RE: Strike Mission Primer Discussion

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: Strike Mission Primer Discussion

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Modern] >> Harpoon 3 - Advanced Naval Warfare >> RE: Strike Mission Primer Discussion

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Strike Mission Primer Discussion - 1/10/2007 11:05:52 AM

cuthbo2001

Posts: 103
Joined: 6/20/2006
Status: offline

If I have read this right, targetting can only be done by the AI according to the criteria layed out in the WIKI, there is no way of specifically targetting a particular ship or facility. If so how then for instance can you configure a strike to punch through an AAW screen to attack a particular presumbably high value target?
thanks

Post #: 1

RE: Strike Mission Primer Discussion - 1/11/2007 1:17:16 AM

Michael104

Posts: 4
Joined: 1/6/2007
Status: offline

Thanks for the clarifacation on the AI vs human player control issues Dale. The constant posting by one of the forum members had me believing I as a player no longer had control of my own units. If something as easy as unchecking the staff handles allocation box, or plotting strike groups to withing launch range and attacking the desired target works as it used to then claims of "critical bugs" "totally broken strike code" etc are simply false for the person playing the scenario.

I can see how it would hamper scenario editors in building new scens. The bigger problem would be updating older scenarios. Some would require extensive rebuilds and still play quite differently than before.

I have not completely given up on the possibility that at a later time a tweak to this AI allocation thing that would restore control for the scen editors could eventually find it's way to the top of the priority list.

If we the Harpoon community work with the developers instead of butting heads ANW will evolve and improve just as Harpoon 3 did.
Michael

Post #: 2

RE: Strike Mission Primer Discussion - 1/11/2007 4:57:00 AM

mikmykWS

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

Course if it had been documented (in the manual, in the forum, in the wiki, wherever) prior too release that loud forum member may have had the opportunity to read about the behavior change before posting right?

I see that mistake isn't being made again and some documentation is being written. Woohoo

(in reply to Michael104)

Post #: 3

RE: Strike Mission Primer Discussion - 1/11/2007 6:12:32 AM

danrhayes

Posts: 51
Joined: 6/15/2006
Status: offline

Okay I must admit I'm finding this all a little confusing. I'm going to address some concerns I have using one of my own scenarios, just because I know what went into building it and the writers intent. Persian Glory simulates a full scale air assault by the Imperial Iran on Iraq. To strike at a single Iraqi base I may have had as many 6 separate strikes groups all set up to achieve as close to possible STOT. This is particularly import especially for the opening strikes because the fighters have cleared route through the defending air patrols but the defenders alert will be in the air soon and since they will be launching from the strikers target they don't have a particularly taxing intercept course. Now as my multiple groups arrive at the target area they have all been given specific target sets. Some will be targeting long range SAMs, other short range while others are after the airfield facilities themselves. Now given the variation in weapons ranges eg Standard ARMs Mavericks, LGBs, CBUs and iron bombs, some of the groups will come within weapons range of other targets they may be a threat to them while they ingress to thier designated target. Most likely that threat has already been allocated in the build process to a different group. Are my Maverick armed F-4s that are designated to take out the close in SHORADs going to start popping off at an SA-3 that has survived the initial attack run of the ARM group leaving the iron bomb armed F-5s behind them to weather a barage of unsupressed SA-8s and 9s? Are we still going to be able to build the sort of large set piece air strike scenarios that would feature so heavily in Central Europe conflict scenarios or as the opening gambit of any major regional conflict? Incidently how does a platform like the B-2 handle this situation. A B-2 may be tasked to hit Moscow,Beijing or Tehran an will flying within the range of a number of systems that could be a threat. Are the particulars of the platform (ie reduced RCS of a B-2) taken into account when determining the threat posed by an enemy unit?

The idea of the AI gaining a bit of initiative sounds great and has the potential to allow the creation of some scenarios without quite the same sort planning stress required at the moment. Ultimately it could mean more scenarios from a wider range folks rather the current , rather concentrated scenario sources. Hmm almost looks a plan to redistribute certain power dynamics. Must be paranoia. Anywhoo, I do think that here will be times when the ability to designate a single target regardless of the threat from other units will be missed. I'd hate to see the A-4s designated to hit the British CVs at the Falklands dumping thier bombs on the close guard escort and then having nothing left to sink the main threat.

Daniel

_____________________________