Minor issues

[Isto]

Suppose its in a code of all copters.

The armoured ones are just harder to damage as it should be.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by Isto

I think the main issue is the non stackable damage when any helicopter can take damage endlessly. Why copters and planes are treated differently in that aspect when both of them use the durability value.

This enables you to suck up the entirety of aa fire to one copter even it would retreat in the next turn and roam free with the others.

If i am right planes have in code that 4+4+4=12 damage but copters have 4+4+4=4 damage. Made me wonder could it be a typo or is it intentionally placed like that.

I ran a number of tests and all show damage IS cumulative when armoured Helos are hit.

This is my last test and it is typical of the others

HIT

HIT

HIT ( 3 damage)

HIT ( 8 damage)

HIT

HIT

HIT ( 9 damage)

HIT

HIT ( 13 damage )

HIT ( 16 damage ) = crash

there were no examples of damage from hits that showed less damage after a series of hits...the numbers always grew, never shrank. The "problem" is it took 10 Stinger hits to bring that helo down and only half of them caused damage and something with a HE pen of 4 should do better on a target with a 2 armour rating so this is now on the list to investigate in the autumn when we start work on the game again.

Thinking in this case because we have to use HE pen for that weapon the effects on the "armoured" helo isn't what it should be....even though that weapon has a 4 HE pen rating the calculator ( which uses game code ) shows an HE pen of 1 but a best of 7 and it's more likely to give the former rather than the latter which explains why half the hits did no damage as 1 does nothing on something with 2 armour.

OTOH......hits on a target helo with only 1 armour WOULD show damage with each hit

[jp10]

Originally Posted by Isto

In my opinion these issues seem a bit strange:
-helicopters seem more durable than mbt
-sems unlikely that swedish gripen would not have vision 40 equipment in 2018
-pretty sure that south korea have special forces
-how can a stationary vehicle take evasive actions ?

1. Since the Hind was your primary complaint I will write that the Hind is so heavy that it cannot fly Nap-of-the-Earth at higher speeds like other attack helicopters. Common doctrine is a straight run at the target and shallow bank away at higher altitude. In Afghanistan their ceiling made them unable to fly over many of the mountain heights and they had to fly down the valleys. Mujaheddin tactics were to climb the heights and fire RPGs at the as they passed. They considered the Hind's only weak spot as the tail rotor and aimed to try and hit there.
Speed and altitude records attained by the Hind were set by a special stripped down model.

2. Pass, no experience with that.

3. ROK Special Forces have been specialized for Guerrilla warfare. At first alert, they will deploy to selected areas and wait for the invasion to pass and then conduct partisan type operations. While they have created a world wide deployment brigade the game's war in Korea scenarios have not focused on them.

4. If it is evading it is no longer stationary but it's movement has not taken it out of the hex. The simplest example is a hull down tank on a hill that spots the back-blast of the ATGM launch and/or spots the missile in flight (20-21 seconds flight time to max range for a TOW) and simply backs up 10 feet till it disappears behind the crest of the hill. After the missile misses, it can drive back forward and engage the launch area with HE.

[Isto]

Hmm

[calvins]

Recently faced some Saudi Apache helicopters, and definitely noticed the odd HIT (no damage) / HIT (some damage) ratio. This applied to stingers and to ATGM firing at stationary helos.

Love the game. Play too much.

[jp10]

I have always accepted a Hit/No Damage on AA Missiles to be a factor of how many are designed.

Generally speaking, many AA missiles aim to get ahead of the target and burst a cloud of shrapnel the A/C has to travel thru. At end of flight or if the seeker calculates it is not going to intercept it will self detonate at closest range to target. The most basic form of ECM is for a target to boost a radar signal to an approaching radar guiding missile and then reduce the signal to make the missile seeker to believe it had missed the target and trigger a self destruct.
I accept a Hit/No Damage to be a burst ahead of the target and there was no significant damage. Not specifically a contact hit on the target. That would be the Hit with lots of damage or single hit and target goes down.

[shahadi]

Originally Posted by Isto

-pretty sure that south korea have special forces

Black Berets are easy to create in the OOB. That is another reason I love this game, it is flexible.

Just pick a slot above 900 in the South Korean OOB and proceed to create a special forces formation.

[Isto]

Is it usable in the pbem games ?

Suppose it must be sent to opponent before the game. Im a little akward when editing games, afraid i break something. But that is a good idea, suppose there are some clear instructions somewhere to be found already ?

Actually i messed up the koreas, i ment the other one all along, the one with crazy militaristic goverment not the ones owning westerners in starcraft even they probably have some decent troops also and are supposedly very good with tech.

In the future warfare multitasking and apm skill might just be the thing when commanding multiple machines of war at once and issuing ai command protocols. Dont see a reason why one commander would not be able to command whole armies of drones.

Still think they should have better troops in the get go because probably have the most strict doctrine in the world right now.

Jp10 that would be one way to imagine it but still thinking anti air missiles are really more effective than in this game. Especially againt targets with no ew value and that armor thing have been stated as a bug so it does not currently work how the creators have intended.


There is also a issue of ai routes when u try to move apc near water, for some reason it takes a priority to drive in water and stop moving. Suppose this happens if vehicle is amphibious.

[shahadi]

Originally Posted by Isto

Is it usable in the pbem games ?

Suppose it must be sent to opponent before the game. Im a little akward when editing games, afraid i break something. But that is a good idea, suppose there are some clear instructions somewhere to be found already ?

Yes, I believe you may play PBEM with user created formations without sending the OOB, as long as the OOB contains the native units and weapons.

I suggest that you copy the Ranger formation of the US Army OOB and then paste it into the Korean OOB in a slot above 900. You may have to edit of course the formation name, while modifying weapons, units, and experience/morale modifiers. Also be sure to change the Nation code from USA to Korea.

See this discussion from 2006:

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=27569

You should check the manual as well for how to edit/save OOB files. Personally, I save OOBs by scenario in the custom folder. However, I urge you to check this forum and the manual.

[Mobhack]

Any changed OOBs will probably have to be shared with the PBEM opponent, as the checksum will differ. The OOB swapping utility makes this less of a hassle - check the game manual for that.

If you edit custom units in the scenario designer for a user-designed scenario or scenarios then there will not be any OOB issues in PBEM. You may then have to send the scenario(s) to the PBEM opponent if you are not player 1 though.