[ADDED B775.11] Dash-and-slash attacks on bombers with tail guns (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series



Message

Sardaukar -> [ADDED B775.11] Dash-and-slash attacks on bombers with tail guns (12/4/2015 8:57:44 AM)

I was playing modified Operation Sling of David and managed to lose several planes to Iranian SAMs.

Main culprit in that seemed to be that AI evasion logic steered the evading planes TOWARDS the shooting SAM battery. That should definitely not be the normal behaviour, since it just invites more SAM launches.

Maybe there should be some tweaking about aircraft evasion logic...e.g. "do not evade towards the direction where SAMs are coming from..."



mikmykWS -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (12/4/2015 9:25:00 AM)

If they see the missiles there are some evasive maneuvers relative to the missile not the launcher but see your point. At some point can you upload a save game so we can see what went on exactly?

Thanks

Mike



Sardaukar -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (12/4/2015 10:23:40 AM)

Will do when I rerun the scenario to see if it happens again..or I'll just make sandbox scenario to see what's going on.

I understand that planes have to maneuver radically to evade SAM, but it seemed to me that they were taking the wrong direction from 2 possible ones. [8D]

When multiple missiles were coming in, every evasion took the planes closer to SAMs, resulting more SAMs being fired at closer range.



CCIP-subsim -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (12/4/2015 11:31:35 AM)

While I'm not too concerned about the SAM evasion specifically, I certainly would love to see a feature in the game where aircraft could be set to be more survival-minded and break away from threats on their own - right now they seem predominantly mission-minded, which often gets them into trouble.



mikmykWS -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (12/4/2015 12:27:19 PM)

They do beam and evade now if they detect the threat. Rags looking at a few other things as well.

Mike



Sardaukar -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (12/4/2015 1:06:44 PM)

Problem was that every beam evasion took them closer to SAMs. Beam evasion is indeed correct tactic, but in this case they should have made more space for themselves in first place.

I know, it is almost impossible to program something for every occasion. [8D]

Also, one problem is that planes with bingo fuel totally ignore enemy threats.



AlGrant -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (12/4/2015 1:10:46 PM)


quote:

I certainly would love to see a feature in the game where aircraft could be set to be more survival-minded and break away from threats on their own - right now they seem predominantly mission-minded, which often gets them into trouble.


Early on in NI #5 - Beware of the Badger - I lost a few F-104's who were engaging incoming Badgers.
Clearly not being 'Survival-Minded' they often started their attack with a head-to-head gun run and as soon as they passed behind their target some of them got shot down by the Badgers tail gun before they ever got a chance to turn and use their AIM-9's (rear aspect attack only). I also had one that fired all weapons and went RTB Winchester and flew directly behind one of the Badgers .... he didn't make it home for tea and medals!

After seeing this happen a few times I started manually taking the F-104's astern of the Badger before letting them attack.

You'd think those pilots would have given the tail guns a bit more respect!






mikmykWS -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (12/4/2015 3:07:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AlGrant


quote:

I certainly would love to see a feature in the game where aircraft could be set to be more survival-minded and break away from threats on their own - right now they seem predominantly mission-minded, which often gets them into trouble.


Early on in NI #5 - Beware of the Badger - I lost a few F-104's who were engaging incoming Badgers.
Clearly not being 'Survival-Minded' they often started their attack with a head-to-head gun run and as soon as they passed behind their target some of them got shot down by the Badgers tail gun before they ever got a chance to turn and use their AIM-9's (rear aspect attack only). I also had one that fired all weapons and went RTB Winchester and flew directly behind one of the Badgers .... he didn't make it home for tea and medals!

After seeing this happen a few times I started manually taking the F-104's astern of the Badger before letting them attack.

You'd think those pilots would have given the tail guns a bit more respect!






We definitely didn't add logic for that. Will add to our list though.

Mike





CCIP-subsim -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (12/4/2015 3:37:25 PM)

Yeah, the gun fights in the game do get strange sometimes - I'm willing to let it slide a bit, of course, considering it's mainly a modern missile-combat game, but it would be good if the AI took things like threat from tail guns into consideration. Another one I often ran into in my Korea scenario for example is jet fighters vs. props - the jets were often at a disadvantage because they would slow down and get into turning fights, where they still go faster than the opponent, overshoot, and make easy targets for the Yaks as soon as they get in front of them. Both in this case and with Badger tail guns - in general, I'd say the AI doesn't quite know how to do "boom and zoom" attacks and minimize exposure to defensive gunfire.



Dimitris -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (12/4/2015 5:03:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CCIPsubsim
Yeah, the gun fights in the game do get strange sometimes - I'm willing to let it slide a bit, of course, considering it's mainly a modern missile-combat game, but it would be good if the AI took things like threat from tail guns into consideration. Another one I often ran into in my Korea scenario for example is jet fighters vs. props - the jets were often at a disadvantage because they would slow down and get into turning fights, where they still go faster than the opponent, overshoot, and make easy targets for the Yaks as soon as they get in front of them. Both in this case and with Badger tail guns - in general, I'd say the AI doesn't quite know how to do "boom and zoom" attacks and minimize exposure to defensive gunfire.


Guilty. Our dogfighting logic WRT speed emphasizes avoiding overtaking the target (both to avoid getting in his gunsights and also in order to maintain the shot opportunity for as long as possible), and thus slowing down to match his speed once within firing envelope. Obviously this is optimized for engagements vs tactical aircraft that don't have tail guns. For attacks against bombers a different "dash and slash" logic is needed.



CCIP-subsim -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (12/5/2015 8:53:12 AM)

Just a thought - maybe it's possible to somehow use a "maintain standoff to target" logic when it comes to aircraft dealing with SAM or tail gun type threats?



Sardaukar -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (12/5/2015 10:38:20 PM)

It'd definitely be good to have sort of setting for that.



PaulCharl -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (1/23/2016 6:49:54 PM)

Not really sure why this is a problem. The way pilots break a SAM lock, other than chaff/flares, is by out maneuvering the missile to either turn inside its turn radius or to get outside the cone of its radar homing and thus break lock. This generally involves a tight diving (or climbing - if your a/c has the power) turn into the on-coming missile. Since the SAM is doing its best to run a straight line from launcher to target this inevitably means the a/c turns TOWARDS the launch site and gets closer to it. Hey-ho! Worry first about the SAM coming at you rather than the next one.



AlmightyTallest -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (1/24/2016 12:51:40 PM)

PaulCharl does have a point, but such maneuvers sometimes makes for a very white knuckle flight and risk for the pilot.

This video shows an F-16 pilot dodging 6 SAM's Note his rapid altitude and orientation changes as he dodges SA-2's and SA-6's in a 5 minute period. The F-16's altitude in on the right side of the HUD, initially around 26,000 feet. Speed is on the left in Mach numbers I believe.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uh4yMAx2UA


quote:

The vid starts out with his premission arming before takeoff as he narrates into the video. The SAM action begins around the 3:00 point. The radar waring receiver tones and chrips can be heard often. In some cases you can see the missile smoke trails.



Rongor -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (1/24/2016 1:19:52 PM)

speed on the left vertical scale is tens of knots. the single value top right of that left scale is the G-load. bottom right of left vertical scale is mach number.



AlmightyTallest -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (1/24/2016 2:36:28 PM)

Thanks for the correction Rongor appreicate that. :)



Dimitris -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (1/25/2016 9:04:41 AM)

Added "dash and slash" logic for attacks on bombers etc. in Build 775.11.



AlGrant -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (1/25/2016 9:44:26 AM)

My F-104 pilots salute you [:)]



Dysta -> RE: Question about SAM evasion (1/25/2016 10:07:32 AM)

Nice to have an attention finally.

What's next, jousting or kamikaze? [:D]



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.7695313