Game Suggestions

[vicberg]

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Can you please, please, please, please put a save game up. You are making it very, very hard to help you.

Absolutely. The backstory is that I'm placing Early Warning and Cap far forward of the fleet due to nuclear tipped Backfires. One missile can destroy an entire fleet and the anti-missile tech can't seem to stop them.

This issue is repeatable. Simply change patrol zone to the persecution zone reference points (8342-8345) and the CAP immediately responds. Change Patrol zone back to single reference point (8346) and CAP goes back to ignoring the hostile bogies.

[vicberg]

ORIGINAL: thewood1

I suspect, you haven't set something in the ROE section. I highlighted where you might be screwed up.

From the Manual addendum:

• New patrol option: Prosecution Area. You can now define an exact area you want units to pursue contacts during a patrol. Units assigned to it will not pursue contacts outside the area. To use: add and select the necessary reference points, press the prosecution area button and add/remove reference points as you would with the patrol area function. If no prosecution area is added the mission works as it traditionally did in that there is no threshold.
Prosecution Areas (PAs) serve two purposes:
a) They act much like a forbidden zone in that contacts appearing within them are marked for interception, but they also restrict the extent at which interceptions will happen. So if you want your fighters to e.g. be triggered only by bandits within 200nm of a protected HVU instead of "waking up" to contacts thousands of miles away, PAs are the solution.
b) They act as a "leash" for assets on a patrol; they effectively determine the extent to which the patrol assets can give chase to receding targets. If the bandit moves out of the PA, the defender is forbidden to follow (though it can still engage with weapons if feasible). This solves the problem of patrol assets over-extending themselves during interception, quite often falling victims to feints/traps.
PAs are supported in the UI by modifications to the Mission Editor UI, and are populated by reference points in the same way as existing patrol areas. They are empty by default, and in this case the AI behavior is the same as before (intercept bandits far away etc.), to facilitate existing scenarios.
Units that are assigned to a patrol with a prosecution area will target & engage only contacts that are within this area (or their patrol area). If they are not on patrol or their patrol does not have a prosecution area, the existing AI rules apply.
This makes it possible to create SAM ambushes (shoot at far less than max range), divide areas of responsibility for multiple patrol forces etc.
PAs work as intented only when the "Investigate targets outside contact area" option is enabled. Also, the "engage targets of opportunity" doctrine option overrides the prosecution area restriction.

I'm seeing nothing in what you posted that imply I made a mistake. I certainly may have. Bogies are designated hostile. Bogies are within persecution zone. CAP isn't responding unless I make the Patrol zone the Persecution zone.

[vicberg]

And a bit more. Within this same game I just posted, I changed patrol zone to persecution zone, CAP responded to MIG-21s, then responded to Flagons (northeast). I change patrol zone back to single reference and CAP didn't respond to identified (not bogey) Flagons within persecution zone. I change patrol zone back to persecution zone reference points and CAP responded again. So there's definitely something going on with the persecution zone logic.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: vicberg
Na... I always choose the largest scenario available. My best approach for learning all aspects of the game, including how to manage it.

Respectfully have to disagree. Going straight-in at large, complex scenarios is an excellent way to literally get lost. With small scenarios it is much easier to understand how the mechanics work and the rationale behind them.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: vicberg
Sure thing, but I'll need to set it up again. After changing my patrol zone from single spot to the persecution zone, I went back and changed it back to a single spot and received this. So I'll need to start the scenario over.

You can resume from a point just before the crash, using the "Resume from Autosave" function.

[vicberg]

And a bit of advice is needed. I've done this mission about 10 times now. There simply aren't enough planes and missiles to stop the Russian attack. 1/2 of the starting US Carrier fighters requires 3 hours to ready. In that time frame, if the MIG-21s suicide into the carriers followed by the Flagons and I take out his Bear based Radar, then the Badgers and Backfires overwhelm.

I've tried being a hole in the water with nothing but passive and a Russian satellite comes over messing that one up. Perhaps I don't put up CAP at all and hope that that the Air to Surface take out the MIGs and Flagons?

I'm stumped.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

ORIGINAL: vicberg
The developers and this company want all dumb or obvious questions asked and answered in a open forum. They want people engaged in the game and not getting frustrated because they didn't find it in the manual. The answer "shut up and go read a manual" doesn't exactly promote this game, especially when someone can usually get a very quick answer from the forum rather than spending hours reading a manual, especially since Matrix search engine isn't the most robust.

Same goes for technology. I can find answers in seconds, the same answers for the same questions asked hundreds of times in which people are ALWAYS ready to answer. Or I can spend hours reading through programming manuals.

It's a good thing and shows it's a very good game, something I'd suggest to you that you don't try to squelch.

Actually experience has helped us develop a good sense about the intent of posters. Most want help, some like to chat and a few are just posting in to show the forum how smart they think they are. The critical thing is focusing on what and who is important.

Mike

I would pay great attention to Mike's points. He's here to help any way possible, but he's also a straight-shooter who won't shy from pointing outright flaws in your method.

[vicberg]

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

ORIGINAL: vicberg
The developers and this company want all dumb or obvious questions asked and answered in a open forum. They want people engaged in the game and not getting frustrated because they didn't find it in the manual. The answer "shut up and go read a manual" doesn't exactly promote this game, especially when someone can usually get a very quick answer from the forum rather than spending hours reading a manual, especially since Matrix search engine isn't the most robust.

Same goes for technology. I can find answers in seconds, the same answers for the same questions asked hundreds of times in which people are ALWAYS ready to answer. Or I can spend hours reading through programming manuals.

It's a good thing and shows it's a very good game, something I'd suggest to you that you don't try to squelch.

Actually experience has helped us develop a good sense about the intent of posters. Most want help, some like to chat and a few are just posting in to show the forum how smart they think they are. The critical thing is focusing on what and who is important.

Mike

I would pay great attention to Mike's points. He's here to help any way possible, but he's also a straight-shooter who won't shy from pointing outright flaws in your method.

And that's exactly what I'm looking for

[cf_dallas]

ORIGINAL: vicberg

And a bit more. Within this same game I just posted, I changed patrol zone to persecution zone, CAP responded to MIG-21s, then responded to Flagons (northeast). I change patrol zone back to single reference and CAP didn't respond to identified (not bogey) Flagons within persecution zone. I change patrol zone back to persecution zone reference points and CAP responded again. So there's definitely something going on with the persecution zone logic.

Based on the screen grabs I suspect you missed the manual line Wood hilighted.

You have to set up a patrol box (or a line, or a single point), then set a box for the prosecution area, AND you have to check "Investigate Contacts Outside Patrol Area." That tells your patrol "go to this location and loiter, then if contacts come within your area of responsibility, investigate."

I very much doubt you've found a logic or programming flaw, unless your copy of the game is very different from mine. It's worked very well for setting up literally hundreds of missions for me. And for dozens of other players.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: vicberg
My experience so far is that the game in some ways is very smart and enables me to simply put my assets in the right locations at the right time, so I feel like I'm in charge of an operation. Then the game gets not so smart and I'm having to get involved in manual control of many little aspects.

.....like real-life commanders.

CMANO is not chess. One of our goals, from the get go, was to accurately represent the semi-organized chaos that unfolds during even the most successful military operations of the post-WW2 period. Quite often the side who wins is the one who adapts on the fly and "plays speed chess" better (yes, even with near-textbook ops like the first days of Desert Storm). That's real life. That's CMANO.

[vicberg]

ORIGINAL: cf_dallas

ORIGINAL: vicberg

And a bit more. Within this same game I just posted, I changed patrol zone to persecution zone, CAP responded to MIG-21s, then responded to Flagons (northeast). I change patrol zone back to single reference and CAP didn't respond to identified (not bogey) Flagons within persecution zone. I change patrol zone back to persecution zone reference points and CAP responded again. So there's definitely something going on with the persecution zone logic.

Based on the screen grabs I suspect you missed the manual line Wood hilighted.

You have to set up a patrol box (or a line, or a single point), then set a box for the prosecution area, AND you have to check "Investigate Contacts Outside Patrol Area." That tells your patrol "go to this location and loiter, then if contacts come within your area of responsibility, investigate."

I very much doubt you've found a logic or programming flaw, unless your copy of the game is very different from mine. It's worked very well for setting up literally hundreds of missions for me. And for dozens of other players.

Ahhhh....that's it then. I thought of persecution zone as it's own entity. Assign it and go, separate from Patrol zone. The investigate has to be clicked in order for the persecution zone to come into play. Even though reading the above makes better sense, I was thinking that investigate would ignore both zones. So now, if I investigate AND I have a persecution zone, I need to drag that zone or create a new one for other contacts.

[vicberg]

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

ORIGINAL: vicberg
My experience so far is that the game in some ways is very smart and enables me to simply put my assets in the right locations at the right time, so I feel like I'm in charge of an operation. Then the game gets not so smart and I'm having to get involved in manual control of many little aspects.

.....like real-life commanders.

CMANO is not chess. One of our goals, from the get go, was to accurately represent the semi-organized chaos that unfolds during even the most successful military operations of the post-WW2 period. Quite often the side who wins is the one who adapts on the fly and "plays speed chess" better (yes, even with near-textbook ops like the first days of Desert Storm). That's real life. That's CMANO.

I'm ok with that. The question comes down to the level of manual involvement. It's the reason I stopped playing the original Harpoon (long long time ago) and never bothered to buy the new Harpoon on Matrix.

[ComDev]

ORIGINAL: cf_dallas

ORIGINAL: vicberg

And a bit more. Within this same game I just posted, I changed patrol zone to persecution zone, CAP responded to MIG-21s, then responded to Flagons (northeast). I change patrol zone back to single reference and CAP didn't respond to identified (not bogey) Flagons within persecution zone. I change patrol zone back to persecution zone reference points and CAP responded again. So there's definitely something going on with the persecution zone logic.

Based on the screen grabs I suspect you missed the manual line Wood hilighted.

You have to set up a patrol box (or a line, or a single point), then set a box for the prosecution area, AND you have to check "Investigate Contacts Outside Patrol Area." That tells your patrol "go to this location and loiter, then if contacts come within your area of responsibility, investigate."

I very much doubt you've found a logic or programming flaw, unless your copy of the game is very different from mine. It's worked very well for setting up literally hundreds of missions for me. And for dozens of other players.

Yeah had a look too, since I'm the last guy to fiddle with this part of the AI/Mission code. It works exactly as designed, ref cf_dallas's post [8D]

Oh and yeah, Rule #1 around here is to never post a bug report without a savegame. Not doing so will very easily get you tagged as a troublemaker, not a problem solver. We're an active developer who hang around in our support forum and interact with our players. There aren't very many such developers around. As such, our forum rules are also different from what you're probably used to elsewhere, and we do not tolerate certain behaviour, ref Mike's posts.

Posting a savegame in your first post, starting with small scenarios, reading the manual, and reading all of thewood's explanation would have saved this thread from going haywire.

[vicberg]

Honestly, this forum feels a bit hostile. I've read through quite a few posts now, and there's definitely some defensiveness, though I don't know why. It's a good game. If the developers do not have time to answer, let the users answer. The users answered my questions. The developers didn't even need to get involved.

I've already received PMs from others since I started this thread about how people are treated on this forum. That's not something you should be proud of. There's no such thing as a dumb question and this is coming from someone who has been in business side of software for 30 years now. Kill them with kindness. It's a good motto to learn.

I do thank everyone for their answers.

[ComDev]

Thanks, noted [8D]

Work on Command 1.12 is already underway, and I'm diving back in. Think you'll like [:)]

[Rudd]

You're right I guess, there are no dumb questions.

The problem is, you didn't ask any questions in the first post, you just were saying here's a bunch of issues with the game, that aren't really issues.

That's what irritates some of us, we may reply in not such a pc way so the devs don't have to repeat themselves over and over. Stay on here for a while and you'll see what I mean.

[mikmykWS]

Jeebus how dramatic. Seems we've been invaded by a bunch of mean ones. How will we survive?

Answer: Focus on who and what's important!

Mike

[mikmykWS]

By the way has anybody found forum utopia yet? I hear it's a wonderful place for exactly one person.

Mike

[USSInchon]

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

Jeebus how dramatic. Seems we've been invaded by a bunch of mean ones. How will we survive?

Answer: Focus on who and what's important!

Mike

So, Mike is important then?

[mikmykWS]

No devs need to focus on folks interested in the game and not poster's screwing around on the forum or trying to troll the devs.

Mike