donaldseadog

I'm still playing this one on and off. I find the game play quite good from either Blue or Red side. It interests me how Red rely strongly on ship board SAM while Blue rely more on aircraft,  and as such carefully playing Red lets you whittle down the Blue defenses and especially if you can get a sub into a good position you can do very well.

I still have no muck being satisfied with victory conditions which are pretty well straight from the original scenario, fair enough I guess but I have the same problem with the original.

You have to play for a very long time, even if you get good results, to get even minimum victory. To me one strong point of having minimum victory is to spur on enthusiasm, to get recognition for working well.

The Min Vic Conditions are:

RED MINIMUM VICTORY CONDITION (AND) 1:
   1 carrier must be killed.
RED MINIMUM VICTORY CONDITION (AND) 2:
   2 ships must be killed.
RED MINIMUM VICTORY CONDITION (AND) 3:
   1 carrier must be on station for 47 hrs, 0 min, 0 sec.

BLUE MINIMUM VICTORY CONDITION (AND) 1:
   1 carrier must be on station for 47 hrs, 0 min, 0 sec.

BLUE MINIMUM VICTORY CONDITION (AND) 2:
   1 carrier must be killed.
BLUE MINIMUM VICTORY CONDITION (AND) 3:
   7 ships must be killed.

game times out at 48 hrs.

After a bit of fiddling I think it will play with more reward if the carriers on station vic conditions were Total, not Minimum conditions.

I'm interested how other people feel about vic conditions and this particualr case.

You should edit Wikipedia?

4 otto 76s would be nice in lots of situations, but I guess she'll always have escorts.

PS, its interesting following the links in Wikipedia, ever growing list of indigenous gear being used by the Indian Navy. 

I'm still keeping an eye on this one but can't find the allusive point where it (probably) all starts to go pear shape.

It does seem to be rather more frequent than occasional in my current testing of Enriques remake of Now there are Two.

My work around is to go back in time (via iterative saves) and split and join the low in fuel aircraft (and any dodgies in the f4 formation editor) - they seem to miraculously get back to the pumps even when they have insufficient fuel?

I don't know about this one (the original) but I do think sometimes the old vic conditions aren't as good as could be.

These ones seem a bit complicated to me, the ships on station basically just extend game play to the last 30 mins of the 2 day game limit. Other side gets vic points for the sinking of ships so no need to have a on station covering the whole map I'd think. What do you think?

I'm replaying again to try to work out why vic conditions didn't fire when I sank all blue other than a couple of sub (not seemingly in vic conditions) and had only lost a couple of ships (and subs) so I think had the number onstation - certainly the number for min conditions.

I track vic conditions in my toolbox and AIWindow, they aren't showing up the On station conditions being met I think. (You can't look at them once you get to game time limit which cought me out as I was playing at full time acceleration )

Are you still on 'holidays' I guess you won't have time to look further and do more testsing till you get home.

I fast played to game limit but no vic conditions were awarded although checking conditions in scen edit I can't see why not.

action over at about 21 hours game time. Wondering if the required time on station is a bit long?

But a very good challenge with quite different outcomes depending on luck.

Red lost the sub in the end, but it inflicted definite damage and got to fire off all torpedo.

Blue side is playing well, very easy progress. No glitches. Glad AC haave limitless ammo for reload

On 9/9/2024 at 2:24 AM, broncepulido said:

Revamped scenario available here. It's not tested, but probably fine because it's not very complicated. Of course I can modify any aspect of it at request, or about detected defects or so. Enjoy!

 

Hi Enrique, A great job.

So far for testing I've played thru once from Red side - all went normal, no glitches seen.

I wonder would the Blue subs be better deployed individually rather than as part of the Surface group? They were very easily detected, at many stages group ABC was detected by only sub (I'd sunk one very early) and AC.

I'll do a Blue side play then let you know how that went.

3 hours ago, broncepulido said:

Yes, but I understood the project was to do the remake faithful to the original, I did minimum changes.

Yes, no critcism meant, just an obsevation about how database can play a big part of situation

PS, and getting a win for the Red side is much harder.

One observation (I am now trying this new remake) is that Red side in the remake seems very limited in standoff land attack ability (without resorting to nukes).

Being topical, I played the original scenario last night from the Red side for a comfortable win, maybe I got over excited and decided to hit the red button and launch off a few nukes. The Tomcats are going to make this one much more challenging

Thanks Enrique

BS=Medc2003, DB=HCDB2-170909 & GE=2024.006
Situation: SG ABS (blue) comprises two units, AB00 I believe is not detected by the red enemy or at least they have no indication of location. AB01 they have exact location. They fire missile at both units. I believe that the missiles are targeting AB00 as if they had an exact location but they do not.

Two saved games are zipped, AShM-SL005 is a couple of seconds before SLSSMatNotKnownTarget. Open game AShM-SL005, the red enemy has approx fix on AB01 and no fix on AB00, within a sec (or two) an exact fix is obtained on AB01 and missiles are fired at both units although red enemy still has no location of AB00.
SLSSMatNotKnownTarget simply shows this situation at time of firing missiles.

SLSSMatNotKnownTarget.zip

AAR

**SPOILER ALERT**

Well this was quite a long campaign. I should have kept a log

At the outset I figured the locals were pretty evenly matched so decided to let my allies take care of their neighbours with only a bit of anti radar strikes from my carrier to get them started, in the main I'd set up a long range CAP, AEW and EW shield of my carrier group to north and east, take out the enemy establishments ahead of me to the west and saturate the immediate areas ahead with asw patrols. This seemed to go well enough for some time while I picked of plenty of long range AC coming down from the enemies bases to the far north.

But then I missed a key strike and had a saturation of missile coming in at VHigh alt where I had limited ability to defend and lost a screening escort and suffered minor carrier damage.

Meanwhile my friends ashore where doing well taking out SAM with the CAS loaded Fitter then coming in with numerous assault attacks to slowly destroy all enemy bases along our departure path.

My own small surface group supposedly securing the exit to open ocean didn't do so well. A later investigation showed that an insufficiently experienced officer-of-the-watch was in place at a critical time, and a sub got through their asw screen to take a ship before they could track and sink her. They at least tried harder after this setback and proved more than useful in sending an enemy SG to the bottom once it was soften up with anti-radar strikes from the carrier. That success started to show political favour with declarations of a partial win.

Our final hurdle, which had remained undiscovered for quite some time, was a heavily defended missile base on a lonely little island. With no aircraft defense it was just a matter of maintaining a continous line of anti radar then bomber attacks and it was destroyed and the declaration of total success issued.

Thanks for putting this together Enrique. Another nice scenario.

@TonyE

I think I have something concrete. (if my export.dll game data collection is correct). I have two saved games (a couple secs apart) with a player surface group of two units, one goes from approx fix by enemy to exact while the second remains undetected or at least no detected location. Two enemy subs fire missiles at both units (including the non localised unit) and all missile appear to have targets (non are BOL).

I've attached here but do you want a new issue report?

SLSSMatNotKnownTarget.zip

3 hours ago, TonyE said:

........ My first thought on submarines is to add a couple of Los Angeles on the Blue side, each in their own group of course but in support of the CVBG then add a Kilo variant of some sort as well as bring the Victor out of the Kuznetsov group and into its own group.

Enrique probably knows a likely submarine deployment for the period.  A situation where the main stategic threat is submarines and the surface groups are for area defense and 'show' could be interesting.

There's room for two good scenario here I'm sure, a bit of updated action from classic times would be nice.

Progress is a bit slow. Here's the long story so far ...  I have the game halting when an attack is executed then I look at the contact quality (within my AIWindow tool).

I have a case where the player has a group that includes two ships, both ships have had missiles fired targeting them, one ship the enemy has an exact fix, one it has no location but knows its there (knows side). I Split the group and destroy the missile targeting the not localised ship. Now there is a group with one unit and enemy has exact fix, another group having one unit with no localisation. The original attacking sub fires again at the (new) group with localised unit but does not fire at the old group with only non localised unit. later the unit is localised and the sub fires.

My current best guess is that if a fix is known on at least one unit in a group the whole group (or perhaps all units of group that are known) will be fired on, but if no units are localised in the group then it won't fire.

I'll keep playing with it.

4 hours ago, broncepulido said:

On holidays to 12 September or so, later I'll see.

"On Holidays"! How can you have holidays when you're retired

I can give you hand eg for testing or other is you wish Enrique, I'm also "On Holidays"

Don

On 9/5/2024 at 11:40 AM, TonyE said:

2024.006 posted.  My fear is that submarines will fire missiles at targets that aren't localized but I bet you can validate that isn't true @donaldseadog.

That should be easy to check.

Homework for tonight

(Update)

There are firings at units without a position (edited) but side is known and another unit of group has exact fix. I'll fiddle a bit more to try to see if they will fire as soon as any contact is made.

(Update2)

I'll fine tune my AIWindow tool to get more info on the contact the enemy sees, but indications are that the sub launches missile at units where no position (exact or uncertainty) is known, possibly only when in a group with a unit that is localised.

On 8/26/2024 at 11:23 PM, TonyE said:

Thank you for the writeup.  That performance is disappointing.  I'll have a look, eventually...

I'm wondering TonyE what should we do next. I'm guessing it relates to no ENEMY_AI_EVENT for the sub only group (I'm assuming there should be). Do you need the original test pruned down to a minimum number of platforms (eg one sub one surface target one awac) ?

And on the side, in the second test where Enrique has added a surface unit to each sub group, they fire a very expensive salvo of missiles at the defenceless merchant men. 

On 8/28/2024 at 6:59 PM, broncepulido said:

Same applied to the Red side, see here the modified test scenario:

2024-08 TEST RED SUB LAUNCHED AShM WITH SHIP.zip 4 kB · 1 download

That certainly made a difference. The ENEMY_AI_EVENT is now occurring which might be a clue for Tony.

I didn't get as far as you Enrique. I'd seen a sub fire at about the range of its torpedo so wondered if it was somehow ignoring coming into missile range before deciding what to fire.

I will post a bit more tonight, (I'm at breakfast on tablet today) but saw that maybe subs aren't doing same 'plotting attack' that surface ships do. Its a code event (ENEMY_AI_EVENT) I don't understand much but it never seems to be attributed to subs (but does to surface ships) and relates to planning an attack (I think).

I'm reading this on my tablet while having lunch. I'm wondering would the subs actions be different if part of a group including surface combatants with suitable range missile. 

I'll also have a play tonight, I wonder if the subs have a solid fix on the targets?

And thanks for reminder the aam missiles, I just realise I wasted I don't know how many $M last night firing sparrow and sidewinder at vhigh alt incoming missiles 🙊

will do chief

From australia ABC 

Chinese and Philippine ships collide again in disputed waters, and the countries are trading blame