Koevoet

I did a series of tests on this topic. Attacker armed with 100 "testmissles" castrated Harpoon SSM with 0 DP due to magazine and mount desing firing salvos of 8 every minute. Defender: Modified F-124, F123, K130 1vs1 only the F-124 1vs3 in the center the F124, than F-123 most outside of the inner Ring, the K130 red and blue got some eh101 AEW to ensure sensor coverage. 1vs1 1vs3 Atack form long range Atack from medium range (within the Range of the ESSM) Weapons on the F-124 sortet from short range to long and vice versa..... Result: 1. Case Long range: It makes no difference how the weapons and mounts are sortet by range as long as the incomming SSM are out of Range of the medium range weapons. The weapon with the longest Range engages first. But when the SSM enters the Range of the Medium Range SAM, the sorting starts to influence the weapon handling. Sortet from long to short: the LR SAM engage until the mount is empty Sortet from short to long: the MR SAM engages as long as MR SAMs are availbe, siwthing back to LR-SAM in the case all MR-SAMs are used the number of ships did not influence the tests except in some cases (depending on Range) the Sea Sparrow on the F-123 did engage too 2. Case Medium Range the way the mounts and the weapons inside the mounts are sortet count! Sortet from long to short: the LR SAM engage until the mount is empty, than swithing to MR-SAMs Sortet from short to long: the MR SAM engages as long as MR SAMs are availbe, siwthing back to LR-SAM in the case all MR-SAMs are used the number of ships did not influence the tests except in some cases (depending on Range) the Sea Sparrow on the F-123 did engage too. If the sorting from short to long did influence the time needed to calculate the engagement could not be observed, but should bee there simply because more weapon calculation needs to be done... No idea if it might get significant in larger scens/ with larger groups! The setting light, normal, heavy did influence the number of SAMs fired vs a target, but the obverservations show that those number are not a hard rule! The oberservation showed a beahavior best described by: Setting x leads leads to y - z SAMs fired vs a target, with 0 =< z < y. But the player has no chance to understand why 2 incomming SSM are engaged by 3+1 SAM (example) and the next 2 are engaged by 4..... Range setting trough all tests was "optimum". My Conclusion: Sorting the AA Systems from short to long helps the AI getting closer to a more realistic Multi-Layyer AAW. It might increase the cpu load but it saves longer Ranged SAMs in cases the incomming SSM is getting closer to the defended group.... because the shorter ranged weapons are prefered due to sorting. And this is IMHO the more realistic behavior in real world AAW, chosing the best suited, shorter/as long as needed ranged SAM, instead of firing the longest ranged SAM all the time . (correct me if this assumption is wrong!) Comment: i did not test the beahaviour with faster SSM and i did not check for effects on the point defense behaviour! Thanks for sharing these test results,great job!!

Hey Joe, WHAT kind of SSM is fired, and what altitude do they fly at? I wrote up a quick scenario on what I knew about the situation in question and had a play. Used current standard data base and 2009.42 game engine. I didn't know the enemy ships or the SSMs in question and I'd think that is where the answers lie. In my original scenario (now lost) both blue ships fired SAMs including sea sparrows at the incoming SSMs (styxs I think). In the attached sscenario (with DDGs added to the enemy) I don't think the sea sparrows get used, for what ever reason. Thinking about some of the comments here I'd guess it depends on the type of SSM and how many SAMs are estimated by AI to be needed and if the sea sparrows aren't required in any salvo to make up those numbers then they aren't fired. I've attached my last version of the scenario and an early saved game (in which I think the sea sparrows ae fired) if any one interested. Don wich battleset did u use with the .sce?

i cant use the platform editor yet,excel 2007 gives al lot of errors,i need to look in to it..

The mount will get a second/aditional engagement envelope. It will fire automatically in "self defense" Great!thanks for that

Try the same scen but change the "Auto"value for the Mk48 16 cell VLS RIM-7M from "0" to "1" in the Platform editor and try the same scen again.... Regards René thanks for the tip,but what will it change?

The german F-124 is rated as a FFG for political reasons, i think the very simliar LCF is a FFG for the same reason, they have nearly the firepower of a Kidd Class DDG and more power than the CF Adams, Decatur, Mitscher Class DDG...... So they are armed like DDG, why not use them as DDG? The F-124 was build as a replacement for the Lütjens DDG they serve as AAW Ships in the same role. true

iam afraid your'e right,ill just have to change tactic's. i wont use frigates with only point defense missiles as shotgun escorts anymore (hugging a high value target with a escort ship carrying only essm's) I think that's as in the real world, CGs and DDGs escorting CVs, not FFG or DD escorting CVs To start with, the dutch navy doesnt have any CG's or DDG's but does have LPD's and other high value targets, do you think there set to sea without escorts because there aren't any??, also iam talking about a merchant not a CV.and by the way the settup we are discussing is not how realistic the tactics are but how the effective the ships airdefense is.

iam afraid your'e right,ill just have to change tactic's. i wont use frigates with only point defense missiles as shotgun escorts anymore (hugging a high value target with a escort ship carrying only essm's)

oke now with JoeK aside we can continue with this topic let me see if i can explain the following.. i have a scenario where i have tree ships in this setting(all radars on): - a mechant ship -a karel doorman frigate (The Karel Doorman is carrying VLS RIM-7M) and a zeven provincien frigate (LCF).(the LCF carries a Smart-L radar and SM2 blockIIIA missiles) (both frigates from the Netherlands) the formation of this group is: mechant in the middle,the LCF 8 nm from the merchant to the west and the karel doorman 1nm east of the merchant enemy surface group 50 nm to the east. the scenario evolves like this: the enemy surface group launches it's SSM's (targeted at the merchant) to witch the LCF answers with it's salvo SM2's,not all the SSM get shot down,the surviving missiles overfly the karel doorman and hit the merchant,sadly the merchant sinks. when i checked the karel doorman's ammo and i saw that it only fired it's 76 mm gun,wich means that the karel doorman's SAM's never fired on the incomming missiles while the SSM's almost overflew my frigate. now game balance or not,this doesnt feel right and i hope that someone will agree with me.

he guys let's keep it cool here,we'we all got one thing in common we all love Harpoon and we all want to enjoy Harpoon to the most... but this tread is getting a bit mixed up with different things and gets confusing, so make different topic for different things and dont feel offended by someones remarks.. What i do think is that harpoon CE still has an alive community and with that aim really happy

That is the problem okey,why is this implemented?? any chance someone will fix this anytime soon in a update? My opinion is that the AI needs to be smarter before the player is given micro-management of SAMs capabilities. Of course I question whether the player should ever have the capability to micro-manage air defenses. There is no chance surface to air engagements will be made manual in the next 3 months (and unlikely in the foreseeable future). Tell me why should the player not have the option to micro manage the air defenses?? I think that the option is more realistic and will have more game value..

That is the problem okey,why is this implemented?? any chance someone will fix this anytime soon in a update? My opinion is that the AI needs to be smarter before the player is given micro-management of SAMs capabilities. Of course I question whether the player should ever have the capability to micro-manage air defenses. There is no chance surface to air engagements will be made manual in the next 3 months (and unlikely in the foreseeable future). Tell me why should the player not have the option to micro manage the air defenses?? I think that the option is more realistic and will have more game value..

In harpoon CE i cant engage hostile air units while they're in my engagement envelope.When i order a unit to attack air units within range i get the message "surface to air attacks air handled automatically " i never understood why this is not possible,sometimes red fighter planes fly really close to my ships and the ai never fires a shot!! Can someone exlpain this to me?

Yes you can,but i found out that the scenario editor doesn't work..