AC Losses
Moderator: MOD_Command
AC Losses
Just a philosophical question here: when an aircraft is destroyed in game, is it really destroyed? I hearken back to my Harpoon miniatures days where a destroyed aircraft was removed from the playing area but the rules allowed that it might actually survive. In that system,a destroyed aircraft was not necessarily shot down but instead considered combat ineffective. It was removed from the game for book keeping purposes but there was a table used to determine if it actually might have limped back to base using distance and pilot quality.
In CMANO when an aircraft is "destroyed", is it similar or does destroyed = shot down? Just wondering for purposes of Campaigns and linked scenarios
In CMANO when an aircraft is "destroyed", is it similar or does destroyed = shot down? Just wondering for purposes of Campaigns and linked scenarios
"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry
- HalfLifeExpert
- Posts: 1161
- Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 3:39 pm
- Location: California, United States
RE: AC Losses
It is really destroyed. But its not like there is a limited number of each type of plane included with the game. It is simply permanently destroyed in that scenario, reloading the scenario resets the number. When you build a scenario there is theoretically unlimited aircraft that you can have in play.
So far there are no campaigns/linked scenarios where losses carry over into the next one, the system isn't set up for that at this time. It is possible that could be added in a future patch, but the bottom line is, no, there is no losses carryover
So far there are no campaigns/linked scenarios where losses carry over into the next one, the system isn't set up for that at this time. It is possible that could be added in a future patch, but the bottom line is, no, there is no losses carryover
RE: AC Losses
I like Gunner98's method of explaining losses (especially on the opposition side) not carrying over to later scens in Northern Fury. The aircraft/ships lost are inaccurately reported destroyed thanks to fog of war in one scen, but remain intact in the next.
RE: AC Losses
ORIGINAL: vettim89
Just a philosophical question here: when an aircraft is destroyed in game, is it really destroyed? I hearken back to my Harpoon miniatures days where a destroyed aircraft was removed from the playing area but the rules allowed that it might actually survive. In that system,a destroyed aircraft was not necessarily shot down but instead considered combat ineffective. It was removed from the game for book keeping purposes but there was a table used to determine if it actually might have limped back to base using distance and pilot quality.
In CMANO when an aircraft is "destroyed", is it similar or does destroyed = shot down? Just wondering for purposes of Campaigns and linked scenarios
Yeah for now it is. We're looking at aircraft damage at some point in the future.
Mike
RE: AC Losses
ORIGINAL: mikmyk
ORIGINAL: vettim89
Just a philosophical question here: when an aircraft is destroyed in game, is it really destroyed? I hearken back to my Harpoon miniatures days where a destroyed aircraft was removed from the playing area but the rules allowed that it might actually survive. In that system,a destroyed aircraft was not necessarily shot down but instead considered combat ineffective. It was removed from the game for book keeping purposes but there was a table used to determine if it actually might have limped back to base using distance and pilot quality.
In CMANO when an aircraft is "destroyed", is it similar or does destroyed = shot down? Just wondering for purposes of Campaigns and linked scenarios
Yeah for now it is. We're looking at aircraft damage at some point in the future.
Mike
That would be very cool. For the record, I was not asking if the code viewed the A/C as destroyed but rather in the broader sense of what that means. At present A/C are either at 100% capability or dead. My questions was if dead was "mostly dead" or "completely dead"? Because "mostly dead" is still a little bit alive
[That probably just went right over some people's head]
My point being that a designer could look at a scenario result (or say the averages of several play throughs) and then project an average loss level. You could then say, x number of this A/C were destroyed in the scenario, but we know that dead really means "mostly dead". If that is true then a follow on scenario would then add back some of the kills as just cripples that made it back to base. This would be useful if say you were trying to create a series of scenarios occurring in sequence where the full strength OOB would eventually be whittled down
"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry
RE: AC Losses
Yeah I see what you're looking for. You may want to look at past conflicts to actually get some historical loss and damage percentages.
I think what you'll find though is what qualifies as a mission killed aircraft varies by era and war. WWII were desperate times so things went up ducked taped together. Kosovo not so much[:)]
Mike
I think what you'll find though is what qualifies as a mission killed aircraft varies by era and war. WWII were desperate times so things went up ducked taped together. Kosovo not so much[:)]
Mike
RE: AC Losses
I imagine it depends on the length of the scenario or campaign being designed and if that length allows for any repair of partially destroyed AC- if they were modeled. Some war game campaign systems allow for something like a percent replacement of losses from a starting point. Typically, these are applied automatically based on actual data (not play tests) by the software in a sequence of linked scenarios. Without linked scenarios spanning days, a single scenario would have to be very lengthy if AC repair were to make a difference. So in a typical <24 hour scenario, AC are effectively destroyed and out of action.
“The study of history lies at the foundation of all sound military conclusions and practice.”
Alfred Thayer Mahan
Alfred Thayer Mahan
RE: AC Losses
It is really a balancing act for the designer. If your going to model a campaign, I think you sort of need a story line for that campaign. In Northern Fury anyway, aircraft losses from one scenario to another are adjusted to fit the story I'm trying to tell. If the losses are high - they get replaced, if low, there have been some non operational losses between scenarios - the end result is that scenario 2 in the story has the number of aircraft needed to make a balanced game and continue the story.
Some players will say - yes but I killed 19 out of 30 MiG-29s in the last scenario so there should only be 11 left and there are 15! Well, if you have ever met a fighter pilot, I'm sure you will agree that everything s/he says is 100% accurate with no exaggeration involved [;)]
Ships are a bit trickier but same principle applies.
B
Some players will say - yes but I killed 19 out of 30 MiG-29s in the last scenario so there should only be 11 left and there are 15! Well, if you have ever met a fighter pilot, I'm sure you will agree that everything s/he says is 100% accurate with no exaggeration involved [;)]
Ships are a bit trickier but same principle applies.
B
Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/
-
- Posts: 402
- Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 8:55 pm
RE: AC Losses
My motto is: As long as you have Speed Tape, you're still in the game!
- Attachments
-
- DuctTape.jpg (29.76 KiB) Viewed 99 times
RE: AC Losses
Even the aircraft is hit, the falling remain is still highly possible to pick up by radar, isn't it?
Like an airliner was struck by a missile in radar screen, and then a huge pile of smaller signatures comes out around the downed target. Or, the whole plane is still in one piece when falling, and the radar is assumed it is still flying, even it is actually destroyed. Only when it is rapidly descending to the surface and confirm its killed.
As for the damaged-but-operable and repairable aircraft, I was mentioned and quoted some references of damaged planes long ago, and ended up with a dispute of "mission-kill".
Like an airliner was struck by a missile in radar screen, and then a huge pile of smaller signatures comes out around the downed target. Or, the whole plane is still in one piece when falling, and the radar is assumed it is still flying, even it is actually destroyed. Only when it is rapidly descending to the surface and confirm its killed.
As for the damaged-but-operable and repairable aircraft, I was mentioned and quoted some references of damaged planes long ago, and ended up with a dispute of "mission-kill".
RE: AC Losses
Some players will say - yes but I killed 19 out of 30 MiG-29s in the last scenario so there should only be 11 left and there are 15!
Aligning a back story with reinforcement schedules can keep a "campaign" moving. But expect some players not to "get" the concept. This probably means expectations have to be managed (pounded in) via the briefing by anticipating player reaction. For example, explaining AC losses do not carry over 100% due to x,y and z. XYZ being a part of the back story. Without a one-to-one carry over, some players will consider these linked scenarios, not a campaign in a traditional sense. Without one-to-one carry over, players and designers have to understand a famous situation is being set up. When a player's successful efforts go unrewarded for no apparent reason they become frustrated and might question their tactics or the accuracy of the game. Some come to the forum and ask why, others will come and complain (some nasty) and some might go as far as give up the product altogether. In text books, the situation is named "Learned Helplessness" and interestingly is one of the underlying reasons for stress in people's lives. Carry over "rules" will work, but best not hidden from the player. It's the hidden part that generates most of the frustration.
PS: this is a general comment not direct at a specific war game or scenario/campaign.
“The study of history lies at the foundation of all sound military conclusions and practice.”
Alfred Thayer Mahan
Alfred Thayer Mahan
RE: AC Losses
I think that's a very valid observation, and sometimes tricky to do if you don't want to open the Kimono too much on your design. Not everyone will be happy however you do it but it is something to keep front of mind.
B
B
Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/
RE: AC Losses
ORIGINAL: Kitchens Sink
My motto is: As long as you have Speed Tape, you're still in the game!
lol the old 100mph tape... so many uses