RE: why do air units rest so much?

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: why do air units rest so much?

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.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> RE: why do air units rest so much?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/16/2007 6:11:44 PM

Veers

Posts: 1324
Joined: 6/6/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Radu

I'd like to put my two cents in, preferably without leading to more temper flaring.

First,AdamRinkleff, when you dismiss the modelling of air combat in TOAW, you do so in what quality? Just as it has been asked before,are you military educated to question the expertise of the designers? Or just a frustrated gamer? Do you know for a *fact* that airforce operations are merely reduced to hopping in the plane,without a significant logistical/planning effort, entailing significant man-hours?

Second. Could you offer some additional details regarding the context of the occurrence ? In which scenario did this occur specifically? What losses did the unit take? Is it reorganization (complete with the orange bar) what you're talking about, or merely a sudden switch from 'Air Superiority' to 'Rest'? What does the Airforce Briefing Screen say before/after the purported mis-functioning?

Excellent questions.

_____________________________

To repeat history in a game is to be predictable.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.

(in reply to Radu)

Post #: 31

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/16/2007 7:59:10 PM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

Groupthink is not cool!

Lol. That's another first. No one's ever accused me of participating in 'groupthink' before. I almost feel comforted. 'See, I don't compulsively disagree with everybody.'

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to Adam Rinkleff)

Post #: 32

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/16/2007 10:01:48 PM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

Whoa, everybody just calm down here

Mr. Rinkleff,

You have raised a question that perhaps deserves to be answered. Now, your comments towards desert were rude and completely out of line. He is just trying to help. If you do not want what you consider �lame attempt to explain the pedantically obvious� you should not post questions on a public forum.

Before you indulge yourself in some fantasy that I am attacking you let me assure that I am not. On the contrary I am coming to your defense.

The TOAW community is too entrenched. Recent debates between several TOAW proponents and yourself, Mr vahauser, and some of the CA people are evidence enough. However, some of these people represent the most knowledgeable �experts� on the game. TOAW has been around for quite some time. Over the years many of these arguments and critiques have been brought up before. Often the results have been dismissed, incorporated, or added to the extensive �wish list.�

Your particular observation here appears to be one of convenience. You are simply annoyed by a feature. This does not necessarily mean the feature improperly handles what it is intended to model.

GD (Mr. Ben) has offered what seems to be a plausible explanation. Typically between GD, Colin, and Lemay and others you will get reasonable answers since they probably know the game better than anyone. If they seem too entrenched, they probably are (for example, Ben has no sense of humor and Lemay is not very good at expressing his ideas even when he is correct). Yet, you should take note that they are listening and responding to your posts, however inane.

Your comment regarding the questionable realism of TOAW is well deserved. It is a game. As such, it is one of the more realistic games available for modeling operational warfare�though I would argue it should be limited to covering warfare through only the 1950s, maybe 1960s, but no further. It has been noted, and generally accepted, that TOAW falls short at the extreme edges (2.5km and 50km scales).

Your comment about people or the game being �pro-Army� is possibly well deserved too (I am certainly �pro-Army� since I spent over a decade in the army and many months in combat�on the flip side I am under contract to study and critique Army methodology as it pertains to my subject matter expertise). Despite Mr. Koger�s background I find that the air model is somewhat lacking. But, again the initial design was to cover a specific period portraying specific elements of operational theory. Pertaining to the �track record� of which you speak I would like further elaboration as to what you mean.

I do believe some of your observations are warranted. Obviously your criticisms are welcome; otherwise people would not take the time to offer explanations or counter-arguments. You do, however, come off as being abrasive and rude�not willing to entertain discussion beyond ridicule of a system that none of us fully understand nor do you seem willing to debate and argue as one would expect a man with your level of education to do. Furthermore, if you think people are impressed by your so called credentials, I doubt it. I have a Ph.D. That trumps your M.A. Besides, an M.A. in military history lacks solid credibility in most academic circles since it is offered mostly through online schools, at least in the US (there are only a few notable exceptions so who am I to judge?).

TOAW is ambitious, that I will grant. Sometimes that ambition outweighs what it is actually capable of doing (go look at AT for an even more powerful editor despite the combat engines serious shortfalls). However, it is certainly one of the best systems out there. Your attacks on a community of gamers dedicated to improving it are largely unwarranted and unnecessary. Criticisms and questions are welcome and, provided they are reasonable, will and usually are responded to. Whether you like it or not, sometimes new ideas fail, sometimes they don�t.

Also, leave the King of Canada alone...judging him by his picture�are you serious?

All these attacks back and forth aside, hopefully you will take some time to answer Radu�s questions as this might lead to a better discussion to what I consider a worthwhile question about how air units perform.

My apologies for the long and didactic post .

(in reply to ColinWright)

Post #: 33

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/16/2007 10:26:56 PM

JAMiAM

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

Two thumbs up, for an excellent post.

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 34

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/16/2007 10:43:25 PM

Adam Rinkleff

Posts: 375
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline

quote:

Are you military educated to question the expertise of the designers?

Yes. I think the program has enormous potential, but there is a problem here with certain egotistical individuals who are so confident about their opinions that they seem dead-set against even allowing other designers to manipulate certain key values. Why would any of you care if I created a scenario with more durable aircraft? Why would you object? Why wouldn't you want a wargame with more flexibility in design? That's fine if Jamiam is too busy to change or fix it; all I'm doing is trying to figure out if there is a way to manipulate the editable values to get the proper performance, and apparently there isn't.

quote:

Do you know for a *fact* that airforce operations are merely reduced to hopping in the plane,without a significant logistical/planning effort, entailing significant man-hours?

I never said that, and I think it is ridiculous to try and deliberately misrepresent what I have said; what you are doing here is called a "strawman argument". In any case, I know for a *FACT* that a decent scenario editor should give designers a wide-range of flexibility in deciding how units perform, and that if I set supply to 100%, readiness to 100%, proficiency to 100%, along with formation proficiency to 100%, and formation supply to 100%, and I still have a recurring problem in which aircraft which have seen only a day or two of light combat are deciding to spontaenously rest for days on end... that is not realistic, and at the very least the program should re-assign them after they have rested for long enough.

quote:

In which scenario did this occur specifically?

I am experimenting with the scenario designer, and not any specific scenario; the weather is great, the units aren't taking heavy damage, their supply/prof/readi ratings are all high, and they are still summarily deciding to rest.

quote:

What losses did the unit take?

Less than 5%.

quote:

Is it reorganization (complete with the orange bar) what you're talking about, or merely a sudden switch from 'Air Superiority' to 'Rest'?

A sudden switch which is wholly unannounced by the program, thus requiring me to check on the air units every single turn, which is a bit annoying. I know that some people will respond that this is a "realistic" simulation of everything a real-life commander would have to do; well um, actually, in a real military the subordinates don't get to spontaenously decide that it's naptime.

quote:

What does the Airforce Briefing Screen say before/after the purported mis-functioning?

Nothing relevant so far as I can tell, what sort of information would you expect to see?

< Message edited by AdamRinkleff -- 11/16/2007 10:55:19 PM >

(in reply to Radu)

Post #: 35

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/16/2007 10:53:16 PM

Adam Rinkleff

Posts: 375
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline

quote:

nor do you seem willing to debate and argue

I didn't come here to debate and argue, I came here to ask a very specific question: How can I get my air units to stop resting spontaneously? If it can't be done, I think its a serious problem, but I'm not interested in arguing with people about it, especially when none of you are in any position to fix the program. If you think air forces sit around resting all day, fine; all I care about is getting my units to stop doing that so much. If you don't know a way to fix it, then just admit it; why sit here and try to convince me that its perfect, when I obviously disagree?

quote:

Your attacks on a community of gamers dedicated to improving it are largely unwarranted

Im not attacking anyone. I'm the one being flamed by trolls who think it is productive to follow me around and criticize everything I say; I don't follow them around making snide comments, that's trolling, and they are doing exactly that. Meanwhile, I'm trying to find people who actually understand how the program works, and how to get it to perform in a specific way, rather than people who simply want to assure me that its very realistic and I must be absurd to suggest that it might work differently.

If you don't like what I have to say, then don't read it, and don't respond to it. I respect other people's threads, and don't come in and spam them up with a bunch of BS naysaying attempts at flame-humor disagreement; it'd be nice if trolls like veers would do the same. About the only thing I've posted in a thread started by someone else is that I agreed with what they said, and just for that I got flamed by the lame trolls, so I really don't think I need accord their statements further respect.

< Message edited by AdamRinkleff -- 11/16/2007 11:06:00 PM >

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 36

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/16/2007 11:15:47 PM

desert

Posts: 827
Joined: 9/14/2006
Status: offline

There is no way to "fix" it (spontaneous resting) that anyone here has ever heard of, I think.

By the way, do pilots really fly all day long? I thought they had a set amount of combat missions per day.

_____________________________

"I would rather he had given me one more division"
- Rommel, when Hitler made him a Field Marshall

(in reply to Adam Rinkleff)

Post #: 37

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/16/2007 11:50:19 PM

Radu

Posts: 29
Joined: 11/6/2007
Status: offline

Ah, I think I've got the problem pinned down.

Micromanagement.

Having to tell (confirm) the air units every few turns "Yes,dammit,carry on", when no special events (like reorg from losses) took place.

I myself am new here, so I don't know wether this micromanagement burden can be removed in the first place. I personally only micromanage every turn small airforce scenarios, and in other instances I let the AI do the job.

But first thing's first: Have I defined the problem correctly? Is it a matter of micromanagement rather than reorg loss tolerance? (as apparently everyone else understood)

(in reply to desert)

Post #: 38

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/16/2007 11:50:57 PM

Adam Rinkleff

Posts: 375
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline

quote:

There is no way to "fix" it (spontaneous resting) that anyone here has ever heard of, I think.

Well, there should be, but I don't expect Jamiam to fix it so I guess that's the end of the thread. I suppose one solution would be to create lots of very small air units, and then at least some of them would keep flying.

quote:

By the way, do pilots really fly all day long?

Yah, its happened before, and I should really have the ability here to force my pilots to keep flying until they mutiny or fall out of the sky.

< Message edited by AdamRinkleff -- 11/16/2007 11:55:09 PM >

(in reply to desert)

Post #: 39

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/16/2007 11:57:24 PM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Radu

Ah, I think I've got the problem pinned down.

Micromanagement.

Having to tell (confirm) the air units every few turns "Yes,dammit,carry on", when no special events (like reorg from losses) took place.

I myself am new here, so I don't know wether this micromanagement burden can be removed in the first place. I personally only micromanage every turn small airforce scenarios, and in other instances I let the AI do the job.

But first thing's first: Have I defined the problem correctly? Is it a matter of micromanagement rather than reorg loss tolerance? (as apparently everyone else understood)

Well, first off, if you want fun and easy to play, TOAW is probably not the system for you (or for Adam, to be more precise). While it's possible to make too much of a good thing, TOAW is all about 'micromanagement.' No splashy special effects, no get falling-out-of-your chair-drunk and be able to play well anyway: it's all about thinking about your choices and carefully executing them. Get the MP's where they should be, position HQ's so that they'll be enhancing the supply of as many of the units in their formation as possible, look at the position you'll be in if the turn unexpectedly ends, ask yourself if continuing with this attack is really a good idea, have some air support ready for the next turn, etc.

So that Adam has to reassign his air units to the missions he wants them to carry out may not be the ideal state of affairs -- but it is not a 'serious problem' (Adam's words). The Germans have a pretty long air unit list in Seelowe -- but clicking through it every round just goes with the territory, in my view. For one thing, I don't want the computer deciding units should just 'carry on.' I'll look at them and decide if that's a good idea myself, thank you.

The system does have serious problems -- but failing to please Adam isn't one of them.

< Message edited by ColinWright -- 11/17/2007 12:00:58 AM >

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to Radu)

Post #: 40

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 12:03:42 AM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

...and I should really have the ability here to force my pilots to keep flying until they mutiny or fall out of the sky.

And you can. Each round, go to the air unit list and set the units to whatever your little heart desires.

That the system won't do this for you is not a 'major problem.' That's like deciding an outboard motor is unusable because it doesn't have an automatic choke. Quit moaning and pull out the little knob when you start it.

The fact of the matter is that the computer is looking at each unit and in some cases, saying 'these guys need a rest.' So override its decision if you disagree. No one's stopping you.

< Message edited by ColinWright -- 11/17/2007 12:05:43 AM >

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to Adam Rinkleff)

Post #: 41

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 12:09:26 AM

Radu

Posts: 29
Joined: 11/6/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

quote:

ORIGINAL: Radu

Ah, I think I've got the problem pinned down.

Micromanagement.

Having to tell (confirm) the air units every few turns "Yes,dammit,carry on", when no special events (like reorg from losses) took place.

I myself am new here, so I don't know wether this micromanagement burden can be removed in the first place. I personally only micromanage every turn small airforce scenarios, and in other instances I let the AI do the job.

But first thing's first: Have I defined the problem correctly? Is it a matter of micromanagement rather than reorg loss tolerance? (as apparently everyone else understood)

Well, first off, if you want fun and easy to play, TOAW is probably not the system for you (or for Adam, to be more precise). While it's possible to make too much of a good thing, TOAW is all about 'micromanagement.' No splashy special effects, no get falling-out-of-your chair-drunk and be able to play well anyway: it's all about thinking about your choices and carefully executing them. Get the MP's where they should be, position HQ's so that they'll be enhancing the supply of as many of the units in their formation as possible, look at the position you'll be in if the turn unexpectedly ends, ask yourself if continuing with this attack is really a good idea, have some air support ready for the next turn, etc.

So that Adam has to reassign his air units to the missions he wants them to carry out may not be the ideal state of affairs -- but it is not a 'serious problem' (Adam's words). The Germans have a pretty long air unit list in Seelowe -- but clicking through it every round just goes with the territory, in my view. For one thing, I don't want the computer deciding units should just 'carry on.' I'll look at them and decide if that's a good idea myself, thank you.

The system does have serious problems -- but failing to please Adam isn't one of them.

Using the Air Assistant more often than not? Guilty as charged.

Seriously,though, what Adam is asking is not that unreasonable,though it must be weighed against the costs of such an implementation.

Really,what I see him asking is a middle option between no AI control and full AI control. A option that involves the player setting missions, but delegates the AI to refreshing the initially set assignment.

Again, this has to be weighed against the difficulty of its effective implementation.

(in reply to ColinWright)

Post #: 42

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 12:21:15 AM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Radu

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

quote:

ORIGINAL: Radu

Ah, I think I've got the problem pinned down.

Micromanagement.

Having to tell (confirm) the air units every few turns "Yes,dammit,carry on", when no special events (like reorg from losses) took place.

I myself am new here, so I don't know wether this micromanagement burden can be removed in the first place. I personally only micromanage every turn small airforce scenarios, and in other instances I let the AI do the job.

But first thing's first: Have I defined the problem correctly? Is it a matter of micromanagement rather than reorg loss tolerance? (as apparently everyone else understood)

Well, first off, if you want fun and easy to play, TOAW is probably not the system for you (or for Adam, to be more precise). While it's possible to make too much of a good thing, TOAW is all about 'micromanagement.' No splashy special effects, no get falling-out-of-your chair-drunk and be able to play well anyway: it's all about thinking about your choices and carefully executing them. Get the MP's where they should be, position HQ's so that they'll be enhancing the supply of as many of the units in their formation as possible, look at the position you'll be in if the turn unexpectedly ends, ask yourself if continuing with this attack is really a good idea, have some air support ready for the next turn, etc.

So that Adam has to reassign his air units to the missions he wants them to carry out may not be the ideal state of affairs -- but it is not a 'serious problem' (Adam's words). The Germans have a pretty long air unit list in Seelowe -- but clicking through it every round just goes with the territory, in my view. For one thing, I don't want the computer deciding units should just 'carry on.' I'll look at them and decide if that's a good idea myself, thank you.

The system does have serious problems -- but failing to please Adam isn't one of them.

Using the Air Assistant more often than not? Guilty as charged.

Seriously,though, what Adam is asking is not that unreasonable,though it must be weighed against the costs of such an implementation.

Really,what I see him asking is a middle option between no AI control and full AI control. A option that involves the player setting missions, but delegates the AI to refreshing the initially set assignment.

Again, this has to be weighed against the difficulty of its effective implementation.

Oh sure. However, it is neither a 'serious problem' nor does it furnish Adam with grounds for flying off the handle and abusing all and sundry. Of course, at this point I'm doing the same to him -- but I've gotten fed up with him. I mean, sparks fly, and some of us are pretty abrasive, but he is just ridiculous. Moreover, he doesn't seem to have anything worthwhile to contribute. It's me or 'Curtis LeMay' minus the understanding of the system but with an extra helping of vitriol.

< Message edited by ColinWright -- 11/17/2007 12:25:21 AM >

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to Radu)

Post #: 43

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 12:26:06 AM

Foggy

Posts: 110
Joined: 6/19/2006
From: matthewcox2001@gmail.com
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

...and I should really have the ability here to force my pilots to keep flying until they mutiny or fall out of the sky.

And you can. Each round, go to the air unit list and set the units to whatever your little heart desires.

That the system won't do this for you is not a 'major problem.' That's like deciding an outboard motor is unusable because it doesn't have an automatic choke. Quit moaning and pull out the little knob when you start it.

The fact of the matter is that the computer is looking at each unit and in some cases, saying 'these guys need a rest.' So override its decision if you disagree. No one's stopping you.

Ex 8th Airforce airman here - I'll keep this on a level tone - not to piss anyone off :) The last remaining fighter let's say of a squadron will NEVER take off - the USAF will want to know why it's losses were so severe. Example - after the bombing raids w/B17's over Germany in 1943 w/such heavy losses - they discontinued these attacks! They knew they needed a long range fighter but damn the losses. Reality does set in though - imagine Overlord w/the French railroad in good condition :))
Weather is/was and will be the primary factor in air war - even WWII
airplanes needed maintenance. BTW - the availabilty rates for the 8th and (critical for you 9th) were the highest of the war after the weather
broke during Dec. 1944. Unless you rode in a P47 - ground support
was very dangerous.
I can understand why you're frustrated - try TOAW naval combat - for
even more laughs

Modern airwar is even worse - NK just I guess could'nt
comprehend what an AWACS supported air fleet can do to an opponent!
PS whatever engineer decided to put that Rolls Royce engine into the P51
deserves every award possible

BTW - the wife & I just cleaned up our basement - I saw my last (1982)
technical regulations there. Standard time for A-10 reloads at a FOL (forward operating location) were 15 minutes after landing. I'll have to look up the time for F-15's, F-16's and most importantly F-4 Wild Weasels.
F-16's just carried AA weapons - quick turnaround time - then from memory F-15's, A-10's and then the F-4's. The F-4 jammers had to be updated constantly during wargames (DUH).
Do you Adam have any experience in modern air war? I only ask - it's
not as hard as armored combat - just as detailed but different.

< Message edited by Foggy -- 11/17/2007 12:58:42 AM >

(in reply to ColinWright)

Post #: 44

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 2:24:23 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff
I didn't come here to debate and argue, I came here to ask a very specific question: How can I get my air units to stop resting spontaneously?

Fair enough, the specific answer is that question is that they are not resting �spontaneously.�

It is quite intentional, and, as Ben pointed out it is largely due to providing variability within the early turn ending framework. I buy it, am I wrong?

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff
If it can't be done, I think its a serious problem

Again, fair enough, but here is where discussion comes in. Why do you think it is a serious problem? I am not ready to disagree with this so convince me. You offered an unqualified opinion so I think we deserve an explanation. Who knows? Perhaps you are right. Keep it short, concise, and courteous please.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

especially when none of you are in any position to fix the program.

Actually a number of the fellows you have been discourteous towards are in positions to advocate changes�you can recognize some of them by their enormous egos (I am with you on that one).

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

If you think air forces sit around resting all day

Well, even you have to admit aircraft cannot stay in the air indefinitely.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

. If you don't know a way to fix it, then just admit it;

Yeah, that would be me; I do not know how to fix it. I am not a programmer but I am also not convinced that this particular feature is broken.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

why sit here and try to convince me that its perfect, when I obviously disagree?

I also refuse to suggest TOAW is anywhere near perfect. It has huge problems, always has. In fact, when the game first came out I almost got banned from a Talonsoft website because I would not shut up about trucks and logistics (10 years ago or so?). You should note that some of the people attacking you are TOAWs biggest critics.

So, let�s assume it is broken. Two questions arise: is there a work around within the game as it stands? How could a future version fix this problem?

AT has a ridiculously powerful editor. Maybe that's better for what you are trying to do. It�s a nice game too. But other than TOAW and AT I can�t think of any others that can tackle the scope this community is going for.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

Im not attacking anyone. I'm the one being flamed by trolls who think it is productive to follow me around and criticize everything I say; I don't follow them around making snide comments, that's trolling, and they are doing exactly that.

You are paranoid. Nobody is following you. Most of us simply read every single new thread. Of late, you have made several appearances. You post in public forum, people read, then post their own drivel.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

I'm trying to find people who actually understand how the program works, and how to get it to perform in a specific way, .

Well, you got that much�.GD and Colin are very knowledgeable when it comes to TOAW mechanics. I�ve played this stupid game for years and still go to them with questions. They know the system better than anyone (James and Lemay notwithstanding). Now, I disagree with some of the �why� of how TOAW works as many people do. But, you have to know they listen and come up with all kinds of screwball ideas, many of which get implemented. Some of their personalities on the other hand�well��don�t get so flustered�just get over it�GD is a self righteous prig, Lemay is fool, James is lazy (busy playing AT I suspect) and Colin is�well, he�s just Colin and so forth blah, blah, blah. I would not take any of them to dinner but I do listen to their TOAW opinions�

By the way, you didn�t happen to attend the University of Northern Iowa did you? Name looks familiar.

< Message edited by wolflars -- 11/17/2007 2:34:49 AM >

(in reply to Foggy)

Post #: 45

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 2:32:03 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

people who simply want to assure me that its very realistic

Okay, now for the rest of you�.is this TOAW behavior realistic?

We have heard from Foggy.

What say the rest?

100% Formation Supply. 100% Unit Supply. 100% Proficiency. 100% Readiness. 100% Formation Proficiency.

These guys would be good. I�m talking Iron Eagle good. Why should they rest after taking less than 5% losses in perfect weather?

It should be noted, that their change to rest can simply be changed back at the end of a round. So, really this is a matter of convenience. Am I wrong?

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 46

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 2:32:55 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

@ Wyatt

what did you do to this guy? He really does not like you

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 47

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 2:44:37 AM

JAMiAM

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wolflars
Some of their personalities on the other hand�well��don�t get so flustered�just get over it�GD is a self righteous prig, Lemay is fool, James is lazy (busy playing AT I suspect) and Colin is�well, he�s just Colin and so forth blah, blah, blah. I would not take any of them to dinner but I do listen to their TOAW opinions�

How about drinks, and then we can work our way up to dinner? Coffee? No? Well then, shove off mate. I'm going back to taking naps and playing AT...

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 48

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 4:43:15 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

sweet dreams

oh hey what do you think of AT's editor? Those action cards are just plain neat-o

quote:

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

quote:

ORIGINAL: wolflars
Some of their personalities on the other hand�well��don�t get so flustered�just get over it�GD is a self righteous prig, Lemay is fool, James is lazy (busy playing AT I suspect) and Colin is�well, he�s just Colin and so forth blah, blah, blah. I would not take any of them to dinner but I do listen to their TOAW opinions�

How about drinks, and then we can work our way up to dinner? Coffee? No? Well then, shove off mate. I'm going back to taking naps and playing AT...

(in reply to JAMiAM)

Post #: 49

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 4:55:08 AM

Adam Rinkleff

Posts: 375
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ColinWrightFor one thing, I don't want the computer deciding units should just 'carry on.'

Ok, so you don't want the computer deciding that units should just 'carry on' -- but you do want the computer to automatically halt your air units? Seriously, air units are not like ground units, and so there is no reason for this to be happening except for supply/weather/maintenance reasons, and yet it still happens in situations where those should not be the issue. But ok, you want the computer to make decisions for you, in order to enforce an ultra-conservative air strategy... but why should that be the way TOAW works for every player?

quote:

ColinWright: The fact of the matter is that the computer is looking at each unit and in some cases, saying 'these guys need a rest.' So override its decision if you disagree. No one's stopping you.

I understand the fact of the matter, obviously I do, or I wouldn't be complaining; the question is why I have to constantly argue and fight with the computer, which is constantly undermining me and forcing me to waste time? Maybe in the United States, it is normal for the Army and Air Force to fight like that, and so some of you think it is realistic... but there needs to be a way to turn off the computer's opinion of when an air unit should rest. I'm not asking for a new feature, just stop trying to cram the AI down my throat, and let me suffer the consequences if my air units start disintegrating.

quote:

Radu: Seriously,though, what Adam is asking is not that unreasonable... A option that involves the player setting missions, but delegates the AI to refreshing the initially set assignment.

See, this is the sort of person that I am here to talk to; I understand that no changes I suggest will be implemented in the game, but I was hoping that there was some way I could simply force my air units to be good enough to keep flying to some substantially significant degree than they are currently. Unfortunately, the solution is apparently going to require actual code change since TOAW doesn't give enough flexibility to scenario designers.

< Message edited by AdamRinkleff -- 11/17/2007 5:15:12 AM >

(in reply to ColinWright)

Post #: 50

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 5:04:30 AM

Adam Rinkleff

Posts: 375
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline

quote:

Wolflars: Well, even you have to admit aircraft cannot stay in the air indefinitely.

And I'm not saying they should! What I'm saying is I've set really high unit levels, and yet after a turn or two of very light combat, they suddenly decide to rest INDEFINITELY. That sounds like a serious problem to me, because that isn't what the air force normally does; what would the US do if the air force decided to rest in Iraq until Bush went and personally clicked on every unit?

quote:

Wolflars: You are paranoid. Nobody is following you.

How would you know? Look, I know how trolls operate on message boards, and when they don't like someone they make a habit of posting baiting criticism in every thread their target posts, and then they cry about it if you criticize them back; if I were to start doing that to you, you'd find it pretty annoying, as do I. I don't go to other threads to point out how wrong they are; I try to only join threads where I have something positive and constructive to say, rather than going out and looking to argue. And even there, all I did was post "good idea" in response to some new person's suggestion, and yet certain people couldn't resist trying to criticize me for encouraging someone's idea... that's trolldom. It's not just immature, it also spams the thread up.

< Message edited by AdamRinkleff -- 11/17/2007 5:20:52 AM >

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 51

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 5:12:53 AM

Adam Rinkleff

Posts: 375
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline

quote:

100% Formation Supply. 100% Unit Supply. 100% Proficiency. 100% Readiness. 100% Formation Proficiency. These guys would be good. I�m talking Iron Eagle good. Why should they rest after taking less than 5% losses in perfect weather?

Exactly my point; maybe I've got some wierd variable set, or maybe there is some way to fix it -- but from the way people have been talking, this is apparently how TOAW handles air units. I don't like it.

quote:

It should be noted, that their change to rest can simply be changed back at the end of a round. So, really this is a matter of convenience. Am I wrong?

To a large extant, yes; it is extremely inconvenient to have to micromanage each and every air unit continuously. I suppose I could use the air manager, but it seems to enjoy having dive bombers on air superiority missions... meanwhile, the fighters are resting.

< Message edited by AdamRinkleff -- 11/17/2007 5:18:21 AM >

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 52

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 5:33:17 AM

Adam Rinkleff

Posts: 375
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline

quote:

The last remaining fighter let's say of a squadron will NEVER take off - the USAF will want to know why it's losses were so severe.

Oh, the USAF you mean? So you aren't actually talking about some sort of iron-clad war rule? Look, you are ASSUMING that the scenario is replicating a situation in which the player is an army commander, with very little jurisdiction over a conservative and uncooperative air force... well, that may be realistic if you are modelling the USAF, but not necessarily so if you are modelling, say, the Japanese. Frankly, there is absolutely no reason that the player shouldn't be allowed to order the air force to keep flying until every last plane has crashed into a hillside or run out of fuel; I'm not saying that's what I want to do, but there should be a value from 0-100 which represents that sentiment. At the very least, if you don't want to give the player that power; well, the scenario designer should have it.

quote:

after the bombing raids w/B17's over Germany in 1943 w/such heavy losses - they discontinued these attacks!

And if Eisenhower had not been ok with that, do you think they would have disobeyed their orders?

quote:

Do you Adam have any experience in modern air war?

Do I have to shoot down a MiG before I know how things work?

< Message edited by AdamRinkleff -- 11/17/2007 5:35:44 AM >

(in reply to Foggy)

Post #: 53

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 6:53:45 AM

Adam Rinkleff

Posts: 375
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline

This is the start of turn 2, only 2-3 planes out of nearly 200 have been lost, all formation/unit supply/prof/readi values were set to 100, the weather is clear and pleasant.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Adam Rinkleff)

Post #: 54

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 7:39:29 AM

JAMiAM

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

This is the start of turn 2, only 2-3 planes out of nearly 200 have been lost, all formation/unit supply/prof/readi values were set to 100, the weather is clear and pleasant.

The health of your units is too low. See the color tagging of the units? Read 7.9.2 of the manual, where it explains the Unit Health. The yellow means that their average of readiness, supply and fraction of assigned vs authorized strength is between 56 to 70%. These units obviously either saw a good deal of action the previous turn, or your units are not properly constructed, with too few assigned out of authorized.

Also, you should check the relative sizes of your air units vis-a-vis those of the opposing side, as well as within the friendly force. Judging by the widely varying strength of the units in this formation, you have a severe problem with size balancing in your scenario. I would predict that the bomber formations have several times the number of airframes that the fighters do. Is this same design choice used for the OPFOR? Whether this extends to air unit versus ground unit as well, is anybody's guess, but too small of air units, in relation to the size of ground units will cause problems. This is likely a scenario design flaw, rather than a game engine flaw. Fix it, and your air units will probably perform better. Maybe not up to your exacting standards, but better than they are now. If you'd like to upload the scenario for evaluation, feel free to zip it and attach it to a post. Then others can see what problems it might have.

As far as why air units go into rest, as opposed to fighting until dead...well, I would rather deal with one malcontent on the forum, who whines about having take a minute to reset his air units missions than a hundred who complain that their air units were too stupid to know when to stop fighting. The game logic is set so that units will generally not fight themselves to extinction. This is usually true for land units, as well. Forces often have a nasty tendency to follow the laws of self-preservation, rather than the sometimes completely unreasonable dictates of their command structure. Better commanders than you or I have had to deal with this reality.

(in reply to Adam Rinkleff)

Post #: 55

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 7:57:39 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

I have to clear up some things:

First, are you or are you not the same Adam Rinkleff who was caught up in some controversy from wikipedia for demonstrating very similar behavior?

Second, is English your first language?

I mean no disrespect here, but sometimes tone can come off in a completely unintended manner when trying to explain or ask something in one�s secondary language. There is another guy who frequents Matrix forums whose language seems bizarre and abrasive at times, though at no fault of his own. Also I am perplexed by your logic. For example, earlier I wrote:

quote:

So, really this is a matter of convenience. Am I wrong?

To which you responded

quote:

To a large extant, yes

Thus, I am wrong and it is not a matter of convenience. But then you continued with

quote:

it is extremely inconvenient...

So, which is it? Or did you mean to say �To a large extant [sic]� it really �is a matter of convenience� and thus you were agreeing with me?

Furthermore, I stated:

quote:

Wolflars: You are paranoid. Nobody is following you.

To which you responded:

quote:

How would you know?

I know it was not your intent, but I got a good belly laugh from this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff
Look, you are ASSUMING that the scenario is replicating a situation in which the player is an army commander, with very little jurisdiction over a conservative and uncooperative air force...

Of course he assumes this. The game covers operational level warfare with a primary emphasis on ground maneuver. It�s the title of the game. As far as the �conservative� and �uncooperative� air force well�..but I do think you have a point about the Kamikaze. I think there is a scenario that covers this, one of Lemay�s perhaps (?). Maybe take a look at that one to see how he dealt with them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

quote:

Do you Adam have any experience in modern air war?

Do I have to shoot down a MiG before I know how things work?

Now that�s just silly�both of you. But, one has to consider Mr Rinkleff offered some academic credential and claimed military expertise.

As far as trolls, I see no evidence of that. Are you referring to the post about partisan warfare? Desert? Colin? Veers? I just don�t see it. These guys comment on just about everything. Go back and read that partisan thread and tell me these guys hunted you down or whatever. Do it with a straight face and I will buy you a beer.

Veers got under your skin somehow�I haven�t read his post but I have a hard time understanding this as he has been one of the most friendly and helpful people on these forums. Besides, he is the King of Canada, jovial, beer drinking, hockey playing, EA obsessed, all around nice guy. Maybe he had a bad day. More likely, you are nuts. Sorry, trolling I know�

I have tried to bring Mr Rinkleff�s complaint back into the world of courtesy and reason because I thought that his complaint deserved to be looked at. His bizarre behavior prompted some unfavorable reaction and still I thought maybe he was on to something. Unfortunately, he has not provided any satisfactory analysis of what he perceives as a serious problem. Thus, I have failed. I teach a course on Logic and Group Function so it is easy to see how some of your comments are difficult to follow. Part of my job requires me to psychoanalysis people by the way they convey thought through writing. Quite simply, many of your comments are hostile, lack sophistication, have no regard for reason and continuity. In other words, you talk a lot but say little. At times they are delusional and schizophrenic. I have seen this anxiety and stress before. The upside is that for some of my students (in California anyway) I can refer them to certain herbal specialists that can help with the anxiety�except my government employee students. It is my professional opinion that you seek help. I am done here. No further comments.

< Message edited by wolflars -- 11/17/2007 8:21:19 AM >

(in reply to Adam Rinkleff)

Post #: 56

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 7:58:42 AM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wolflars

quote:

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

people who simply want to assure me that its very realistic

Okay, now for the rest of you�.is this TOAW behavior realistic?

We have heard from Foggy.

What say the rest?

100% Formation Supply. 100% Unit Supply. 100% Proficiency. 100% Readiness. 100% Formation Proficiency.

These guys would be good. I�m talking Iron Eagle good. Why should they rest after taking less than 5% losses in perfect weather?

It should be noted, that their change to rest can simply be changed back at the end of a round. So, really this is a matter of convenience. Am I wrong?

Is it realistic? Well, not really: if the unit really can't function, it should go into reorg. Otherwise, if you want it to keep doing what you told it, it should.

On the other hand, is this a serious problem? No: if I made a list of things that need to be fixed/improved in TOAW I think this would come in around #843. Sort of like the ashtray being too small in my Mack MS 250. If someone wants to decide it's a 'feature' and keep it, fine with me -- not even worth the effort to try to convince them otherwise.

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 57

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 8:03:12 AM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

...It is my professional opinion that you seek help. I am done here. No further comments.

Laughing my ass off.

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 58

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 8:13:39 AM

a white rabbit

Posts: 2366
Joined: 4/27/2002
From: ..under deconstruction..6N124E..
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

quote:

Groupthink is not cool!

Lol. That's another first. No one's ever accused me of participating in 'groupthink' before. I almost feel comforted. 'See, I don't compulsively disagree with everybody.'

..oh dear, still in denial..

..and you were doing so well..

_____________________________

..toodA, irmAb moAs'lyB 'exper'mentin'..,..be�n'tus all..?,

(in reply to ColinWright)

Post #: 59

RE: why do air units rest so much? - 11/17/2007 8:34:39 AM

Adam Rinkleff

Posts: 375
Joined: 7/24/2007
Status: offline

quote:

The health of your units is too low. See the color tagging of the units?

I thought you might mention that... its actually because I broke the units up into smaller units with only a third of their equipment assigned in the hopes that it would change things; but notice how the bright green units are also resting? So yah, I can recombine the fighters and they'll still rest as bright-green units. But perhaps the equation should not take the fraction of assigned vs authorized strength into account? I mean, honestly, why would that matter? During the Normandy invasion, two lone German fighters strafed the beaches; they didn't care that the rest of their assigned strength was unavailable, and they didn't rest.

quote:

Also, you should check the relative sizes of your air units vis-a-vis those of the opposing side

I'm making 100% identical forces on each side, which is why I think I'm about the only person around here qualified to start talking about TOAW's equations in a scientific manner; people who haven't been doing that really have no objective standard to measure anything against, and they can talk all day about trying to balance a scenario, but they really can't seriously discuss how anything works. That is exactly the case with the AP/DF thread, where people insist that AP=attack and DF=defense, when it is clear from using identical units that AP/DF affects both attack and defense.

quote:

Fix it, and your air units will probably perform better.

I dunno, they weren't doing better before I broke them up. On the other hand, I did manage to actually figure out what is happening, which is why these threads are useful, and would be even more useful if certain people would try harder to understand what is happening, refrain from insisting that everything is just fine, and refrain from spamming the thread with side commentary. Anyways, it turns out that during PM turns, the aircraft like to rest; and so if the air manager is off, then they'll keep resting. I really don't think in this case, that it has much of anything to do with supply levels, readiness, or assigned equipment -- it appears to be primarily a function of PM turns. So, I guess the program has a problem if you don't use the air manager, but if you do... its not so bad.

quote:

wolflars: Or... were agreeing with me?

Of course I'm agreeing with you; however, in my opinion, this problem is both inconvenient AND unrealistic. High-ranking military commanders generally don't have to deal with this kind of inconvience; when it happens, you drive over to the airfield, fire the commander, and appoint someone else to take over. I'll concede however that it can be realistic, in some situations where the air force is not very supportive of the army; however, the program should really allow you to create situations where the air force is very supportive and subordinate to the player.

quote:

It is my professional opinion that you seek help. I am done here. No further comments.

You see? You are trolling! That's what its called when you go around trying to be the nice guy and seek happy peaceful interaction, and conclude with what can only be construed as a series of snide personal attacks, disguised as helpful advice, and delivered in a passive-aggressive manner. Sure, you can say that I'm paranoid to claim that certain individuals here are intent on attacking me; or maybe I'm just familiar with canadian hockey players who drink beer, lonely people who sit at computers, and how the political mechanisms of internet communities operate.

It'd be easy for me to get along here, all I'd have to do is follow certain people around (Jamiam and Veers are good targets) and compliment them while figuring out who they don't like and insulting those people in a way which makes Veers do the

; this is the way the world works, and I'm not at all paranoid. I'm criticizing your pet little game, not taking the hint to love it or leave, and insisting on arguing with people who have established themselves as important here; on top of that, I show a general lack of respect for those who troll at me, and its meanwhile only natural that you focus upon my disrespect as a crime, while accepting their disrespect as presumably warranted due to their authority status -- for someone who claims to understand psychoanalysis, I think you show a stunning lack of understanding for how primates operate.

Meanwhile, I actually do care about TOAW, and I just wish it gave scenario designers more flex. I really have no desire to talk about historical accuracy, and I'm pretty sure I know what I'm doing; where TOAW works, it works great, but where it doesn't... the best solution is to allow scenario designers to set the values however they want.

< Message edited by AdamRinkleff -- 11/17/2007 9:04:46 AM >

(in reply to JAMiAM)

Post #: 60

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> RE: why do air units rest so much?