|
Post by tomthehand on Aug 21, 2019 14:55:23 GMT -6
I'd like to suggest adding "smarter" movement orders that could be given to divisions: - Intercept - Continually plot a course that will intercept the target as quickly as possible; if an actual intercept is impossible, plot a course that will provide the closest possible approach. A checkbox to choose whether or not to eventually try to ram the target would be a nice addition.
- Retreat - Continually plot a course away from the target.
- Maintain range - Continually plot a course to maintain a specific range from the target, closing or opening the range as necessary. An incredibly useful additional option would be to specify whether to try to keep all guns unmasked, allowing full broadsides, or to focus on achieving the range more quickly at the cost of masking some guns.
I realize that the game limits the player's information about, for example, exact enemy speeds and headings, and would expect that these orders would also rely on estimates and be imperfect as a result; they would still be incredibly helpful.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Aug 22, 2019 9:58:40 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Fredrik W on Aug 22, 2019 14:35:30 GMT -6
On what realism level do you envisage this to be used?
|
|
|
Post by tomthehand on Aug 22, 2019 18:48:08 GMT -6
Thank you. I've thought about this further, and I've come to feel that all three are essentially the same thing: intercept just tries to maintain a range of 0, while retreat tries to maintain a range of infinity. I think this could be implemented with a pop-up that has two sets of three radio buttons: Order: () Ram () Maintain range: [text box] () Retreat The text box would be disabled unless "Maintain range" is selected. Priority: () Range () Balanced () Firepower "Range" would prioritize achieving the selected range as quickly as possible, without worrying about broadside. "Balanced" would try to maintain a target bearing that allows a full broadside, unless this prevents the selected range from being achieved. "Firepower" would focus on full broadsides, even if this keeps the selected range from being achieved (so, for example, the target slowly gets away, but you hit him as hard as you can while he's in range). On what realism level do you envisage this to be used? I don't think it should be restricted to any particular realism level; paradoxically it would be MORE logical for an admiral to have access to orders like this than a captain.
|
|
|
Post by sloanjh on Aug 24, 2019 9:44:36 GMT -6
Agree with spirit of this, but at Admiral mode would suggest something much simpler for the non-retreat stuff:
Turn on the ability to tell a division to engage (target) an enemy division. At present there's a selection box that's turned off at Admiral level. I think that might only affect gunfire targeting though. I'd like the ability to tell e.g. my BCs to go off and engage e.g. an enemy cruiser force while my main battle line engages the enemy battle line; I'm pretty sure I don't have that at Admiral.
I think it would be appropriate to turn on the sorts of range and tactics options the OP mentions at Rear Admiral level.
|
|