Parameters for not authorized fire

[carll11]

I am getting a lot of not authorized or unauthorized to fire on hex, or whatever the message reads....the hex has a sighted enemy whom has fired on me and I am 2 hexs away spotting....

[Jason Petho]

For which scenario? Or just in general?

[berto]

In the Vietnam War, artillery fire was often denied authorization for political reasons. In the old "Tour of Duty" TV series, there is an episode where a South Vietnamese province chief withholds artillery fire authorization because his runaway wife is hiding out somewhere in the area of operations. In other cases (not in the TV series as I recall), political authorities -- at all levels of government -- would bargain for a quid pro quo before granting permission to fire away. In the Tet '68 Battle of Saigon, most artillery fire (and airstrikes) were disapproved in and around the city. Could be any reason, from one instance to the next, you never knew when or why artillery fire (and airstrikes) might be denied, or not.

In CS:Vietnam, these "authorization denied" instances are abstracted, are randomized. As in Real Life, they are nuisances designed to annoy and to frustrate. In the game, there is no reason for them to happen "a lot" except due to a run of bad luck.

Note that there are AAI parameters

indirect_fire_denied_prob, // Probability indirect firing authorization denied when ordered vs. habitat hexes. [#68]
airstrike_denied_prob, // Probability airstrike authorization denied when ordered vs. habitat hexes. [#191]

governing the probability of "authorization denied". They can be tweaked as needed.

[carll11]

For which scenario? Or just in general?

For a scn I created...

[carll11]

In the Vietnam War, artillery fire was often denied authorization for political reasons. In the old "Tour of Duty" TV series, there is an episode where a South Vietnamese province chief withholds artillery fire authorization because his runaway wife is hiding out somewhere in the area of operations. In other cases (not in the TV series as I recall), political authorities -- at all levels of government -- would bargain for a quid pro quo before granting permission to fire away. In the Tet '68 Battle of Saigon, most artillery fire (and airstrikes) were disapproved in and around the city. Could be any reason, from one instance to the next, you never knew when or why artillery fire (and airstrikes) might be denied, or not.

In CS:Vietnam, these "authorization denied" instances are abstracted, are randomized. As in Real Life, they are nuisances designed to annoy and to frustrate. In the game, there is no reason for them to happen "a lot" except due to a run of bad luck.

Note that there are AAI parameters

indirect_fire_denied_prob, // Probability indirect firing authorization denied when ordered vs. habitat hexes. [#68]
airstrike_denied_prob, // Probability airstrike authorization denied when ordered vs. habitat hexes. [#191]

governing the probability of "authorization denied". They can be tweaked as needed.

Thank you berto.

I understand the concept,and if this were recon by fire on villages I absolutely agree, that was verboten ( unless they had declared a FF zone before hand, which they did according to the AO), however, I can attest that after 15 mins engaging with and taking fire from a MG and squad with Aks, there was no power on this earth that would stop us from hitting them with arty, in 18 months, I've never seen it.

In any event, keeping the annoyance factor in mind, best laid plans and all that which definitely existed, i have modified the init.ai file, from 10 to 5, I assume that number represents a straight %? ( and I assume my memory is correct, that is the file top modify etc.)

[berto]

Right, the prob is a straight percentage.

Yeah, by abstracting it and making "authorization denied" a simple random chance, we lose a lot of nuance. There will be situations like you say where, in reality, there would be no stopping it, and "authorization denied" doesn't make good sense.

By making the prob an AAI parameter, one can either modify it in a custom scenario .ai file (if you don't generalize the prob globally, in your install's init.ai file). Or you can follow the technique described here

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 0#p4953950

to alter the prob(s) within the scenario .lua file. This is probably better than creating a <scenario>.ai file, as the .lua file technique is much simpler.

There are scenarios where the entire AO is a free-fire zone, and where the usual EP maluses for firing on habitat hexes don't apply. We will review whether, in those scenarios, the "authorization denied" prob(s) might be reduced to 0.

[berto]

I am giving some thought to making the "authorizing denied" more nuanced, more granular. Where if the enemy fires from a habitat hex, for that hex all constraints lapse, no arty fire/airstrike denials, no EP maluses. Not for the near future, but early next year. We shall see.

[berto]

I understand the concept,and if this were recon by fire on villages I absolutely agree, that was verboten ( unless they had declared a FF zone before hand, which they did according to the AO), however, I can attest that after 15 mins engaging with and taking fire from a MG and squad with Aks, there was no power on this earth that would stop us from hitting them with arty, in 18 months, I've never seen it.

You will be happy to learn that in the latest revisions:

• The game engine tracks and remembers, for every hex, whether or not enemy were observed to (in)direct fire or assault from a hex.
• If enemy has fired/assaulted from a hex, there is 0% chance indirect fire or airstrikes on that hex will be blocked by "authorization denied".
• If enemy has fired/assaulted from a habitat hex, the EP penalty for indirect firing/airstriking that hex will be the same whether the hex is enemy occupied or not. (Before, the penalty was higher if unoccupied.)

[berto]

Update: Not just (in)direct fire, if an enemy otherwise assaults from a hex, an attack(from) flag is set for that hex also.