Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Weapons effectiveness: a statistical analysis

 
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 >> Weapons effectiveness: a statistical analysis Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Weapons effectiveness: a statistical analysis - 12/1/2020 11:23:32 PM   
Steve04

 

Posts: 79
Joined: 12/1/2020
From: Firenze - Italia
Status: offline
I know this is unusual, but for me, the report and statistical analysis at the end of each scenario is perhaps the most important thing.
Already with the old Harpoon 3, I have implemented a database, in the form of a spreadsheet, in which I reported all the uses of the various weapons (expenditures - both by the Human and the A.I.side) and their outcome.
Obviously, after playing and analyzing a few dozen scenarios, the results, in terms of the effectiveness of the various weapons (percentage ratio between hits scored and quantity fired), began to be interesting and with a certain reliability.
I would also like to do something like this with the current version of the old Harpoon, or "Commad: modern operations".
I purchased this splendid product on Steam a few days ago and, after trying a series of Tutorials, I tried my hand at the first scenario, choosing "A helping hand", a situation of medium complexity and difficulty, set in the Midway area, where a mixed NATO force, including a British task force, plus some American air / naval assets is called to defend the famous Pacific island against the Soviet threat, centered on a Carrier group with the Minsk helicopter carrier, some surface and underwater units, equipped with dangerous long-range cruise missiles, as well as a few four-engined aircraft from distant Kamchatka.
The scenario turned out to be interesting and in the end I took success, with a strategy, first prudent and then gradually more aggressive, mainly aimed at eliminating Minsk, for a total of 750 pts.
It is therefore interesting to observe, not only the final detection of losses / expenditures, but, as I said, the performance of each single weapon system, detected, minute by minute, through the truly exhaustive message logs, during the battle.

SCENARIO: A HELPING HAND (Human UK/USA – A.I. URSS) – area Midway
FINAL RESULT: p. 750
SIDE: United States / UK Forces
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
2x A-4M Skyhawk...........................(by SA-1 Goa of Kresta I)
1x P-3C Orion Update II ..................(by SA-1 Goa of Kanin)
1x SH-2F Seasprite LAMPS I................(loss with FF Garcia)
1x UH-1N Huey.............................(by SA-1 Goa of Kotlin)
1x FF 1040 Garcia.........................(by SS-3 Shaddock of Submarine ?)

EXPENDITURES:
------------------
9x AIM-9H Sidewinder......................(hit % 66,67)
11x RUR-5A M.4 [Mk46 Mod 2]...............(hit % 00,00)
5x AN/SSQ-47 Julie A.R.Only
3x Mk44 Mod 1.............................(hit % 66,67)
37x SSQ-947 Julie A.R.Only [AN/SSQ-47]
16x AGM-84A Harpoon IP....................(hit % 25,00)
5x Mk46 LWT Mod 2.........................(hit % 40,00)
5x NT-37C.................................(hit % 40,00)
51x 127mm/38 HE-PD [HiCap]................(hit % 13,73)
6x AJ.168 Martel..........................(hit % 40,00)
76x HYDRA 70mm Rocket.....................(hit % 50,00)
24x AIM-7E2 Sparrow III...................(hit % 30,43)
6x AIM-9D Sidewinder......................(hit % 33,33)
8x AS.37 Martel [ARM].....................(hit % 25,00)
4x AGM-62A Walleye I ER/DL................(hit % 50,00)
18x Mk13 1000lb GPB.......................(hit % 72,22)
4x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
8x Mk82 500lb LDGP........................(hit % 62,50)
8x ZUNI 127mm HVAR Rocket.................(hit % 50,00)

SIDE: Soviet Union
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
15x Ka-25BSh Hormone A..................(by 1 Sid.D – 3 Sparrow - 4 Sid.H - 6 sunk with ships – 1 other)
2x Ka-25PS Hormone C....................(by 2 sunk with Minsk)
2x Ka-25Ts Hormone B....................(by 2 sunk with Minsk)
2x Tu-95RT Bear D ......................(by 2 Sidewinder H)
16x Yak-38 Forger A.....................(by 6 Sparrow - 1 Sid.D - 9 sunk with Minsk)
1x BPK Kanin [Pr.57A Gnevny]............(by 4 127mm – 2 AJ-168 Martel – 26 Hydra)
1x BPK Kresta II [Pr.1134A Berkut A]....(by 2 Harpoon)
1x KU Admiral Senyavin..................(by 4 127mm – 9 Hydra)
1x SKR Kotlin [Pr.56 Spokoinyy].........(by 2 NCT-37C – 1 Mk.13 1000lbs.)
1x TAKR Minsk [Pr.1143 Krechyet]........(by 2 Martel AS-37 – 3 Harpoon – 2 Walleye – 12 Mk.13 1000lbs)
1x VTR Boris Chilikin [Pr.1559V]........(by 3 Mk.82 500lbs.)
1x PLA-659T Echo I......................(by 1 Mk.46)
1x PLARK-675MK Echo II..................(by 2 Mk. 44)
1x PLRK-651 Juliett.....................(by 1 Mk.46)

EXPENDITURES:
------------------
5x Generic Flare Salvo
10x Generic Acoustic Decoy
8x Generic Chaff Rocket
18x SA-N-1b Goa.........................(hit % 18,75)
416x RGB-1
64x AK-230 30mm/65 Twin Burst [0 r].....(hit % 01,56)
62x 57mm/81 ZIF-75 Quad DP Burst [6]....(hit % 01,61)
4x SS-N-3c Shaddock.....................(hit % 25,00)
14x PK-2 Chaff [TSP-47]
21x SA-N-3b Goblet [4K65]...............(hit % 09,52)
8x SA-N-4a Gecko [9M33].................(hit % 12,50)
15x AK-630 30mm/65 Gatling [400 r]......(hit % 13,33)
2x PK-2 Flare [TST-47]
11x AK-726 76mm/60 Twin HE [2 r]........(hit % 00,00)


I specify that the excess shots (launched against a target already hit) are included in the expenditures, but obviously excluded from the calculation of the percentage of hits (because they can't to be considered as "miss").
I specify also that, given the not exceptional intensity of the battle, it was almost always possible for me to use the Manual Engage mode for weapons and this allowed me to better test the procedure and the launch parameters for the individual systems, and finally, more fun !
Overall the results were decent, a little disappointing only for the Sparrows III and especially the RUR5 ASROC (these however launched automatically) with the Mk.46 torpedoes that circled around a stationary submarine, until they ran out of fuel, without being able to engage and hit it.
A moderately good performance also offered the old Soviet Goa against airplanes and some success for the Goblets against incoming missiles.
Now on to the next scenario...


< Message edited by Steve04 -- 12/5/2020 3:02:25 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Weapons effectiveness: a statistical analysis - 12/2/2020 5:48:06 AM   
Rory Noonan

 

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline
quote:

I know this is unusual, but for me, the report and statistical analysis at the end of each scenario is perhaps the most important thing.


Not at all, in fact the professional interest in this side of the sim lead to Command: Professional Edition. You're amongst good company if you're into the numbers behind the sim!

_____________________________


(in reply to Steve04)
Post #: 2
RE: Weapons effectiveness: a statistical analysis - 12/5/2020 2:55:47 PM   
Steve04

 

Posts: 79
Joined: 12/1/2020
From: Firenze - Italia
Status: offline
BREAKING BELBEK
In my learning curve, I completed a second scenario, again from the Standing Alone stock series, namely Breaking Belbek, with Russia vs. Ukraine - 1997, then with Soviet-made armaments. I must say that, despite the clear superiority of the Russians, from the point of view of the aviation, the scenario presents some not indifferent surprises, as the anti-aircraft defenses of Ukraine have proved almost insurmountable ... In fact, contrary to the initial predictions, which spoke generically of several anti-aircraft batteries, in reality the Ukrainians have at their disposal an avalanche of excellent SAMs, a few very long-range Gammons, but an industrial quantity of Grumble that have proved deadly, both against aircraft which, especially against the fast ASuW missiles (Kyle, Karen, Kitchen etc.). Instead, the ten obsolete Su-15 Flagons were able to put up little resistance against the Alamos and the deadly Archers of the Fulcrum and Flankers. In the end, although the Belbek base could not be neutralized (too far for range, especially SU-25 Frogfoot, and lack of time to carry out second waves for most other aircraft), the results give Russia a all too generous "Triumph", with 285 victory points. The final statistics, with the detailed analysis of the results of each weapon, highlight the difficulty of the Russians to deal with the situation, as well as the great reliability of the Ukrainian anti-aircraft system. Surely, having to play the scenario a second time, I would adopt a more aggressive tactic for the Russians, trying to saturate the SAM sites with fewer but more massive air attacks, rather than trying to exhaust the defenses with a series of attacks. However, here is what emerged at the end of the battle:

SCENARIO: BREAKING BELBEK (Human RUSSIA – A.I. UKRAINE) – area Crimea
FINAL RESULT: TRIUMPH p. 285
SIDE: Russia
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
3x MiG-29S Fulcrum C............................(2 Grumble/b – 1 Anab F IR)
10x Su-24 Fencer C..............................(6 Grumble/b – 2 Grumble/a)
8x Su-25 Frogfoot A.............................(7 Grumble/b – 1 Aphid)
8x Su-27S Flanker B.............................(1 Grumble/a – 6 Grumble/b – 1 Fuel)
2x Tu-22M-2 Backfire B..........................(2 Grumble/a)


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
1x 30mm Gsh-30-1Burst [30r.Flanker].............(hit% 00,00)
3x 30mm Gsh-30-2Burst [50r.Frogfoot]............(hit% 33,33)
11x AA-10 Alamo A [MR TSARH]....................(hit% 36,36)
4x AA-10 Alamo C [LR TSARH].....................(hit% 25,00)
2x AA-10 Alamo D [LR IR]........................(hit% 00,00)
7x AA-11 Archer ................................(hit% 71,43)
31x AS-10 Karen.................................(hit% 65,52)
16x AS-4 Kitchen B Mod 2........................(hit% 00,00)
19x AS-9 Kyle...................................(hit% 15,79)
22x OFAB-250-270 Frag...........................(hit% 18,18)
6x FAB-500M-54 GPB..............................(hit% 50,00)
22x Generic Chaff Salvo[4x Cart]
8x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cart]
8x Generic Chaff Salvo [8x Cartridges]
2x Generic Flare Salvo [3x Cartridges, Single Spectral]
1x Generic Flare Salvo [4x Cartridges, Single Spectral]



SIDE: Ukraine
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
6x 23mm ZU-23-2 [Cargo].........................(2 Karen – 2 OFAB - ???)
1x Building (Odd Pair HF) [Cargo]...............(1 Karen)
1x Building (Square Pair) [Cargo]...............(1 Karen)
1x Building (Tall King C) [Cargo]...............(1 Karen)
3x Radar (Bar Lock A)...........................(1 Kyle – 1 FAB 500 - ???)
1x Radar (Spoon Rest D).........................(???)
2x Radar (Tall King A)..........................(1 Karen)
2x Radar (Tin Shield B).........................(FAB 500 ???)
12x SA-10a Grumble TEL [Cargo]..................(1 Kyle – 4 Karen – 1 OFAB - ???)
16x SA-10b Grumble TEL [Cargo]..................(4 Karen – 1 30mm Frogfoot – 2 FAB 500 - ???)
6x SA-5c Gammon Single Rail [Cargo].............(5 Karen)
10x Su-15TM Flagon E/F..........................(4 Alamo A MR – 5 Archer – 1 Alamo C LR)
3x Vehicle (Clam Shell) [Cargo].................(???)
1x Vehicle (Flap Lid A) [Cargo].................(???)
2x Vehicle (Flap Lid B) [Cargo].................(???)


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
3x 23mm Gsh-6-23 [50 rnds]......................(Hit% 00,00)
39x 23mm ZU-23-2 Burst [20 rnds]................(Hit% 00,00)
4x AA-3 Advanced Anab E [SARH]..................(Hit% 00,00)
1x AA-3 Advanced Anab F [IR]....................(Hit%100,00)
5x AA-8 Aphid...................................(Hit% 20,00)
44x SA-10a Grumble..............................(Hit% 27,27)
133x SA-10b Grumble.............................(Hit% 36,84)
10x SA-5c Gammon................................(Hit% 20,00)


I specify that the shots in excess (with target already hit ...), although counted in the expenditures, do not enter into the calculation of the percentage of hits, as they cannot be considered "missed". On the other hand, hits vanished by weapon malfunctions are counted as missed.
Very well, apart from the Grumble, were the performances of the AS-10 Karen, brought to the target by the Su-25 Frogfoot at low altitude (often hiding among the reliefs, thanks also to the LOS tool, albeit at the price of some losses), while the Kyle and above all the Kitchens were well intercepted, at a distance by the Ukrainian SAMs, often mounted on mobile ramps and not easy to identify.
I specify that, given the not exceptional intensity of the battle, I set the ROE with the air strikes on HOLD and the Automatic Evasion on NO, this allowing me to always conduct attacks manually, managing to better test the procedure and the launch parameters for the individual systems, and finally, more fun !
It should be noted that sometimes, especially with weapons at short range, it is not always possible to identify exactly the attribution of a kill. In particular, I noticed that irons / unguided bombs (such as OFAB or FAB) often give rise to a "missed" message in the weapon endgame section of the message logs, although the hit on the target was graphically signaled with the classic "yellow explosion" and the loss is detectable in the losses / expenditure report. This I believe may be the result of a "near missed", which however can cause the destruction or the damage of the target. Some sharerd kills can also occur, especially when multiple weapons fire at the same target. These difficulties in detecting may be the cause of the fact that - in the final analysis - I was not able to attribute some losses to any weapon with certainty (after all I think that this can sometimes also really happen). However, this has little relevance to the final purpose of this analysis.
Now on to the next scenario...


< Message edited by Steve04 -- 12/5/2020 3:37:22 PM >

(in reply to Rory Noonan)
Post #: 3
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Weapons effectiveness: a statistical analysis Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.445