Inability of AI to Launch TLAM strike

[hermanhum]

ORIGINAL: koelbach

Translated into the "weird behaviour discussion", we have found two major issues:

1. While in H3 3.6.X the carrier group on its transit mission fires its Tomahawks at the detected red bases, it does not fire a single one in ANW. That illogical behaviour alone shifts the odds and breaks the scenario.

fb.asp?m=1840623

Now that Ralf has broken the ice on these two behaviours, I think that the other problem he identified should also be discussed.

The issue is as follows:

TLAM will only launch from units on Ground Strike mission in ANW or manually.

The current situation:

TLAM-armed units must be assigned to Ground Strike missions in order for the AI to employ these powerful weapons.

The problem:

All scenarios built with USN units (ANW and previous versions) lose tremendous striking power due to the inability of TLAM to launch from AI units on Transit, Plotted, or Unassigned missions.

The purpose of this thread is to collect user opinions on the issue, the pros and cons of the current situation and possible solutions. Please start with the pros and cons. User contributions may lead to action taken and possibly help design any further game engine changes.

Thanks and please keep it technical



This issue does not appear in the list of * Known Harpoon [ANW] Issues because it is believed to be a deliberate change in ANW. Therefore, it isn't a "Bug". However, it does appears to be a very bad new behaviour.

Pro:

Previously in H3, USN ships armed with TLAM Tomahawks would launch them when the unit was:

[ol][*] Unassigned,
[*] Plotted Mission,
[*] Land Strike mission, or
[*] Transit mission. [/ol]
This would always create a big challenge for the player who had to defend against this wave of missiles.

Con:

The H3 behaviour was far from perfect. There was no way for the AI to either:

• a) Delay the TLAM wave
• b) Select specific targets for the TLAM (with one exception as a specific Land Strike mission)

The Current ANW behaviour is far worse. There is no way for the AI to:

• a) Delay the TLAM wave
• b) Select specific targets for the TLAM (with one exception as a specific Land Strike mission)
• c) Fire TLAM from any Units on Transit, Plotted, and Unassigned status at all

Units placed in ANW scens so that they can fire TLAM must be assigned to the Land Strike mission. This requirement is severely restrictive.

• a) Units will not move on their own to conduct any type of patrol. After conducting the TLAM Land Strike, they will just sit motionless.
• b) Units given a plotted path in addition to their TLAM Land Strike mission have no freedom of movement from the specific plotted path
• c) Units given a plotted path in addition to their TLAM Land Strike mission are not able to utilize alternative starting points for the unit as this will cancel the plotted path

The old H3 TLAM launch capability needs to be re-stored to the Plotted, Transit, and Unassigned missions. The new ANW behaviour restricts the Game Engine without adding a single benefit. Instead, it cripples all pre-existing and future scenarios utilizing TLAM-armed platforms.

[Shemar]

I don't know the exact internal workings but I would assume that the reason detected facilites are not attacked right away is that they have no threat value. If that is the case, simply removing that condition (as Russell intends to do) will bring us close to what was the behavior in 3.6.x. However I would like the AI to be smarted about allocating valuable assets, so:
 
Ideal (but not realistic at the moment) scenario: Units can be assigned in more than one missions using a priority list.
 
Realistic scenario: Like I suggested in the other thread, expand the threat value concept to encompass sensors and air facilities, while at the same time compare the threat value towards any friendly unit in range, rather then just the current unit trying to decide if it should fire or not. So, for example. a sub would fire on a ship that is only capable of attacking other ships or aircraft, if friendly ships or aircraft are in the area. An air facility should have a threat value based on the capabilities of the hosted aircraft and the ideal result is that it would normally be a priority target of opportunity, even if not specifically targetted with a mission.
 
Possible helpful feature: Scenario designer can manually assign threat values to any unit that overrides the calculated one.
 
In any case of course, specifically assigned targets through missions should take absolute priority over targets of oportunity.

[hermanhum]

ORIGINAL: Shemar

I don't know the exact internal workings but I would assume that the reason detected facilites are not attacked right away is that they have no threat value. If that is the case, simply removing that condition (as Russell intends to do) will bring us close to what was the behavior in 3.6.x.

Nope. Threat value is utterly irrelevant. No TLAM attacks against anything. Period. Unless the ship is on Ground Strike mission.

The game needs to be set back to what worked previously. Adding new features (even if possible) still means that all pre-existing scenarios remain broken and inoperative.

[FransKoenz]

TLAM's, TLAM's ......

In a complete new scn [my scn] the US Navy starts firing missiles without given orders [really! I even have not implement TLAM-strike missions etc. in my scn], as soon there is a hostile side within H3/ANW environment, units start launching Tomahawks. How to implement strike-missions when the involved unit has already launched because of a bug [or something like that?]?

This is frustrating![&:]

Why not go back to scratch [Harpoon 3.6, which was almost perfect] and improve 3.6 and let the MP go [The most frustrating MP game ever built]?

I share the feelings of Freek.... [;)]

[rsharp@advancedgamin]

The conditions Herman is asking for seems like it would be a new ROE, weapons really really free. Transit and plotted missions are not attack missions so I disagree that they should be launching missiles. Perhaps unassigned craft could let loose.

I don't completely understand the issue you brought up, Taitennek. Are you saying that the TLAMs are launching on their own? That seems to contradict the behavior described in this thread. Maybe this is a different circumstance you could describe in more detail.

If you're going to be so fatal then go be fatal somewhere else. Such rhetoric is getting repeated ad nauseum by a vocal minority. I'm happy to engage in constructive criticism and help move this game forward.

Thanks,

[ruixilyy]

So why not adopt the H3ANW features to the 3.6.3 game engine? I mean, to combin the best of these two (game based on 3.6.3, then equip it with 3.9's new features such as MP, larger screen, color platform pics, and so on)? IMHO, the 3.7 designer had done at least one weird thing: to cancel the loading quotations and H3 intro movie. (Now this is fixed in 3.9.3, but still, you need a original 3.6.3 movie so as to make this movie available in 3.9.3. Fortunately I do have it.)

[rsharp@advancedgamin]

The newer features, especially MP, are not modular and combining them with 3.6.3 would be as resource intensive as redoing them anew except without the funding. I apologize, but we have to ask people to move forward. When we find a happy middle of backwards compatibility to add to stable gameplay then I believe we will have a better game than ever.

The intro movie is available from me by request from anyone that wants it.

[hermanhum]

ORIGINAL: rsharp@advancedgamin

The conditions Herman is asking for seems like it would be a new ROE, weapons really really free. Transit and plotted missions are not attack missions so I disagree that they should be launching missiles. Perhaps unassigned craft could let loose.

Just to be clear what ROE or behaviours are new/old, I'll refer to the game versions.

In H3, TLAM could launch when units were on Unassigned, Plotted, Transit, or Land Strike missions.

In ANW, TLAM can only launch on Land Strike missions.

Apparently, something has changed in ANW and the old behaviour is needed back because all the scenarios (numbering in the hundreds) that had TLAM in them need it in order to launch. The ANW behaviour appears to be just a more restrictive subset of the H3 behaviour. No idea if it is an ROE setting or some other parameter that got changed.

Transit may not be a "strike mission", per se, but it is an Area Patrol mission not unlike ASuW and ASW. In Area Patrol missions, weapons are still fired.

The same can be said for Plotted and Unassigned. Though you may not personally classify them as attack missions, they still fire weapons so it is not necessary to call them attack missions in the first place. Even in the current ANW-aValue behaviour, Unassigned and Plotted units will fire their weapons (according to the aValue calculation). Something is specifically limiting their ability to fire TLAM, IMO. That is pretty much the entire difference.

All other weapons (SAMs, SSMs, torpedoes, guns,...) seem to be able to fire on all manner of targets (subs, ships, aircraft) so long as the proper triggers are provided, with the sole exception of TLAM -- nothing seems to be able to trigger their release.

All I know for a certainty is that the TLAM cannot fire in ANW except in one particular instance. You can check out scenario identified by Ralf to see the results of the behavioural change.

fb.asp?m=1840623

[FreekS]

Yes I would like the ability of various missions to fire TLAM restored.
Of course the fact that you couldnot/cannot make a delayed TLAM strike in 3.6/3.9 is a disadvantage but only allowing GroundStrike missions to fire TLAM is not good.
 
Reason is that this means you have to make dedicated groups for TLAM strikes, while ALL TLAMS are always loaded on platforms, mainly CGs, DDs and SSNs that also have critical other missions (such as firing harpoons on enemy ships). And the GoundStrike missions, as Herman explained, don't really do any other missions that groundstrike very well.
 
In general, I'd recommend to be carefull to make Missions too specialised, as the trend in modern ships is to become more rounded (most new FF and DDs have ASW, ASuW, guns and AAW). I have yet to do exhaustive review but 393 missions are more specialised (for example ships on ASW missions no longer fire guns on hostile, in range and threatening enemy ships).
 
Freek

[Shemar]

ORIGINAL: hermanhum

ORIGINAL: Shemar

I don't know the exact internal workings but I would assume that the reason detected facilites are not attacked right away is that they have no threat value. If that is the case, simply removing that condition (as Russell intends to do) will bring us close to what was the behavior in 3.6.x.

Nope. Threat value is utterly irrelevant. No TLAM attacks against anything. Period. Unless the ship is on Ground Strike mission.

The game needs to be set back to what worked previously. Adding new features (even if possible) still means that all pre-existing scenarios remain broken and inoperative.

Wrong. If the facilities had a threat value then any unit would fire on them upon detection, just as they would fire SAMs against an incoming aircraft or SSMs against detected ships.

Unlike some people I do not want the game to regress. I do not want to see the AI dumbed down for the sake of past compatibility, I want the AI to be made as realistic and challenging as possible and that means expanding and fixing the threat value concept and not going back to blindly firing at anything that is red. And that means at some point more bugs, yes. You can't add new features or make anything better without making some mistakes. Nobody forces legal owners of previous versions of Harpoon to stop playing them and upgrade. Anybody who thinks older versions were better can go happily play those, but the constant whining about "make it work like it did in 3.6" is getting so old and tired. Somebody moved your cheese. Deal with it already.

I realise that some scenario designers are worried that improving the game will make some of their schenarios not work properly, but in my opinion any scenario that is based on faulty AI, or bugs, or erroneous database values in order to work properly is broken anyway and there is no point in not improving the game in order to preserve it.

I undertsand that you have a view of don't change anything because it may break pre-existing scenarios, but I simply do not share it. that is why I am not using the PlayersDb any more, because of all the wrong values in there that you refuse to change for the sake of compatibility. Anything that needs the wrong numbers or the wrong behaviors to work is broken anyway in my view.

[Shemar]

ORIGINAL: FreekS

Yes I would like the ability of various missions to fire TLAM restored.

It is my understanding that TLAMs are not fired any more because the legal targets that present themselves pose no threat (as calculated by the A value) to the TLAM carrying platforms. It is basically the same behavior as not firing on unarmed planes. Therefore removing the requirement of the A value to be >0 in order to fire should fix that.

[hermanhum]

ORIGINAL: Shemar

Wrong. If the facilities had a threat value then any unit would fire on them upon detection, just as they would fire SAMs against an incoming aircraft or SSMs against detected ships.

ORIGINAL: Shemar

It is my understanding that TLAMs are not fired any more because the legal targets that present themselves pose no threat (as calculated by the A value) to the TLAM carrying platforms. It is basically the same behavior as not firing on unarmed planes. Therefore removing the requirement of the A value to be >0 in order to fire should fix that.

Show me in any database you choose (or one you wish to make up) an example whereby a ship fires TLAM-C at a ground target while on Transit mission.

I think that I've tried every target/weapon combination in existence and cannot get this to happen. I've armed ammo dumps and other facilities with all manner of missile and guns to inflate the aValue, yet the ships continue to sail past on their Transit missions. The ships will fire guns, SAMs, SSMs, and torpedoes on all other armed targets they run across, but no TLAM on the land targets. Of course, I could have missed something. Show me the solution.

What values do I need to use to get the results that you say are possible?

[Shemar]

All you need to do is wait for the A Value > 0 requirement to be removed and see what happens. If TLAMs still don't fire after that then it would be a bug and not a behavioral issue.

[hermanhum]

aValues are already currently available. If this theory has any credibility, we should certainly be able to re-create it, now, without any future code changes.

Transit missions fire on all manner of other targets (ships, subs, aircraft) when the aValues are > 0. Show me how this can be done for TLAM vs. facilities.

[Shemar]

Show me a facility that has a decent A Value against ships and subs

[hermanhum]

You've got all the tools you need in your own copy of the Harpoon3 Editor and Scenario Editor.

[FransKoenz]

This riddle of suggestions and better sugestions make no sense!
 
Come up with something new[;)]

[hermanhum]

Maybe an answer to the original question would be nice. (instead of evasive manoeuvring like a Alfa with a Mk 48 torpedo tracking it!)

[Shemar]

If you think that I am actually interested in playing word games with you you have serious delusions. I don't even know what the 'original question' that I am supposed to be evading is supposed to be. For anyone with even the slightest understanding of computers, everything I have said makes perfect sense. It may not be right, as I don't have inside information, but is sure makes a lot more sense than your ramblings and completely uneducated assumptions.
 
You create an issue specifically naming TLAMs. Prove that the behavior is specific to TLAMs. Make a naval unit fire on a facility with non-TLAM weapons and not fire with TLAMs. Because that and only that constitutes an issue that can be called "Inability of AI to Launch TLAM strike". Otherwise the issue is "The AI does not fire on facilities", or even "The AI does not fire on unarmed targets, including facilities", but hey that would make it one less issue to complain about, wouldn't it. We wouldn't want to miss an opportunity to inflate our "independant" bug list with several instances of the same bug now would we.

[hermanhum]

ORIGINAL: hermanhum

Show me in any database you choose (or one you wish to make up) an example whereby a ship fires TLAM-C at a ground target while on Transit mission.

I think that I've tried every target/weapon combination in existence and cannot get this to happen. I've armed ammo dumps and other facilities with all manner of missile and guns to inflate the aValue, yet the ships continue to sail past on their Transit missions. The ships will fire guns, SAMs, SSMs, and torpedoes on all other armed targets they run across, but no TLAM on the land targets. Of course, I could have missed something. Show me the solution.

What values do I need to use to get the results that you say are possible?

fb.asp?m=1843064

Ah, so you missed the question? Okay, here it is, again.

You claim to be an expert in the game, so show me where I have missed the mark.