AI use of Smoke (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Modern] >> FlashPoint Germany



Message

jjhouston4 -> AI use of Smoke (6/24/2005 7:16:15 AM)

I've got two questions regarding the AI artillery's new proclivity to fire smoke missions:

Is there a way to turn it off?

How is the effect of smoke on the different target acquisition and fire control systems modeled, i.e., does it have a differential effect on units depending on how advanced their equipment is?



CapnDarwin -> RE: AI use of Smoke (6/24/2005 2:30:39 PM)

You can turn off the AI directed smoke by turning off the FSCC option and plotting your own missions.
Smoke does block line of sight for units not equipped with thermal sights.
IIRC the new 104 update reduces the % use of WP smoke to better match WP planning of the 80's.

Happy Hunting!



jjhouston4 -> RE: AI use of Smoke (6/25/2005 8:46:53 PM)


quote:

You can turn off the AI directed smoke by turning off the FSCC option and plotting your own missions.


That's quite a handicap if the Limited Staff Rule is in effect.

quote:

Smoke does block line of sight for units not equipped with thermal sights.


Yeah, that's the problem --- WP AI dropping smoke on its units leaving them blind but still visible to M1s and Bradleys. Not very smart, nor, I'd imagine, realistic.

quote:

IIRC the new 104 update reduces the % use of WP smoke to better match WP planning of the 80's.


Out of curiousity, what sources are being used to determine what the WP planning of the 80's was?




IronManBeta -> RE: AI use of Smoke (6/28/2005 3:04:05 AM)

As Commanding Officer you are not really expected to tell the staff and gunners what particular rounds to select for each and every mission. It is handled more abstractly unless you really do want to explicitly fire a smoke mission, which of course you can do. Many games let you jump into the shoes of anyone on the battlefield but a key part of the FPG design - inherited directly from the SimCan MBT series on which it is based - is to avoid just that confusion.

The staff basically applies a random factor based on the approximate % of smoke rounds available. The Soviets at one point were huge believers in smoke - 'blinding levels' of smoke were to be delivered in support of an assault - but NATO smoke-piercing technology rendered all that *much* less valuable by 1989. The Soviets were deemphasizing it rapidly by 1989 but still had huge stocks of shells on hand. Currently both sides fire smoke and (and if friendlies are not too close) gas on a variable basis to keep the enemy guessing. Does it fail to be optimal at times? Of course, but that happens in real life too. Miscommunications and errors due to fatigue are endemic in any army.

You would be happy to hear that I am revisiting the whole core AI all over again. Now that I have gotten it this far we can pick up on the little glitches here and there. Some can be fixed as is but my ambition is to come up with something that is a lot more modular and maintainable (for my benefit) while modelling the battlefield in greater depth so that things like this don't have quite so much (your benefit). I might throw in some explict artillery doctrine screens for people to tweak as well.

I am reading a book called "Field Artillery and Firepower". It is on Amazon and the author was a British major general who was director of Royal Artillery for two years and a developer of British artillery doctrine for NATO. Fascinating stuff. For Soviet doctrine I keep going back to FM-100-2-1 The Soviet Army Operations and Tactics. That is dated July 84 though and things had started to change by 1989 in response to the deployment of the 'death star' like MLRS. The Soviets were having to consider doing without massed bombardments and heavy concentrations of arty in favour of lighter and shorter fires and more mobile arty groups. This is echoed in the game.

If you could design an 'artillery doctrine screen' what sorts of things would you put in it?

Cheers, Rob.



jjhouston4 -> RE: AI use of Smoke (6/28/2005 5:43:51 AM)

Mr. Crandall,

Interestingly enough, having just started it, I happen to be on page 64 of General Bailey's book myself. [:)] The reason I'm reading it is to satisify myself that I'm correct in a friendly, yet long-going, disagreement over the employment of artillery in another sim that I play regularly. That disagreement centers around which echelon of command should control the arty assets in range of the FEBA. Despite the way it may seem from my previous posts in this thread, I really do like what you've done with the FSCC handling counter and opportunity fire missions.

As far as WP doctrine (I was a scout not MI or FA, so I've no expertise, which is why I was curious as to what you are relying on -- maybe I can learn something), I've been under the impression (relying mostly on FM 100-2-1 -- found it on eBay-- and Isby's Weapons and Tactics book) that most of the fires available would be pre-planned and the type of fire would depend on the manuever unit's mission, e.g., lots of smoke for a river crossing.

What prompted my question initially was frustration when playing WP and having the friendly FSCC drop smoke on an M1 platoon while a BTR company is engaging. The friendly MRC is now blind and at a severe disadvantage to the hostile tanks.

It may be 'gamey', but I, for one, would certainly appreciate a 'do not use smoke or chemical or FASCAM unless ordered' option.

Thanks.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.765625