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: Changing Base HQs

 
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] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Changing Base HQs Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Changing Base HQs - 2/19/2021 4:37:20 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline 		Time to put to rest some of the "hearsay" of this thread.  Bear in mind that disclosure of the algorithms is not on.  So consider the following more of a mental checklist on how to think about the concept of air coordination.

1.  The entire air war design of AE is focused on conducting air operations in raids, not the humungous single air Verduns in a single turn over a target of classical WITP.

2.  Players look at air coordination myopically, viz they only consider the number of planes in the raid, the more planes in the raid the better coordination is as far as they are concerned.  This is far too simplistic.  Consider this hypothetical situation:

(a)  Raid (A) arrives over target and is fully coordinated according to the code.  Total number of planes of raid (A) are 10 bombers (from 5 different groups) and  9 fighters.  A total of 19 planes.

(b)  Raid (B) subsequently arrives over the same target because it is not coordinated with raid (A).   Total number of planes of raid (B) are 16 bombers (from 1 group) and 25 fighters.  A total of 41 planes.

Over the many years since AE was released the usual complaint would be that raid (A) was the uncoordinated raid whereas (B) was coordinated.  And as usual, the player complaint and assessment is just wrong.  You see, players demand that all the planes they launch would arrive in a single raid over the target if it was coordinated.  Any other outcome is to them a failure of coordination.  They consistently fail to understand the ramifications of point 1.

3.  To achieve the player expectation of point 2, the focus on groups is too simplistic, and by itself, cannot ensure the preferred player outcome is achieved.  Just as important is understanding the considerations which impact on the number of planes flying.  I remind the reader of the hypothetical position presented in point 2.

4.  The HQ to which a base itself  is attached to, is not a direct factor in determining which groups fly together in a single coordinated raid.

5.  The manner in which a coordinated raid is formed is not well understood by players.  In simplified terms, a group qualifies and becomes the raid leader.  The next candidate group participant (remember the key initiating factor is having the same assigned altitude), if it passes various checks joins the raid leader.  Then the next candidate group participant, if it too passes its checks joins the raid leader as the third group.  And so on with some candidate groups passing and other candidates failing the various checks.

6.  The checks of point 5 are not the same checks which determine the number of planes which fly from each group.  Again I refer the reader to the hypothetical presented in point 2.

7.  A coordinated raid can take off but before the attack resolution, the degree of group coordination can decrease.  No I won't disclose what the relevant factors are as that is a prerogative of the devs.


In short, there are both direct and indirect considerations when it comes to structuring air operations.  The basic design philosophy is to place various checks with the explicit intention of minimising the size of air combat.  Having multiple raids in a single turn over the same target, rather than a humungous single raid, is the basic design philosophy as that is in accordance with the historical record.

Alfred

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 31
RE: Changing Base HQs - 2/19/2021 7:33:24 PM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 1674
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline 		Thanks, Alfred !

I can’t help myself, I notice in your point 4 you state that the base’s HQ is not a « direct factor » in strike coordination. Given the discussion was quite specific, I’ll blame your phrasing on your NDA preventing you from confirming or denying an indirect effect, trusting you that, had a Dev provided a full statement on such indirect effect, you would have told us. Thus, no Dev speak, the matter will stay in the fog.

In your point 2, to link your example with LoBaron’s posts in the threads one can read by following the link you provided earlier, I suppose the raid B is what he called a « co-operated » raid ? From what I’ve understood of those threads, such a co-operated raid may appear to have many fighters protecting the bombers, but in reality the escorts won’t (necessarily ?) intercept the portion of the CAP intercepting the bombers. My understanding of this differenciation between coordinated strikes and cooperated strikes is that escorts in a coordinated strike better protect the bombers than escorts in a cooperated strikes.
Maybe I’m reading too much in LoBaron’s posts ?

Point 1 really is in the Manual, and in every design thread from twelve years back. As a former WitP player, I remember quite well the atrocious results of the gigantic air battles, when every squadron of escort met every squadron of CAP, then every squadron of CAP met every squadron of bombers... I’m thankful to the AE team for remedying this.

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 32
RE: Changing Base HQs - 2/19/2021 11:41:30 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

Thanks, Alfred !

I can’t help myself, I notice in your point 4 you state that the base’s HQ is not a « direct factor » in strike coordination. ...


Yes -Thanks, Alfred!

I think you have to read point 4 with point 6. I plan to continue paying for base attachment, when running significant air campaigns, even if it is not a direct DRM.

More significant in my mind is that Alfred's point 5, when read together with Michaelm's 8th bullet point, tells you (as an example) to not try to put B17G's with B29s/B24s in the same strike package. Given the disparity in cruise speeds, you are better off forming separate strike packages at different altitudes, each with an escort component.

B-17G - cruises at 150mph
B-24J - cruises at 200mph
B-29B - cruises at 225mph.

quote:

Michaelm's 8th bullet point-

Groups need to be within 20% of the raid's speed or time to target for the raid and group within 30 minutes to participate in raid


< Message edited by Ian R -- 2/19/2021 11:43:23 PM >

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 33
RE: Changing Base HQs - 2/20/2021 12:18:33 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

Thanks, Alfred !

I can’t help myself, I notice in your point 4 you state that the base’s HQ is not a « direct factor » in strike coordination. Given the discussion was quite specific, I’ll blame your phrasing on your NDA preventing you from confirming or denying an indirect effect, trusting you that, had a Dev provided a full statement on such indirect effect, you would have told us. Thus, no Dev speak, the matter will stay in the fog.

In your point 2, to link your example with LoBaron’s posts in the threads one can read by following the link you provided earlier, I suppose the raid B is what he called a « co-operated » raid ? From what I’ve understood of those threads, such a co-operated raid may appear to have many fighters protecting the bombers, but in reality the escorts won’t (necessarily ?) intercept the portion of the CAP intercepting the bombers. My understanding of this differenciation between coordinated strikes and cooperated strikes is that escorts in a coordinated strike better protect the bombers than escorts in a cooperated strikes.
Maybe I’m reading too much in LoBaron’s posts ?

Point 1 really is in the Manual, and in every design thread from twelve years back. As a former WitP player, I remember quite well the atrocious results of the gigantic air battles, when every squadron of escort met every squadron of CAP, then every squadron of CAP met every squadron of bombers... I’m thankful to the AE team for remedying this.


You might want to brush up on your Delphic Oracle reading skills if you want to advance your case for appointment to the Hof van Cassatie (I assume you are a Dutch speaker).

You can consider the fighters of Raid B as being a cooperative exemplar. Or Raid B was it's own (separate from raid A) mini coordinated raid. It would depend on various factors not included in the hypothetical situation I provided.

In the combat resolution stage, the performance of coordinated and cooperated escort fighters is not impacted by the categorization. Other factors come into play regarding how well the escorting fighters perform. I would steer you towards my posts on cooperation rather than LoBaron. In his Guide, LoBaron focussed on explaining how to maximise the chances of getting coordination. Which is why over the years, I've posted a lot less on the mechanics of coordination as I generally allowed LoBaron to take "first chair" on air matters whilst he was active on the forum.


To materially improve upon Lobaron's guide would require too much disclosure of the under the hood mechanics. You will therefore understand that I'm not really that interested in producing a rival air coordination guide to that of LoBaron's. Besides, me producing a Guide would potentially reduce the flow of cases to the AE Hof van Cassatie.

Alfred

(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 34
RE: Changing Base HQs - 2/20/2021 12:22:26 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

Thanks, Alfred !

I can’t help myself, I notice in your point 4 you state that the base’s HQ is not a « direct factor » in strike coordination. ...


Yes -Thanks, Alfred!

I think you have to read point 4 with point 6. I plan to continue paying for base attachment, when running significant air campaigns, even if it is not a direct DRM.

More significant in my mind is that Alfred's point 5, when read together with Michaelm's 8th bullet point, tells you (as an example) to not try to put B17G's with B29s/B24s in the same strike package. Given the disparity in cruise speeds, you are better off forming separate strike packages at different altitudes, each with an escort component.

B-17G - cruises at 150mph
B-24J - cruises at 200mph
B-29B - cruises at 225mph.

quote:

Michaelm's 8th bullet point-

Groups need to be within 20% of the raid's speed or time to target for the raid and group within 30 minutes to participate in raid



Well spotted.

You can entertain having that mixture of bombers, provided you understand you are punting what's left on the rank outsider in the 7th at Royal Randwick.

Alfred

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 35
RE: Changing Base HQs - 2/20/2021 12:25:18 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		Alfred: you misspelled "Castration".

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 36
RE: Changing Base HQs - 2/20/2021 12:43:31 AM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 1674
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Alfred: you misspelled "Castration".


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 37
RE: Changing Base HQs - 2/20/2021 12:49:56 AM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 1674
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline 		Well, cruise speed of the various types of planes involved in a strike is a matter already heavily discussed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

Thanks, Alfred !

I can’t help myself, I notice in your point 4 you state that the base’s HQ is not a « direct factor » in strike coordination. Given the discussion was quite specific, I’ll blame your phrasing on your NDA preventing you from confirming or denying an indirect effect, trusting you that, had a Dev provided a full statement on such indirect effect, you would have told us. Thus, no Dev speak, the matter will stay in the fog.

In your point 2, to link your example with LoBaron’s posts in the threads one can read by following the link you provided earlier, I suppose the raid B is what he called a « co-operated » raid ? From what I’ve understood of those threads, such a co-operated raid may appear to have many fighters protecting the bombers, but in reality the escorts won’t (necessarily ?) intercept the portion of the CAP intercepting the bombers. My understanding of this differenciation between coordinated strikes and cooperated strikes is that escorts in a coordinated strike better protect the bombers than escorts in a cooperated strikes.
Maybe I’m reading too much in LoBaron’s posts ?

Point 1 really is in the Manual, and in every design thread from twelve years back. As a former WitP player, I remember quite well the atrocious results of the gigantic air battles, when every squadron of escort met every squadron of CAP, then every squadron of CAP met every squadron of bombers... I’m thankful to the AE team for remedying this.


You might want to brush up on your Delphic Oracle reading skills if you want to advance your case for appointment to the Hof van Cassatie (I assume you are a Dutch speaker).

You can consider the fighters of Raid B as being a cooperative exemplar. Or Raid B was it's own (separate from raid A) mini coordinated raid. It would depend on various factors not included in the hypothetical situation I provided.

In the combat resolution stage, the performance of coordinated and cooperated escort fighters is not impacted by the categorization. Other factors come into play regarding how well the escorting fighters perform. I would steer you towards my posts on cooperation rather than LoBaron. In his Guide, LoBaron focussed on explaining how to maximise the chances of getting coordination. Which is why over the years, I've posted a lot less on the mechanics of coordination as I generally allowed LoBaron to take "first chair" on air matters whilst he was active on the forum.


To materially improve upon Lobaron's guide would require too much disclosure of the under the hood mechanics. You will therefore understand that I'm not really that interested in producing a rival air coordination guide to that of LoBaron's. Besides, me producing a Guide would potentially reduce the flow of cases to the AE Hof van Cassatie.

Alfred

Understood.

But no, I’m not a native Dutch speaker; French is my primary language, although 75% of my ancestry is Flemish. And I have absolutely no intention of being appointed to the Cour de cassation. I’m not even interested in the Court of Appeals, I prefer to stay close to the ordinary people.
Which doesn’t mean my judgements are not heavily discussed, and published in the most prestigious law reviews, even when I have no intention to be published. Critical failure at stealth...

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 38
RE: Changing Base HQs - 2/20/2021 1:35:59 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

... As a former WitP player, I remember quite well the atrocious results of the gigantic air battles, when every squadron of escort met every squadron of CAP, then every squadron of CAP met every squadron of bombers... I’m thankful to the AE team for remedying this.


I haven't checked this to see if the devs ever made a public comment but as it doesn't disclose any algorithm details, it should be safe to state.

Remedying the humungous Verdun style air combat of classical WITP was in the top 4 changes the AE devs set themselves to accomplish. This remained an area of great interest to them even after AE was released. Perusal of the public patch notes will show that important tweeks were made by the devs even years after the release of AE. Those tweeks most definitely were not the sole work of michaelm75au. As with all the significant patch changes a considerable amount of effort was also expended by other devs too.

Alfred

(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 39
RE: Changing Base HQs - 2/20/2021 1:57:30 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

... I have absolutely no intention of being appointed to the Cour de cassation. I’m not even interested in the Court of Appeals, I prefer to stay close to the ordinary people. ...


Guess that means the ECJ is of no interest then.

But can I interest you in a sideways move to Alicante. For the lifestyle of course. Or would that involve in your professional life too much corporate contact and minimal ordinary people interaction.

Alfred

(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 40
RE: Changing Base HQs - 2/20/2021 7:36:12 AM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

Well, cruise speed of the various types of planes involved in a strike is a matter already heavily discussed.



With all due respect, m'Lord, whilst that is so, the critical fault line is if the one bomb group that cruises 60mph slower than the other n groups, is the one selected as raid leader. That will stuff up a lot of subsequent co-ordination DRs.

I have my own ideas about how the raid lead group is selected, but it's (anecdotally informed) guesswork at best. Experience, skill, leader aggression and air rating, that air group bombing accuracy stat (is that squadron related or pilot related or both?), they all sound like things the program might check. But I don't think the criteria for selection of the raid leading group has ever been de-classified.


_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 41
RE: Changing Base HQs - 2/20/2021 7:50:57 AM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 1674
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

Well, cruise speed of the various types of planes involved in a strike is a matter already heavily discussed.



With all due respect, m'Lord, whilst that is so, the critical fault line is if the one bomb group that cruises 60mph slower than the other n groups, is the one selected as raid leader. That will stuff up a lot of subsequent co-ordination DRs.

I have my own ideas about how the raid lead group is selected, but it's (anecdotally informed) guesswork at best. Experience, skill, leader aggression and air rating, that air group bombing accuracy stat (is that squadron related or pilot related or both?), they all sound like things the program might check. But I don't think the criteria for selection of the raid leading group has ever been de-classified.


I agree. If you could be sure that adding that lone B-17G squadron to the strike of 9 B-24J squadrons would only risk that lone squadron to fall out, well, so be it, you only risk 12 planes (or less). But as such, it’s a larger hazard.

For choosing the raid leader, the program might also check the air group’s ID number.

(in reply to Ian R)
Post #: 42
RE: Changing Base HQs - 2/20/2021 8:00:13 AM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 1674
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

... I have absolutely no intention of being appointed to the Cour de cassation. I’m not even interested in the Court of Appeals, I prefer to stay close to the ordinary people. ...


Guess that means the ECJ is of no interest then.

But can I interest you in a sideways move to Alicante. For the lifestyle of course. Or would that involve in your professional life too much corporate contact and minimal ordinary people interaction.

Alfred

Even less the ECJ than the rest ! I really don’t like international law, including (and foremost) the EU’s legislation. ECHR is not to my liking either.

As a magistrate, transferring from one country to another is not possible, as far as I know. Each country holds the judicial system to be a core of its sovereignty, and if in some cases it is possible to be appointed without being a national, it still requires to meet all criteria to be appointed. If I wished to leave Belgium to become a French judge for example (I’d be tempted by Britanny rather than the Mediterranean Spanish coast), I’d have to resign in Belgium, get my Law degree recognized by France (which would be near automatic, maybe just a small university cursus to learn the specifics), and then succeed at the French exam... before attending the École Nationale de la Magistrature for 2 or 3 years (where I’ll be with other prospective magistrates half my age...).

European integration is far from complete...

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 43
RE: Changing Base HQs - 2/20/2021 8:31:21 AM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ambassador



I agree.


Well, I do always try to write my final written submissions in a form that, with the mere alteration of a few pronouns, constitutes a good judgement.

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 44
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Changing Base HQs Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

0.688