Is SSM probability of hit really this bad?

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 SSM probability of hit really this bad?

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 >> Is SSM probability of hit really this bad?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/18/2013 11:14:32 PM

Alex170g

Posts: 36
Joined: 10/1/2013
Status: offline

Maybe I�m used to other naval sims (harpoon, fleet command, Arctic circle), but in this scenario most Surface to Surface Missiles miss their targets.

I know that ECM may be a large part of it, but all Russian SSM are fired against Norway (and Norway�s ships do not have their radars on) usually only one ship is sunk, sometimes none, and Russian fires their missiles in one salvo.

In the other side, Norway fires all their Surface to Surface Missiles against Both Improved Steregushchy [Project 2038.5], in 1 to 6 missiles salvoes, always only one or none Russian ship is sunk, (only once both ships where sunk of about 5 tries.)

I know that ESSM from Norway�s Aegis do their job very well, as Improved Steregushchy [Project 2038.5] SAMs, but what about Norway�s PTGs, or when SAMs are gone out, Only size and ECM works, and it works very well, as most SSM miss their targets, even a full six missiles salvo is totally wasted, their accuracy is totally 00%.

Attached the scenario, just let it go.
34x NSM = sunk 1 or 0 [Pr.2038.5, Improved Steregushchy]
16x SS-N-26 Sapless [P-800 Onyx] = sunk 1 or 0 P 960 Skjold
12x SS-N-9 Siren [P-120 Malakhit] = 0 ship sunk..[even with monolit radar on.]

I have the same feeling in Green Canary scenario, usually a single Spanish f-18 needs to fire all their sparrows and sidewinders to shot down a single morocco Mirage, (the last sidewinders are fired in pairs).

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Alex170g -- 10/18/2013 11:16:52 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/18/2013 11:15:04 PM

Alex170g

Posts: 36
Joined: 10/1/2013
Status: offline

here is the scenario

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Alex170g -- 10/18/2013 11:16:16 PM >

(in reply to Alex170g)

Post #: 2

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/18/2013 11:45:37 PM

Figeac

Posts: 290
Joined: 7/11/2013
Status: offline

I think that all air-to-air missiles are fired in pairs, or at least, aircrafts and other launching platforms always try to have 2 missiles going for the same target. That's reasonable and is in accordance with most modern AAW doctrines, I think. The problem is that when the first missile misses his target, the aircrafts/launching platforms immediately fires a second one, even if there is another already on the way. And if this one hits the target, the just launched missile will be lost...

Maybe they should wait for the first pair to resolve, not just the first one, before launching any other missile.

And yes, missiles DO miss a lot they targets in Command.

(in reply to Alex170g)

Post #: 3

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/18/2013 11:49:18 PM

jomni

Posts: 2827
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline

Yup. The Air Defense Missiles easily defeat those Surface missles. But I'm not complaining because it saves my ships. :)

_____________________________

My Blog
Random Wargame Name Generator

(in reply to Figeac)

Post #: 4

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 12:26:51 AM

Wiz33

Posts: 147
Joined: 5/16/2007
Status: offline

I have not loaded the scenario to see but are they getting intercepted by SAMs and AAMs or were they decoyed away from target? SAMs and AAMs have a pretty good chance to hit a large non-maneuvering target as long as it does not have a high crossing rate (some newer systems also works well against crossing target).

< Message edited by Wiz33 -- 10/19/2013 12:28:28 AM >

(in reply to jomni)

Post #: 5

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 12:28:07 AM

jomni

Posts: 2827
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wiz33

I have not loaded the scenario to see but are they getting intercepted by SAMs and AAMs or were they decoyed away from target? SAMs and AAMs have a pretty good chance to hit a large non-maneuvering target as long as it does not have a high crossing rate.

Now that you've mentioned it, may these are pretty small and fast boats.

_____________________________

My Blog
Random Wargame Name Generator

(in reply to Wiz33)

Post #: 6

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 2:06:21 AM

Alex170g

Posts: 36
Joined: 10/1/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL:
I have not loaded the scenario to see but are they getting intercepted by SAMs and AAMs or were they decoyed away from target?

The aegis and Improved Steregushchy have SAMs which work quite well..The PTGs only ECM and small size ...No airplanes...There is a point where both Improved Steregushchy run out of SAM missiles, and still more NSM Surface to Surface Missiles inbound, which also miss.

In other words; 20 SSM against Norway's four PTGs and, in the best case, only one hit (misteriously always the same PTG, the one that is closer to the Aegis). 8 SSM versus the aegis, and all shoot down by Evolved Sea Sparrows.

By the way, the aegis is behind the lat/lon black box.

< Message edited by Alex170g -- 10/19/2013 2:23:39 AM >

(in reply to jomni)

Post #: 7

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 7:17:25 AM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

Okay I'm bumping this up on my to-do list, thanks guys

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to Alex170g)

Post #: 8

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 7:41:43 AM

Wiz33

Posts: 147
Joined: 5/16/2007
Status: offline

OK. I may see why this is happening. I'm looking thru the database. I don't see any form of ECCM rating for missiles (unless they are not show in the database viewer). Without that. The current missile combat resolution is totally flawed. Without taking into the ECCM rating of a missile (the missile onboard logic for filtering countermeasures). The game may have reduced the pk% of any missile by too much when faced with countermeasures. Chaff, flares and jammer might have a decent chance of spoofing older missile but probably will be a lot less effective against modern/near future missiles. Without some form of ECCM rating for the missile. A SS-N-22 will suffer the same pk% penalty as a 40+ years old SS-N-2 which is just not right.

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 9

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 11:19:45 AM

Dimitris

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

Guys, read the message log. It will tell you exactly why a missile hits or misses. There is no black magic involved

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Wiz33)

Post #: 10

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 11:21:51 AM

Dimitris

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wiz33
OK. I may see why this is happening. I'm looking thru the database. I don't see any form of ECCM rating for missiles (unless they are not show in the database viewer). Without that. The current missile combat resolution is totally flawed. Without taking into the ECCM rating of a missile (the missile onboard logic for filtering countermeasures). The game may have reduced the pk% of any missile by too much when faced with countermeasures. Chaff, flares and jammer might have a decent chance of spoofing older missile but probably will be a lot less effective against modern/near future missiles. Without some form of ECCM rating for the missile. A SS-N-22 will suffer the same pk% penalty as a 40+ years old SS-N-2 which is just not right.

Not quite true; In fact we model very carefully the tech generations of different weapons and seekers and the effect this has on endgame calculations. A given DECM will be much more effective against an SS-N-2 than an SS-N-22. If you have seen them being equally defeated by a countermeasure please show us the log. Thanks!

< Message edited by Sunburn -- 10/19/2013 12:46:09 PM >

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Wiz33)

Post #: 11

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 12:40:56 PM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

Would suggest you try the Latakia scenario. The SS-N-2s are quite useless against chaff and jammer-equipped attack boats. Then swap the SS-N-2 for something more modern, and see what happens then

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 12

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 3:04:51 PM

ExMachina

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

Just d/l-ed the save game and let it run.

The first SSMs of each salvo destroyed the small Norwegian boats and NONE of the SSNs got through the ESSM defensive ring. The surface group needs to turn its radar on to see incoming vampires, then these were effectively defeated by Russian SAMs...

So at least for me, there were no obvious problems.

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 13

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 3:29:49 PM

ExMachina

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

Ok...maybe there is a problem here...

I've been running it several times and under 1 sec time compression (for the attack resolutions) everything looks normal (ie, the little boats die and the Russian SSMs hit with good reliability).

However, when I up the time compression for the scenario (I tried both 1 minute and 5 minutes)--all the Norwegian boats somehow evade all the Russian SSMs.

Annoyingly, I cannot figure out how to save the full message log (the older entries keep disappearing) so I cannot see how each of the attacks was resolved.

So it LOOKS like attacks are resolved differently at different time compression. Can anyone else confirm this?

(in reply to ExMachina)

Post #: 14

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 4:03:57 PM

ExMachina

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

FWIW, I think I have now been able to reproduce this behavior in a new scenario. Playing First Contact 2016 as Norway, whenever Russian SSMs got "close", I simply changed time compression to 5 minutes and all my units survived.

But again, because I cannot figure out how to keep the message log from auto-clearing, I have no idea what actually happened.

(in reply to ExMachina)

Post #: 15

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 5:11:09 PM

mattpenfold

Posts: 94
Joined: 7/1/2006
Status: offline

If you have the message log displaying in a separate window you can just highlight the test and copy it. You can then paste it into notepad or similar.

(in reply to ExMachina)

Post #: 16

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 5:16:28 PM

ExMachina

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

Right. You can also export the log to a txt file. The problem is that the log auto clears every now and then (can't figure out the trigger for clearing).

quote:

ORIGINAL: mattpenfold

If you have the message log displaying in a separate window you can just highlight the test and copy it. You can then paste it into notepad or similar.

(in reply to mattpenfold)

Post #: 17

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 5:38:38 PM

mattpenfold

Posts: 94
Joined: 7/1/2006
Status: offline

Well rather than wait until the end, could you not save the log periodically ? I think there is also an option to clear the log, so you could pause the game, save the log and then clear it, before resuming.

(in reply to ExMachina)

Post #: 18

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 5:43:39 PM

mattpenfold

Posts: 94
Joined: 7/1/2006
Status: offline

Also, have you looked at what is recorded in the logfile you will find in the logs directory ?

(in reply to mattpenfold)

Post #: 19

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 5:53:39 PM

ExMachina

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

Ah! Great! (so why is there even an option to export the log to a text file?--seems like it's all here?)

Thanks

quote:

ORIGINAL: mattpenfold

Also, have you looked at what is recorded in the logfile you will find in the logs directory ?

(in reply to mattpenfold)

Post #: 20

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 7:17:52 PM

Wiz33

Posts: 147
Joined: 5/16/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wiz33
OK. I may see why this is happening. I'm looking thru the database. I don't see any form of ECCM rating for missiles (unless they are not show in the database viewer). Without that. The current missile combat resolution is totally flawed. Without taking into the ECCM rating of a missile (the missile onboard logic for filtering countermeasures). The game may have reduced the pk% of any missile by too much when faced with countermeasures. Chaff, flares and jammer might have a decent chance of spoofing older missile but probably will be a lot less effective against modern/near future missiles. Without some form of ECCM rating for the missile. A SS-N-22 will suffer the same pk% penalty as a 40+ years old SS-N-2 which is just not right.

Not quite true; In fact we model very carefully the tech generations of different weapons and seekers and the effect this has on endgame calculations. A given DECM will be much more effective against an SS-N-2 than an SS-N-22. If you have seen them being equally defeated by a countermeasure please show us the log. Thanks!

So there are some sort of ECCM rating built into the missile data but it's just not show on the database viewer?

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 21

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 7:27:51 PM

Dimitris

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

You can see the "battle of tech generations" on the message log.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Wiz33)

Post #: 22

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 8:07:36 PM

ExMachina

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

Running the OPs scenario 4 times, here are the log stats:

With time compression set to 1 sec during all Russian missile attack resolution phases:

First Test
10/17/2016 5:10:28 AM - : Weapon: SS-N-26 Sapless [P-800 Onyx] #93 has impacted P 963 Steil
10/17/2016 5:10:38 AM - : Weapon: SS-N-26 Sapless [P-800 Onyx] #81 has impacted P 965 Gnist
10/17/2016 5:11:39 AM - : Weapon: SS-N-9 Siren [P-120 Malakhit] #95 has impacted P 961 Storm
10/17/2016 5:11:39 AM - : Weapon: SS-N-9 Siren [P-120 Malakhit] #96 has impacted P 961 Storm
10/17/2016 5:12:43 AM - : Weapon: SS-N-9 Siren [P-120 Malakhit] #97 has impacted P 960 Skjold

0 SS-N-s "missed"
------------------------------------
Second Test

10/17/2016 5:10:30 AM - : Weapon: SS-N-26 Sapless [P-800 Onyx] #94 has impacted P 963 Steil
10/17/2016 5:10:38 AM - : Weapon: SS-N-26 Sapless [P-800 Onyx] #81 has impacted P 965 Gnist
10/17/2016 5:11:41 AM - : Weapon: SS-N-9 Siren [P-120 Malakhit] #96 has impacted P 961 Storm
10/17/2016 5:12:43 AM - : Weapon: SS-N-9 Siren [P-120 Malakhit] #97 has impacted P 960 Skjold
10/17/2016 5:12:43 AM - : Weapon: SS-N-9 Siren [P-120 Malakhit] #98 has impacted P 960 Skjold

0 SS-N-s "missed"
===============================================

With time compression set to >1 minute (tried to keep it at 5min) during all Russian missile attack resolution phases
First Test
10/17/2016 5:11:38 AM - : Weapon: SS-N-9 Siren [P-120 Malakhit] #96 has impacted P 961 Storm

13 SS-N-s "missed"
-----------------------------
Second Test
10/17/2016 5:10:39 AM - : Weapon: SS-N-26 Sapless [P-800 Onyx] #89 has impacted P 965 Gnist

11 SS-N-s "missed"

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 23

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 11:41:28 PM

ExMachina

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

Sunburn (where did your reply go?), the results are repeatable.

I'm attaching and additional 7 runs I just ran with the OP's .save file (the only change I made from the OP's settings were turning on the Russian corvette's radars).

For the tests, I did two runs with no (1sec) time compression during combat resolution, one run with 1-minute compression and four runs with 5-min compression.

The 1sec-compression runs both saw all four of the Norwegian boats killed (always with the first missile of the salvo, too). The runs with compression saw only one or two the boats killed, and the middle two boats ALWAYS survived. I did not see a difference between the 1-min and 5-min compression runs.

So there is a repeatable discrepancy in outcomes here. Moreover, this weirdness (at least in this scenario can be "gamed"--as I said above, I was able to start a fresh run of First Contact 2016--playing as Norway--I was able to and save ALL my boats by simply time compressing during the SS-N's terminal resolution.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ExMachina)

Post #: 24

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/19/2013 11:54:35 PM

ExMachina

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

Ah Ha!

It's the difference between 1:1 hi-fidelity mode and non-hi fidelity mode!!

I can duplicate the time-compressed results @ 1sec time compression if I turn hi-fi mode "off"

So the question is now: does hi-fidelity mode always favor the attacker?

(in reply to ExMachina)

Post #: 25

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/20/2013 2:17:25 AM

mikmykWS

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

This is interesting. Thanks for putting time in on this one. We have a meeting tomorrow

_____________________________

(in reply to ExMachina)

Post #: 26

RE: Is SSM probability of hit really this bad? - 10/20/2013 11:02:24 AM

smudge56

Posts: 667
Joined: 1/17/2009
From: UK
Status: offline