RE: The first air ops tutorial

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: The first air ops tutorial

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> The War Room >> RE: The first air ops tutorial

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/12/2016 4:00:08 PM

MarkShot

Posts: 6671
Joined: 3/29/2003
Status: offline

My alpha strike using WRA and allocating 24 building only resulted in 7 buildings lost. Less than it would I have expected.

Perhaps I would try to concentrate in a single complex to take advantage of blast compression waves.

More experimentation tomorrow with real scoring.

_____________________________

Never more! (I've had enough. Sliterine has raised mediocrity to an art form!)

(in reply to MarkShot)

Post #: 31

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/12/2016 4:48:51 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarkShot

If I lower the altitude from the AI 800', it fails to release. Hours of fire has not affect.

You can see the drop parameters in the db viewer.

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to MarkShot)

Post #: 32

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/12/2016 4:49:47 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarkShot

Okay 1 Walleye is a kill.

Precision optically guided weapon.

_____________________________

(in reply to MarkShot)

Post #: 33

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/12/2016 4:50:21 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarkShot

My alpha strike using WRA and allocating 24 building only resulted in 7 buildings lost. Less than it would I have expected.

Perhaps I would try to concentrate in a single complex to take advantage of blast compression waves.

More experimentation tomorrow with real scoring.

Sure its worth a shot.

_____________________________

(in reply to MarkShot)

Post #: 34

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/13/2016 3:02:23 PM

MarkShot

Posts: 6671
Joined: 3/29/2003
Status: offline

Keeping the targets as tight as possible got me 12 buildings lost.

< Message edited by MarkShot -- 6/13/2016 3:05:17 PM >

_____________________________

Never more! (I've had enough. Sliterine has raised mediocrity to an art form!)

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 35

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/13/2016 4:28:45 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

Great news.

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to MarkShot)

Post #: 36

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/13/2016 8:13:56 PM

MarkShot

Posts: 6671
Joined: 3/29/2003
Status: offline

Mike and team,

This is pretty much the best I can do with program parameters and given resources. This is assuming I was to wipe out the SAM threat. (Which I believe that I can do.) (The air threat is totally trivial.)

I believe this number could be increased by manually managing every planes' attack run. As it would allow you to spot and concentrate on buildings already suffering damage. Doing so would reduce your total weapons expenditure. (Buildings randomly seem to suffer damage as a result of nearby blast concussion. So, even with guided weapons good candidates for follow on strikes appear. Further, in theory a preponderance of strikes which good locality working out from a damage center would probably achieve the most with the least.)

Now, this has all been very interesting. (an exercise in understanding the air strike options and UI.) You have no idea the number of things which I tried.

But I don't think I want to micro-manage my battles for maybe a 100% improvement in combat results. Part of the attraction of this game is that it is operational and not a flight simulator. I want to make strategic and operational decisions as opposed to determine platform by who to target; exactly how many weapons to allocate; and follow up on every weapon strike to repeat the whole cycle.

Having spent 10 years working on a premier operational title, you only have one way to make micromanagement NOT to be the certain choice in all scenarios: That is that micromanagement will result in a performance penalty of some form such that the more micromanagement the greater the penalty. Thus, you reach a tipping point where the AI and high level routines are a better choice.

Additionally, it helps to model the OODA loop. I don't mean in how quickly a missile can come off the rails, but that two much hands on commanding introduces intolerable delays which allows the enemy to get inside your OODA loop and be calling the shots. (I hope I am being clear.)

SIDE: CVW-15
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------

EXPENDITURES:
------------------
8x AGM-62B Walleye II ER/DL
16x GBU-10E/B Paveway II LGB [Mk84]
160x Mk82 500lb LDGP

SIDE: Red Side
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
3x A/C Hardened Aircraft Shelter (1x Medium Aircraft)
10x Building (Large)

EXPENDITURES:
------------------

< Message edited by MarkShot -- 6/13/2016 8:31:34 PM >

_____________________________

Never more! (I've had enough. Sliterine has raised mediocrity to an art form!)

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 37

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/13/2016 8:27:37 PM

MarkShot

Posts: 6671
Joined: 3/29/2003
Status: offline

Mike and team,

Note the scenario calls for 20 buildings to be destroyed.

First, as the briefing mainly focuses on introducing missions, I think it falls short of what the real solution is here (manual ops).

Second, it may just be my biased, but tutorials should not be hard to win. They are to illustrate concepts and teach mechanics. Not to be puzzle problems.

Now, I know this scenario has changed as I watched Baloogan play it on YouTube with v1.00. Also, I know as a beta tester that few want to do regression testing of remedial stuff with each new patch. It's the expert scenarios with sizzle that keeps beta testers content and busy.

A tutorial scenario for a new player should take hours and not days.

Feel free to delete my experience again (but experience is relevant to contributions):

* I have a career of systems design.

* I've beta/designed/documented games for over 10 years.

* And I've done the business side of indie games too.

NOW, DELETE AWAY. (But before you do, realize time and effort goes into sharing test results and perceptions with you. I have a life and other things to do, but I appreciate the dedication it takes to make such products that I can experience worlds unknown. So, it is with experience and generosity that I write ... not trolling or disparaging your work.)

_____________________________

Never more! (I've had enough. Sliterine has raised mediocrity to an art form!)

(in reply to MarkShot)

Post #: 38

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/13/2016 11:13:18 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

Mark we appreciate anything positive you contribute but unfortunately got no time for whatever this is. Sorry you're angry and feel like you have to validate yourself. I have no idea why as we've been responsive. We've got updating the air ops scenario on our list.

Thanks

Mike

< Message edited by mikmyk -- 6/13/2016 11:20:02 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to MarkShot)

Post #: 39

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/14/2016 5:48:42 AM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

Hold on, I'll dig into

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to MarkShot)

Post #: 40

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/14/2016 7:11:43 AM

Dimitris

Posts: 12385
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

I have a suspicion about what is going on.

Prior to v1.11, unguided bombs (and rockets) were aimed individually by aircraft during attacks on surface targets. So for example an F-16 dropping 12x Mk82 bombs was able to aim each bomb individually, either on the same single target or against multiple individual targets. In reality, this is a capability that only became feasible with INS/GPS guided weapons (like the JDAM family), and was hitherto possible only for MIRVs on ballistic missiles.

Unguided weapons, when employed in a salvo (multiple weapons per attack), are released in a "stick" pattern, with the "middle of the pack" typically aimed straight at the target aimpoint and the rest straddling it fore and aft. This gives a good probability that the target will be direct-hit or sufficiently near-missed by either the middle bomb or the immediately next or after. A classic example of stick bombing is the "Black Buck" attack on the Port Stanley runway:

(In this case the stick fell a bit short of the runway.)

Beginning with v1.11, to properly model this restriction of unguided weapons (otherwise why bother with JDAMs?) we applied a model of stick bombing, as described here: http://www.warfaresims.com/?page_id=2696

The practical effects of this on gameplay are twofold:

1) It becomes more firepower-efficient to perform multiple attacks on the same target(s) with fewer (or even single) weapons per attack, rather than dump all weapons on a single pass (since stick bombing is inherently inefficient). IIRC this can be configured via the WRA. Of course in a "hot" target area making multiple passes is an invitation to get shot down, just like in RL. (This BTW, along with all-weather & altitude-insensitive precision capability, was the main driver behind the development of JDAM)

2) The number of targets that can be effectively attacked with a finite number of unguided munitions is reduced, again because of the inherent inefficiency of stick bombing. Unless otherwise directed by WRA settings, the virtual pilots will naturally want to dump their loads and get out of dodge rather than stick around for repeated passes.

I suspect that the latter effect is what Mark experienced. Our dev team will check this. If this is indeed the cause, we may have to adjust the "destroy X number of targets" victory thresholds on scenarios that heavily rely on unguided munitions (this tutorial is one such example; "Down Town" also comes to mind), or update briefings with the instruction that multiple-pass attacks may become necessary to service mission targets.

Thanks.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 41

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/14/2016 7:14:15 AM

MarkShot

Posts: 6671
Joined: 3/29/2003
Status: offline

Mike,

Since you unlocked. I am not angry. I provide feedback on every piece of software I own like utility software; especially small companies who listen. If I was angry, I wouldn't take the time.

(True story: I was trading stocks with an online brokerage using their advanced desktop. I had enough feedback on issues that they offered me a job. Sadly, I found out I am better at software than trading stocks!)

If I put some of my experience down, it is simply that you know who you are talking to. I know nothing about air/naval ops, but I am letting you know where I do have experience.

Emsoy,

Here is another thing I find is odd. If let them come straight in per ROE, they only score 4-5 buildings same target list. If I let them use the autoplanner to strike from different axis you get 10-12 as you see above. It should be noted, I have removed the air and SAM opposition. There is absolutely no defense. So, why should this matter?

Finally, I am going to try a manual attack:

(1) Dumb bomb flight bombs in line with buildings. One plane heading East hits #2 of 4 in the line. Another heading West hits #3 of 4 in the line. The idea is falling short or long does damage.

(2) The surviving buildings are picked off by precision weapons.

(3) Remaining precision weapons strike tight clusters; one weapon per building. Damage exceeds actual impact. Damaged buildings get hit by follow on strikes and you work out from the epicenter.

We will see how I do.

< Message edited by MarkShot -- 6/14/2016 7:18:47 AM >

_____________________________

Never more! (I've had enough. Sliterine has raised mediocrity to an art form!)

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 42

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/14/2016 7:25:49 AM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

Thanks :)

Could you post savegames of the various observations please? Along with step-by-step instructions on how to reproduce? As we've taked about many times earlier there's a million ways to so stuff in the sim and I may not see the same as you because I may use a different method.

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to MarkShot)

Post #: 43

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/14/2016 7:34:06 AM

MarkShot

Posts: 6671
Joined: 3/29/2003
Status: offline

Here is what I have done. I have a script that changes your autosave (first one into a checkpoint); I don't use the save game feature. The script runs continuously in background. When it detects the archive bit flip, it copies and time stamps the autosave clearing the archive bit. In the checkpoint directory, I annotate time stamped saves of interest so that I can reload points of interest.

I can send you now. The scenario made that has no SAMS and no MIGS (just targets). I can send you the checkpoints with the latest illustrating my doctrine, WRA, and missions which correspond to the losses and expenditures above.

PM me an email address, and I will send you a zip.

Thanks.

_____________________________

Never more! (I've had enough. Sliterine has raised mediocrity to an art form!)

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 44

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/14/2016 7:47:25 AM

Dimitris

Posts: 12385
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

Mark,

1) Thanks for your time on researching this possible issue on the air ops tutorial. Give a try to any of the 300+ other CMANO scenarios that relies less on unguided munitions (typically more recent-date ones). If my hunch is correct, you should not face this problem on them (at least to this extent).

2) "You only have one way to make micromanagement NOT to be the certain choice in all scenarios: That is that micromanagement will result in a performance penalty of some form such that the more micromanagement the greater the penalty. Thus, you reach a tipping point where the AI and high level routines are a better choice."

Agreed, and this is generally our goal as well. Your experience with the tutorial scenario is atypical, and as you yourself noted it doesn't match either Baloogan's video or the feedback we have been getting on this scenario from most beginner users (the story typically runs like "initially I tried to micromanage everything but was swamped with details, then I put missions to good use and it was a breeze"). If my suspicion about the cause of this issue (see above) is correct, this may explain why you are the first to notice it.

3) You are still CV-dropping. This is not a job interview. I have worked on financial systems with "money per second" that would pay over your life's-worth salary 10 times over. Mike here worked for years on medical systems where a software bug can literally _kill people_. Paul Bridge traded machine gun fire with Argie attack jets and had to scoop the blood of his mates from his frigate's deck (I won't even go into the gory details of his more recent counter-piracy tours). Ragnar works daily on stuff that he cannot talk about even to his wife, on pain of for-life jail. You are not impressing anyone.

Your arguments can have merit, so let them stand on their own.

4) "Having spent 10 years working on a premier operational title --" _SIGH_.

"Back when we were working on the Command Ops series, we found out that XYZ" <--- See how much better this goes? You don't have to annoy people to get your point accross.

5) "Feel free to delete my experience again" <--- Sorry, but I cannot think of any other word that better describes this than "trolling". Perhaps someone else with a better command of the English language can come up with a more appropriate definition. ("Passive agressive"...?)

6) Of everything that you posted in this thread, arguably the most helpful post was this: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4097650 . You may want to reflect on why.

This is real life, not "House MD". To effect change, it's not enough to have a valid point.

Thanks.

-----

EDIT: Saw your last post while I was finishing this up. That's a step in the right direction.

< Message edited by Sunburn -- 6/14/2016 8:14:25 AM >

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 45

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/14/2016 8:27:31 AM

MarkShot

Posts: 6671
Joined: 3/29/2003
Status: offline

Send me a PM. I will zip what you need.

Knowing peoples backgrounds, I like that. RDOA/HTTR/COTA/BFTB/CO2 (3 of 5 were Matrix projects before the Slitherine purchase). We had systems types, military types, historian types, ... it was the fusion of skills that make the result so much more than any individual could have.

I really meant no offense. Technically, I think I am still under a Beta agreement (legacy Matrix). But I think no one left here knows me but for Erik. (Also, my beta days are behind. I hear the clock ticking, and just want to play games.)

What I seek from CMANO is an operational experience on par with CO2, but with planes and ships as opposed to WWII ground forces.

Whatever regression issues there might be with this tutorial, I have learned a great deal of the game from monkeying around with it.

I hope we can get past any ill feelings. I want to enjoy the game. I would like to point out issues I spot (they will most likely be software and not content/simulation).

I have attached a zip if you prefer not to do emails. (It was small enough.)

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Never more! (I've had enough. Sliterine has raised mediocrity to an art form!)

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 46

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/14/2016 8:33:45 AM

MarkShot

Posts: 6671
Joined: 3/29/2003
Status: offline

By the way, this is how I changed your autosave into a game checkpointing facility.

WinTitle(WinName(), "SavCkpt(CMANO)")

; ----- Definitions ------

SourceFile="E:\Games\CMANO\Scenarios\Autosave.scen"
DestinationDir="E:\Games\CMANO\Scenarios\_CMANO Chkpt\"
Interval=1

; ----- Monitor Save Game Status -----

While @true
If FileExist(SourceFile) then ; wait for file to appear
Attr=FileAttrGet(SourceFile)
If StrSub(attr, 2, 1) == "A" Then GoSub CopySaveGame
End If
TimeDelay(Interval)
End While

; ----- Shut Down -----

Exit

Message("Debug", "Pause")

; ##### CopySaveGame #####

:CopySaveGame

; ----- Form file name -----

Delay(8); Stabilize
BaseName=FileTimeGetEx(SourceFile, 2)
ReplaceName=StrClean(BaseName, ":", "", @False, 1)
ReplaceName=StrSub(ReplaceName, 1, 14)
ReplaceName=StrCat(StrSub(ReplaceName, 1, 8), " ", StrSub(ReplaceName, 9, 6), ".scen")
TargetName=StrCat(DestinationDir, ReplaceName)
ErrorMode(@OFF)
FileCopy(SourceFile, TargetName, @False)
ErrorMode(@ON)
FileAttrSet(SourceFile, "a") ; clear the flag

Return

_____________________________

Never more! (I've had enough. Sliterine has raised mediocrity to an art form!)

(in reply to MarkShot)

Post #: 47

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/14/2016 8:44:04 AM

MarkShot

Posts: 6671
Joined: 3/29/2003
Status: offline

Actually, load:

20160614 022949 Revised WRA (1 on harderned).scen

and run.

_____________________________

Never more! (I've had enough. Sliterine has raised mediocrity to an art form!)

(in reply to MarkShot)

Post #: 48

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/14/2016 10:53:09 AM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

Thanks for the file, will dig into tonight

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to MarkShot)

Post #: 49

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/14/2016 5:47:59 PM

MarkShot

Posts: 6671
Joined: 3/29/2003
Status: offline

These are my results with totally manual bombing attempting to always pick the most likely building not to survive the next strike:

SIDE: CVW-15
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------

EXPENDITURES:
------------------
8x AGM-62B Walleye II ER/DL
16x GBU-10E/B Paveway II LGB [Mk84]
160x Mk82 500lb LDGP

SIDE: Red Side
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
4x A/C Hardened Aircraft Shelter (1x Medium Aircraft)
10x Building (Large)

EXPENDITURES:
------------------

_____________________________

Never more! (I've had enough. Sliterine has raised mediocrity to an art form!)

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 50

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/14/2016 5:49:19 PM

MarkShot

Posts: 6671
Joined: 3/29/2003
Status: offline

No real quantitative difference between mission and manual.

_____________________________

Never more! (I've had enough. Sliterine has raised mediocrity to an art form!)

(in reply to MarkShot)

Post #: 51

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/15/2016 6:03:53 AM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

Work is underway. Will need a few days, complex stuff. Thanks!

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to MarkShot)

Post #: 52

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/15/2016 8:28:46 PM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

Will this satisfy your needs, you think?

Feedback and comments are always welcomed

The CEP calcs thows the stick of bombs 'off target' by a random distance and direction, in this case ca 15 short of the DPI.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by emsoy -- 6/15/2016 8:32:53 PM >

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 53

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/15/2016 8:31:46 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

Nice work Mr. Emsoy!

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 54

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/15/2016 9:01:07 PM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

More, re-running the above setup (A-7E with 18x Mk82s at low altitude):

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by emsoy -- 6/15/2016 9:04:23 PM >

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 55

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/15/2016 9:04:41 PM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

More, this time with a RAF Vulcan bomber, 21x 1000lb'ers from medium altitude

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by emsoy -- 6/15/2016 9:20:25 PM >

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 56

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/15/2016 9:19:06 PM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

And of course... the B-52, our #1 fav!

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 57

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/15/2016 11:41:45 PM

wqc12345

Posts: 250
Joined: 12/7/2015
From: San Francisco, CA
Status: offline

I made one of those my desktop wallpaper. Awesome!

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 58

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/16/2016 12:40:07 AM

Kitchens Sink

Posts: 402
Joined: 5/4/2014
Status: offline

Curtis LeMay would definitely approve!

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 59

RE: The first air ops tutorial - 6/16/2016 1:47:08 AM

MarkShot

Posts: 6671
Joined: 3/29/2003
Status: offline

Thanks. A big improvement!

Let me mention a related difficulty in such "stick" bombing runs.

The game engine moves the bearing of the attack as the plane attempts to turn in even when the plane is 20-30 miles out. Instead the engine should get the user/commander's intent that I want it to maneuver to fly this particular profile; especially if I give it enough lead distance to make the corrects. But the engine, treats my profile as a desired point rather than a desired line.

Thanks again for your support and improvements!

_____________________________

Never more! (I've had enough. Sliterine has raised mediocrity to an art form!)

(in reply to Kitchens Sink)

Post #: 60