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: Build Roll - mirror

 
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 >> RE: Build Roll - mirror Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/27/2013 3:22:40 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		Again, it's a design decision you made...that's your prerogative. But not being expressly clear on the decision until asked, wasted a huge amount of my gaming time. I come back any wargame that has a dependency on the AI like Command not having the default action to be to attack an enemy unit in range is somewhat mind boggling. Otherwise, you have AI ships just sitting there getting pounded without a response.

I assume to workaround this I need to create a giant mission box that covers the entire battle area.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 121
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/27/2013 3:31:50 PM   
navwarcol

 

Posts: 637
Joined: 12/2/2009
Status: offline 		I do agree with D that it must be carefully implemented, especially because in Harpoon, one of the first things needed used to be to quickly assign your vls ships for example, lest they immediately fire off TLAMs at everything in range. On the other side I get what you are saying also thewood1. I think he said they are working on it though. I do think (??) that currently you can assign a mission inside of ref.pts. and assign those to follow your ship so rather than create a global mission, you can just create an ASuW mission with RPs, assign the RP to follow your ship, and it should work around?

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 122
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/27/2013 4:40:12 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: navwarcol
I do agree with D that it must be carefully implemented, especially because in Harpoon, one of the first things needed used to be to quickly assign your vls ships for example, lest they immediately fire off TLAMs at everything in range.


DING!

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to navwarcol)
Post #: 123
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/27/2013 4:44:15 PM   
ExMachina


Posts: 462
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

"Why are my ships throwing LRASMs at every little Boghammer out there? I just want them to search for subs!"


That'd be me Nothing ends a scenario faster for me than to have a well-intentioned AI suddenly loose all of my assets against targets of its choosing.

And while I've not played around with scenario design much, it seems like CMANO already has sufficient options for conditional "weapons free" units/groups via the missions editor.

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 124
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/27/2013 5:04:26 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1
I played several naval warfare games and it has always seemed to me a "weapons tight" vs "weapons free" is a pretty simple solution.


Not if one wants to avoid manual player intervention, which is the whole point of this request.

Unless your definition of "weapons tight" is "engage only your mission targets", which is exactly the current mission-AI behavior. (Most players interpret "weapons tight" as "only fire at incoming missiles, otherwise clamp down".)

< Message edited by Sunburn -- 11/27/2013 6:09:00 PM >

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 125
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/27/2013 5:28:07 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		But you are trading one evil for another. If I had to choose, I'd rather they fire at something as default than sit and let a gunboat chug up along side them and pummel them. Right now, the AI has no way to respond to an enemy human that does something unexpected outside its mission parameters. Missions are great, but they are not the end all be all in compensating for getting the AI to react properly to an immediate threat. Right now, unless the scenario designer has some way to predict where a human will take his assets, the AI can easily be left unable to respond.

I spent an entire weekend trying to figure out why a modern Aegis cruiser was letting a Chinese destroyer cruise up to it and destroy it. The cruiser was on AA duty and watched as the Chinese destroyer killed its escorts and then came along side and fired point blank at it. It wasn't until this discussion a week or so came about that I realized the issue. I can manually target stuff. The AI can't and can be very hobbled by this issue.

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 126
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/27/2013 5:36:53 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1
I spent an entire weekend trying to figure out why a modern Aegis cruiser was letting a Chinese destroyer cruise up to it and destroy it. The cruiser was on AA duty and watched as the Chinese destroyer killed its escorts and then came along side and fired point blank at it. It wasn't until this discussion a week or so came about that I realized the issue. I can manually target stuff. The AI can't and can be very hobbled by this issue.


Specifically for AAW tasking on ships, up to now you could assign them to an ASW/ASuW/SeaControl mission, or leave them mission-less, and they would still engage air & sub hostiles defensively (they just wouldn't actively manouver to intercept them). Try it out.

I say "up to now" because on the new build, as part of adding this as a doctrine option, we are enabling this behavior only when the option is explicitly set by the player / scen author.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 127
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/27/2013 6:20:36 PM   
mikmykWS

 

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

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1
I spent an entire weekend trying to figure out why a modern Aegis cruiser was letting a Chinese destroyer cruise up to it and destroy it. The cruiser was on AA duty and watched as the Chinese destroyer killed its escorts and then came along side and fired point blank at it. It wasn't until this discussion a week or so came about that I realized the issue. I can manually target stuff. The AI can't and can be very hobbled by this issue.


Specifically for AAW tasking on ships, up to now you could assign them to an ASW/ASuW/SeaControl mission, or leave them mission-less, and they would still engage air & sub hostiles defensively (they just wouldn't actively manouver to intercept them). Try it out.

I say "up to now" because on the new build, as part of adding this as a doctrine option, we are enabling this behavior only when the option is explicitly set by the player / scen author.


Jeez D sounds like somebody just got exactly what he wanted...Again!



_____________________________


(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 128
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/27/2013 6:46:19 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline 		That is a big step in the right direction. But I still don't like having to explicitly put a unit on a mission to counter an attack. It should be inherent in its doctrine. It leaves the AI-side with limited capabilities without the scenario designer having to think of every possible event that can come up.

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 129
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/27/2013 7:59:19 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline 		We're getting the mission because I want it.

I think the ROE D said he'd implement fits with what you wanted. You can set it by side so probably covers it.




_____________________________


(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 130
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/27/2013 9:09:02 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Build 468 (beta)
---------------------

Fixed:
----------
- 0006036: [462] ASW Mission Logic: Surface Units on ASW missions will not engage hostile ships that fire on them
- 0005111: Ships on AAW patrol should still engage surface contacts with guns

* New doctrine option: Engage targets of opportunity (default is NO). When enabled, a unit will target and engage any contact for which it has suitable weaponry (at range up to 1.5 of max suitable weapon range), regardless of its mission tasking.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 131
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/27/2013 9:14:18 PM   
snowburn


Posts: 188
Joined: 9/24/2013
From: Bovril, Argentina
Status: offline 		Great job!!!! CMAMO is getting better everyday

Each new build makes b460 look outdated, any chance to allow us to try the latest builds?

< Message edited by snowburn -- 11/27/2013 10:26:04 PM >

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 132
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/28/2013 12:51:52 AM   
Agathosdaimon


Posts: 1034
Joined: 7/8/2012
Status: offline 		I can imagine that having ai auto respond to threats outside its mission would be helpful on massive scenarios with lots happening, though i just like the options i have set with messages to popup and notify me explicitly of new contacts for me to then decide on, like in harpoon

(in reply to snowburn)
Post #: 133
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/28/2013 1:27:41 PM   
JCR

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 11/4/2013
Status: offline 		Wow, this a great step, especially for CWDB scenarios, where gun engagements occur a lot more often than with DB3000

(in reply to Agathosdaimon)
Post #: 134
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/28/2013 1:57:38 PM   
SSN754planker


Posts: 448
Joined: 10/2/2013
Status: offline 		For the love of turkey, PLEASE have a new build available for download when i get home tonight from my thanksgiving feast! All this new stuff in these builds, makes B460 look old.

_____________________________

MY BOOK LIST
ST1/SS SSN 754

(in reply to JCR)
Post #: 135
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/28/2013 2:06:21 PM   
JCR

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 11/4/2013
Status: offline 		I second that. Please think of those who do not belong to the Beta Testing Master Race (tm) :D

(in reply to SSN754planker)
Post #: 136
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/28/2013 2:30:02 PM   
snowburn


Posts: 188
Joined: 9/24/2013
From: Bovril, Argentina
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JCR

I second that. Please think of those who do not belong to the Beta Testing Master Race (tm) :D


+1
we feel like dirty peasants-

(in reply to JCR)
Post #: 137
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/28/2013 4:41:36 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJBg74WYa-0

< Message edited by Sunburn -- 11/28/2013 5:42:09 PM >

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to snowburn)
Post #: 138
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/28/2013 5:29:20 PM   
Moltke71


Posts: 1253
Joined: 9/23/2000
Status: offline 		LOL!

_____________________________

Jim Cobb

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 139
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 11/29/2013 7:56:15 AM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Build 469 (PUBLIC)
------------------------

Rolls up beta releases 461-468, plus:

* New event trigger: Unit Detected. Fires when a unit (flexibly filtered from side-wide down to specific unit) is detected by the specified side.

* New and improved sound effects for various gun calibers (incl. lasers), aircraft & helicopter take-offs, new contacts, alert (weapon contacts) etc.

* OODA values are now affected by proficiency levels. Novice crews take twice the nominal OODA value to execute their targeting process while ace crews beat even the nominal best-case value
(all other levels in-between).

< Message edited by Sunburn -- 11/29/2013 8:56:54 AM >

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Moltke71)
Post #: 140
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 12/1/2013 10:07:12 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Build 470 (beta)
-----------------------

Fixed:
-------
- 0005763: Sead Patrol mission should have RTB When Winchester set by default
- 0006112: Hold Position for ground units
- 0006132: Cannot select new home base for grouped aircraft, only one-by-one
- 0004198: Ability to manually change aircraft callsigns
- 0004760: No way to delete a specific aircraft from a base / ship
- 0006035: Mobile units should have a 'static' option so they don't move around
- 0006034: Doctrine option: Use SAMs in anti-ship mode
- 0000759: On/off switch for SAM's with Surface Target Engagement Capability
- 0005651: Adding/Removing weapon record from loadout causes a crash
- 0006159: Sidebar slightly trimmed from B461 onwards

* "Hold Position" command added to right-click menu for mobile ground units.

* You can now select a new home base for multiple-selected aircraft.

* You can now edit aircraft names and delete specific aircraft directly through the Air-Ops window.

* New doctrine option: Use SAMs in anti-surface mode (or not).

* New imports by Rudd: DPRK complete EW + AD installations 2003-2013.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 141
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 12/2/2013 4:32:02 AM   
SSN754planker


Posts: 448
Joined: 10/2/2013
Status: offline 		More polishing to an already great sim! I cant wait to see what CMANO looks like 1 year from now.

_____________________________

MY BOOK LIST
ST1/SS SSN 754

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 142
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 12/2/2013 9:39:28 AM   
El Savior

 

Posts: 337
Joined: 7/31/2003
From: Finland
Status: offline 		Yes!

- 0006132: Cannot select new home base for grouped aircraft, only one-by-one
- 0004198: Ability to manually change aircraft callsigns
- 0004760: No way to delete a specific aircraft from a base / ship
- 0006035: Mobile units should have a 'static' option so they don't move around

This will make all easier. Thank you!

_____________________________

El Savior

(in reply to SSN754planker)
Post #: 143
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 12/2/2013 4:01:32 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Build 471 (beta)
---------------------

Fixed:
-------
- 0005758: Players would like to hide reference Points
- 0006090: Tu-16s taking up runway access points
- 0005973: AS-2 drone shoots down AIM-54
- 0006190: Accessing the Side ROE and doing nothing changes the unit opportunity fire ROE to yes
- 0004668: SAM Site isn't grabbing weapons from attached ammo dump
- 0004920: Can't transfer ammo from land mag to SAM unit
- 0004050: Issue with Mission Activate Event - We disabled the ability ot set a mission time in game
- 0004955: Players would like to be able to set mission activation times in game mode.
- 0006024: Scenario user was building crashes at load

* New game option: Reference point visibility. Three settings are available: Normal (as currently), Small (half-size and grayed out), and Don't Show. This significantly declutters the map in cases of dense ref-point concentrations.

* New imports by Rudd: ROK complete EW + AD installations 2003-2013.

* You can now set the activation time for a mission through the mission editor.

< Message edited by Sunburn -- 12/2/2013 7:25:17 PM >

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to El Savior)
Post #: 144
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 12/3/2013 5:49:05 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Build 472 (beta)
-----------------------


Fixed:
---------
- 0006207: Mission Editior Dialog: Set Activation Time procedure set the mission inactive for the player
- 0006206: [471] Mission Editor Time Activation Text Color

* The map-cursor databox (a.k.a. Black Box of Data) can now be configured to appear beside the cursor (as currently), appear on the bottom of the map, or not appear at all. This is set by Game -> Game Options -> "Map Cursor Databox", and is a global (not scenario/side-level), persisting setting.

* Delay-timed missions are displayed in the mission editor with a "[D]" prefix.

* Refined acoustic reverberation modifiers for sonars. Now the sonar's tech level (more modern sets are affected less) and operating frequency (lower-frequency sets suffer the most) also play a part in determining degradation due to reverberation from shallow water or under-ice conditions.

* Strategic submarines now actively evade not only weapon contacts but also potential sub & surface threats in proximity.



_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 145
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 12/3/2013 9:22:31 PM   
SSN754planker


Posts: 448
Joined: 10/2/2013
Status: offline 		* The map-cursor databox (a.k.a. Black Box of Data) can now be configured to appear beside the cursor (as currently), appear on the bottom of the map, or not appear at all. This is set by Game -> Game Options -> "Map Cursor Databox", and is a global (not scenario/side-level), persisting setting.

Wow! Was not expecting this! 1.02 is looking to be amazing!

_____________________________

MY BOOK LIST
ST1/SS SSN 754

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 146
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 12/10/2013 2:01:43 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline 		What's a Delayed Timed Mission? I've linked mission activation to events, including time events, in the past. How do D-T Missions differ?

(in reply to SSN754planker)
Post #: 147
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 12/10/2013 5:49:06 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		With delayed-time missions you no longer need to use the EE to time-trigger a mission activation, so you can also set delayed missions as a player now.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 148
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 12/10/2013 6:25:20 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline 		I remember that request now. Thanks, D!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

With delayed-time missions you no longer need to use the EE to time-trigger a mission activation, so you can also set delayed missions as a player now.


(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 149
RE: Build Roll - mirror - 12/10/2013 11:03:27 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline 		The map-cursor databox (a.k.a. Black Box of Data) can now be configured to appear beside the cursor (as currently), appear on the bottom of the map

What's the constantly changing large integer that appears in the window-bottom black box?

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> RE: Build Roll - mirror Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
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

2.172