Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it?

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] >> Flashpoint Campaigns Series >> Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it? - 3/21/2014 2:02:17 AM

Xenomorph

Posts: 97
Joined: 2/26/2014
From: Colorado
Status: offline

I'm sure most likely I'm botching it but I had a few question for the devs and the vets in the crowd (THANK YOU for your service btw!!).

1. I had a vulcan platoon hidden in a forest when (I don't want to spoil anything so I won't give scenario name) several attack helicopters came its way. The forest had 90% coverage and, whoa, those vulcans only lasted a few minutes and only took out a single enemy. I'd have guessed the vulcans in the forest would have been able to shoot and scoot a lot better while blasting away at the very exposed choppers or at least managed to stay better covered even if it meant not shooting back once it looked like things were going south.

2. Is the LOS for AD units the same as if they were attacking ground units? It seems like my AD units don't attack unless they're in a hex that they have LOS to but I assume the LOS would be different when attacking aloft aircraft.

3.. Does coverage in a village differ from that of a forest when it comes to aircraft? The helos that attacked my forest units flew even directly over and around my main hq which was in a town and didn't seem to see it.

4. How do I tell a unit to hold fire? That same group of helicopters soon thereafter became a swarm and a single lowly Bradley platoon decided it'd be a good idea to squeeze off a few rounds at them as they passed by. Scratch the entire Bradley platoon. Not a single enemy loss.

5. Also, are the chances of being spotted by enemies higher the more units you have in a hex? I'm wondering if that's part of the problem.

6. Were the Bradley 3s really that much better than the 2s. They have about triple the range.

I actually do try to find answers in the manual first but time is short on my end. Apologies if these answers are readily found and I missed them.

Thanks!

Post #: 1

RE: Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it? - 3/21/2014 2:22:55 AM

Panta_slith

Posts: 318
Joined: 4/4/2002
From: Montevideo, Uruguay
Status: offline

The v2.03a Ad routines are better than the original ones, nevertheless I just stopped playing scenarios with too many helos a longtime ago. Are hordes od chppers realistic? Maybe. Is it fun/fair to play? I don't think so. If a particular scenario has too many helos I play another one. When I have tried all of them I play my own or just play another game.

< Message edited by Panta -- 3/21/2014 3:23:43 AM >

(in reply to Xenomorph)

Post #: 2

RE: Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it? - 3/21/2014 7:40:12 AM

loki100

Posts: 10920
Joined: 10/20/2012
From: Utlima Thule
Status: offline

Some of what you describe are down to the (very) few limits in the game engine - such as range or the ability of an isolated unit to decide that discretion is the better part of valour.

More specifically:

#1 - worth thinking what a 'forest' means when you have set up a large bit of military kit that relies on LoS. You are probably going to deploy at the edge or on a low hill with visibility. Ok if you sit very still but easy to spot if you start shooting. It may also be the case that shoot and scoot is a wee bit harder when you need to move around trees etc. All thats a sort of rationalisation for what you see.

#2 - for helicopters yes, remember they are mostly at NAP, but you do get longer range on attacking fixed wing aircraft, I've seen AA try to interdict a bombing raid from 4-5 hexes away (and managed to lose an entire NATO flight when it was targetted near some Soviet AA convention centre)

#3 - yes, I'd say a town gives better cover, easier to move around, easier to get completely out of sight, also a HQ unit is probably not looking to deploy into locations where they will engage (again a bit of rationalisation)

#5 - I'm not sure. I think not (or only marginally), but I have noticed that a successful shot on a 'large' unit, or a hex with more than one unit sometimes generates multiple kills

#6 - I'd trust what you are seeing, the game is well researched

_____________________________

(in reply to Xenomorph)

Post #: 3

RE: Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it? - 3/21/2014 8:58:40 AM

Clod100_slith

Posts: 19
Joined: 12/9/2010
Status: offline

Hi! I have been a couple of years in a light air defence unit of the Bundeswehr. We had the STINGER System. I know also the GEPARD Air-Defence System. It makes no sense to put a AD System in the wood. Normelly for a GEPARD Battery you have on System running ites Serarch Radar, the rest will not transmit. With the GEPARD System you can change to a optical mode and use the LASER to get a good fix and engage up to four targets in a hurry. To be realistic, if you engage a four ship HIND flight with just one GEPARD System you bring maybe two down but you wont survived the fight for sure. For a missile unit like STINGER or ROLAND it will be stupid to put them into wood. ROLAND, for example, will need a couple of seconds to engange any Helicopters or Aircraft. I think around 13 sec, but not sure. GEPARD was able to engage on the move, ROLAND not. So in the 90 the german AD Units will use a Flugabwehrkampfgruppe (Air Defence Task Force) to protect ground forces. For example, four GEPARD and two ROLAND for a Panzer Batt. WIth good fire controll the GEPARD will take care for the HELIS and the ROLAND moving from fire position to fire position to clear the skies from aircarft. Come back to the game: It all depends on the LOS, in my opinion. But the get it in the game, it will be some hard work. Even to have more than one weapon System in one counter makes no sense. For AD it will make more sence to have one counter for one system so its more possible to engage different types of target. Four >VULCANS in one counter, no way. German AD-Doctrin was around two GEPARD to protect one Companie. Maybe more for the Schwerpunkt. ROLAND was more to protect Bridges, HQ, Ari and such thinks. All changed in the 90 and we used the mix of ROLAND and GEPARD. If the dev likes, maybe I can help with some infos about the AD Systems. Anyway, a great game and I loved to play it. And still waiting for the SOP-Button! :)

(in reply to loki100)

Post #: 4

RE: Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it? - 3/21/2014 12:00:26 PM

jds1978

Posts: 114
Joined: 10/1/2010
Status: offline

Try setting up anti-air ambushes. Put forward a 'sacrificial lamb' that is likely to get the Helo's attention; then put a number of AD units nearby (hidden behind a ridge or in a valley) that is in the likely path of the helo's. I used to use my AD as a purely defensive way and found (like everything else) you have to use them more aggressively.

In Germany, the LOS can be bad due to all the rolling hills, valleys and forests. The enemy helos are using this to their advantage.

Putting lots of units in the same hex is a bad idea. It invites higher casualties when the arty (or airstrike) comes. Keep them within command distances and with good LOS.

I've yet to see any real difference between the two Bradleys

(in reply to Clod100_slith)

Post #: 5

RE: Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it? - 3/21/2014 1:17:38 PM

SwampYankee68

Posts: 1186
Joined: 5/8/2002
From: Connecticut, U.S.
Status: offline

I think the "2 & 3" designations for the Bradley are the IFV and the Scout version. Different loadouts and perhaps sensors, but not substantively different.

_____________________________

"The only way I got to keep them Tigers busy is to let them shoot holes in me!"

(in reply to jds1978)

Post #: 6

RE: Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it? - 3/21/2014 1:46:05 PM

Mad Russian

Posts: 13256
Joined: 3/16/2008
From: Texas
Status: offline

Yes, the difference in Bradley AFV are usage differences.

The M2 is the IFV (Infantry Fighting Vehicle). It has a TOW launcher with a few reloads and carries an infantry squad. During the Gulf War (2 August 1990 - 28 February 1991) they are credited with destroying more Iraqi vehicles than the M1 Abrams.

The M3 is the CFV (Cavalry Fighting Vehicle). It has a TOW launcher with a lot of reloads and carries a 2 man team.

In game terms we code the M3 as a recon and the M2 as combat vehicle.

Good Hunting.

MR

_____________________________

The most expensive thing in the world is free time.

Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.

(in reply to SwampYankee68)

Post #: 7

RE: Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it? - 3/21/2014 3:01:10 PM

cbelva

Posts: 1843
Joined: 3/26/2005
Status: offline

I been following this thread and thought I would share some things I have learned. With the new patch, I don't fear the Hinds like I use to. I am not a duck hunter or an aviator so I will leave the discussion as to how close this is to real life to them. Most of my comments were already said so I am basically reinforcing some of the tactics learned. I learned not to set up my ADA inside a forest. They can't see well enough to engage. The Vulcan needs good los. I prefer to set them up in a wood line where they have LOS in the direction I want them to defend. I have also learned that putting them in a hold profile also seems to increase their effectiveness. I have watched Vulcans get into shooting matches with Hinds and come out on top. I have also seem the opposite. I have also seen these engagements end in a draw, where they damaged each other and then the Hinds withdraw. Atk helos is still a potent force on the battlefield, but you can organize yourself to minimize their damage.

One important tactic that I have learned is to mass my mech and armored plts/companies so that they have overlapping fire. Note, I want overlapping fire, I don't want them on top of each other. In order words they support each other. I try not to stack units in a hex because the more units in a hex, the more damage you will take--also increases the likelihood of being spotted. I have watched mech and ar companies drive hinds away thru overlapping fire.

I do expect to take some damage from atk helos. But I don't fear them as I once did. Thru good tactics it is possible to minimize their effect.

(in reply to Mad Russian)

Post #: 8

RE: Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it? - 3/21/2014 3:49:22 PM

Xenomorph

Posts: 97
Joined: 2/26/2014
From: Colorado
Status: offline

In response to Panta's post I completely understand where you're coming from. We all have limited free time and part of us wants to blast away at stuff. I find however that a major key to this game is patience. Yes, it's a wargame but to do well I find you really have to go into "Zen mode". Haha. For example, my original post was after my first turn where a swarm of hinds did massive damage to my, of course, BRILLIANTLY laid plans. I sat there in horror as the better part of an entire mech inf platoon was obliterated and then the hinds proceeded to romp and play over the rest of the battlefield. As I write this, the mech pl survivors are out of command and morale is getting close to single digits. They're scattered to the winds and won't move at all. So..."the best laid plans" right? But I'm nearly two hours in and over time nearly half the hinds were picked off, reinforcements have arrived and (yay!) these include a chaparral(missile)AD unit. The chaparral isn't deployed yet but hope springs eternal! Plus, enemy ground forces have arrived and have taken a good number or losses while I so far haven't taken a single loss from enemy ground forces. Bottom line: while it can be waaaay frustrating, the frustrations merely highlight to me the brilliance of this game. (The devs are at this moment puffing out their chests and nodding vigorously in agreement!) But it's not an FPS. It requires patience grasshopper.

Thanks for the responses to my questions!

Bob

(in reply to cbelva)

Post #: 9

RE: Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it? - 3/21/2014 4:36:12 PM

Panta_slith

Posts: 318
Joined: 4/4/2002
From: Montevideo, Uruguay
Status: offline

Xenomorph, it is actually the opposite of what I expect from a wargame. If I want to blast tanks, all I have to do is to make a scenario (I have made a few) in Steel Beasts Pro where I shoot at will at targets with a superior tank and see them burn.
But alas, no, it isn't what I expect. What I want is a game that reproduces reality in a rather credible way to play scenarios using realistic tactics to see how well I solve the different problems. Something like chess.
I have a particular scenario I made for SBP and I have played it countless times trying different tactics, weapons and approaches and learning every time from every mistake. I don't play in a hurry, actually I have plenty time, all things considering, since I can even play at times even at work, when things go smoothly. It is just that I don't want to waste time with certain things. The fact is that some things are not appealing to me and seeing how a full regiment (or more, haven't WP assault helos regs 12 choppers instead of 24?) of Hinds destroys your units when you can't fire back is rather useless. Better to start playing when the horde has passed by. The same thing goes for massive arty (a few hours barrage) or massive air strikes. Not interesting to play.
Maybe I am wrong and FPC is just a game with all its limitations, (like the old FPC, which was fun but just that, fun, not too realistic) and I am asking too much. But so far things have improved a lot, which gives me hope for the future. Right now many aspects have been improved, even the air-ground issue, which I reckon is rather complicated, that's why I prefer to refrain from playing with scenarios with too many choppers (on either side)

. Other than that, the game is going well, with every patch making it better.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xenomorph

In response to Panta's post I completely understand where you're coming from. We all have limited free time and part of us wants to blast away at stuff.

(in reply to Xenomorph)

Post #: 10

RE: Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it? - 3/21/2014 4:39:47 PM

zakblood

Posts: 22687
Joined: 10/4/2012
Status: offline

things i've found / learned since latest patch, is AI is now a lot harder / smarter

woods are only ever for hiding in and not for shooting from, unless at the edge etc, unless you want a ambush and are 100% sure someone will come through the same woods, and for me thats never happened, rest and refit there yes, shoot from no unless like i said above ambush from edge is fine, deep woods are a no no unless pure infantry wanting to keep off the roads,

then again what do i know, been hammered last few times i've played.

(in reply to Xenomorph)

Post #: 11

RE: Is this realistic? Or am I just botching it? - 3/21/2014 5:42:48 PM

Xenomorph

Posts: 97
Joined: 2/26/2014
From: Colorado
Status: offline

Yes. Haha. Probably projecting my own in-game annoyances onto you panta. Apologies if it came off that way. But if I could request just one improvement it'd be that ability to hold fire at low odds opportunities. I'll expect that done by...hmmm, let me look at my watch.

In my old age I'm only now getting a kick out of watching my plans all blown to pieces and then seeing if I can recover. As an aside: gawd did I screw up!

I saw where MR wrote he plays a few turns every day (of course in his case I can make sense) but I see lots of folks saying the same thing. I work in an inner city ER. The busiest one in my city. I love my job but if people would just stop getting shot it'd really lower my stress level.

(in reply to zakblood)

Post #: 12