface Combat Resolution insert a Naval Reaction Phase. The number of hexes a TF could move would depend on how many OPS points remain to it (presumably out of 1000), its max speed and whether "REACT" is on or off.

One thing not tracked now (I think) is how many Ops points are consumed by air attack. That might require a bunch of code to do but I'm no programer so I have no idea.

[Akos Gergely]

And there should be reaction for surface TFs as well, so if they have remaining ops points they could move closer to their targets. ANd I agree with more open ocean intercepts, it's badly needed because now 99% of surface combat occurs in coastal hexes.

[TheElf]

Bump

[ny59giants]

If your SC TF has a reaction set at "x" it should close on an enemy TF that has been previously spotted with that range or if not, then based on the number of planes your TF has set on Naval Search. If your SC TF has a Mission Speed of 5 and the enemy is mainly AK/TK/AP with a mission speed of 2, it should be hard to avoid.
There needs to be a toggle to choose: combat ships (Air, SC), transports (Escort, Transport), or all for types of SC missions.

[jolly_pillager]

A more intellegent allocation of fire from surface ships...if your BB's fail their fire roll with their main armament because there are no other BB's (as Tom Hunter demonstrated) then they should use them against CA's/CL's...if they are on a raid (Retirement toggled "on") then they should use them against ANY target in the hex until they are reduced to a minimum safety level of Ammo (enough for one engagement with a surface combat TF say).

Change the "off doing something else" check from individual ships to TF's...

More verbose replay messages...too much is not explained ion the combat text which leads to much frustration. If a ship cannot engage because it has no target ID'ed, it should be tagged as such with an icon.

More FoW...unspotted ships should not only not be named...they shouldn't be on the display at all.

The ability to set "Doctrine" for different TF's...or at least, set them for different mission types...by Doctrine I mean a small set of rules for targeting priority (a 1-6 list say with an "all others" at the bottom), a toggle for general attack method (hit and run, maintain contact with surface forces, break past surface forces, willingly break formation to hunt scattering ships, shadow enemy TF...etc. etc.) and a formation choice (tight ring for AAA defense, a loose ring for better manuevering and better spotting, deploy radar pickets, etc. etc.)

For those who don't want to set the Doctrine every time there should be a "Commander's Choice" toggle/setting.

Lastly the adjustment of ammo to the setting of one ammo factor=1 round of ammunition. Then incerase consumption per shot fired to some factor and renormalize accuracy to be in line with historical results.

Allow a single shot (representing multiple shells in multiple volleys) to get multiple hits.

Allow ship captains to lift and shift fire when their target is a burning, sinking, wreck and there is an undamaged AK *right there* [;)]

[zuikaku]

what I like being improved is mid ocean intercept. It can be done on 60mile hex with some calculation, but on 30mile hex it would be a nightmare. So, i think that this routine have to be automated in some way. Why just not add a new value to description of naval leaders: Mid ocean intercept. The higher the value, the higher is the chance that TF (that has mid ocean intercept orders) is to intercept enemy shipping in that area. I would also like to see german subs and raiders that operated in this area to be included. And I would like that TF could be intercepted on every hex it passes during the day not only the ones where it ends on the night or day phase (I found that most annoying and unrealistic in current WITP engine as you can not intercept path but hexes with most traffic).

[Ursa MAior]

In general I'd like to see a TG/TF approach than just one big TF. Just like USN and IJN did.

[Terminus]

Agreed. Let's have TG 58.1, .2, .3, etc.