Missiles

[JSG]

Hello,

I have attempted to model a guided missile of the Fritz-X kind (800 kg SAP) for the Japanese, but my attempts fail.

I succeeded to get my pilots to release them in battle, and I had pilots of different skill (including about skill 70 in naval bombing). My hit rate is zero, repeatedly. Furthermore, the game insists on not sending more than 6 (of 24 ready) bombers out against a well-sized convoy (more than 6 ships).


I basically modified the Ohka for minimal range and less effect, also attempted different "accuracy" settings (and yes, I enabled production).

Does anybody know about how to make missiles hit, even if only about the Ohka itself?

[YankeeAirRat]

I don't think the engine is able to accurately model missiles. I can't find it know, but there was a thread a few years back in the Original WiTP when someone tried to make the ASM-N-2 Bat bomb that was carried near the end of the war by PB4Ys and TBMs. In the end the author of that thread ran into the same problem and I think one of the original designers basically came up and said that guided Missiles like BAT or even the Ohka aren't accruately modeled in the game engine due to the constrants in the game engine accurately modeling guidance systems compared to the old Mk1 Eye Ball in gun directors and even just basically radar directed gunnery (someone else who hasn't been around for a while pointed out that radar directed anything isn't like a modern guided missile, just puts your shells in the same area as the target with a smaller Circular area of probabilty; then older methods of range finding)

[el cid again]

It may have been an RHS thread, as I created the Bat missile in WITP days for the original RHS. I have one again now -
as well as other missiles. It is unclear if the code was modified to address this or not? But so much work was done to make
AE better it might have been. So I redefined the missile as a "plane guided missile" again and we will see.

Originally I had to define missiles as bombs with great accuracy - and I am sure that will work now. I use the same
mechanism for the special ASW torpedo - called a " Mark 24 Mine " to confuse the enemy - and it too needs a statistically significant
number of tests to see if we have it working properly (which is to say a great deal of the time - it was so successful
production was scaled back - and it remained in service over half a century). Basically by playing with accuracy and
effect you can model a missile with a bomb device - if you have to.

[US87891]

ORIGINAL: JSG

Hello,
I have attempted to model a guided missile of the Fritz-X kind (800 kg SAP) for the Japanese, but my attempts fail.
<sn>
Does anybody know about how to make missiles hit, even if only about the Ohka itself?

Yes, certainly. Babes people figured out how a couple years ago. There's some threads out there that say how to do it, but they are 2 years old, at least. Babes teams have been playing with rocket armed a/c since the beginning with no issues whatever.

You might be hearing from people who live back in the WiTP days and who don't know about what was done in the intervening 5 years. There is a vast collection of urban myths about many things, and this is just one of them.

If want to do missles, it's simple, its easy, and it works. If you want to know how to make Ohkas and Fritzes work, send a pm and I'll send it over to the people who figured it out.

[Alfred]

US87891,

Is this thread, plus the embedded link contained therein post #8, the threads from 2010 you had in mind?

tm.asp?m=2394894&mpage=1&key=missiles&#2396357

Alfred

[YankeeAirRat]

ORIGINAL: US87891

ORIGINAL: JSG

Hello,
I have attempted to model a guided missile of the Fritz-X kind (800 kg SAP) for the Japanese, but my attempts fail.
<sn>
Does anybody know about how to make missiles hit, even if only about the Ohka itself?

Yes, certainly. Babes people figured out how a couple years ago. There's some threads out there that say how to do it, but they are 2 years old, at least. Babes teams have been playing with rocket armed a/c since the beginning with no issues whatever.

You might be hearing from people who live back in the WiTP days and who don't know about what was done in the intervening 5 years. There is a vast collection of urban myths about many things, and this is just one of them.

If want to do missles, it's simple, its easy, and it works. If you want to know how to make Ohkas and Fritzes work, send a pm and I'll send it over to the people who figured it out.

I know some things had changed between Vanilla flavored WiTP and AE; I just didn't know how well it worked. From just lurking here on this forum at various times people have complained that they couldn't get Ohkas to work and I can't remember who; but I thought there was a thread here from when the game launched about two years ago where they talked about trying to recreate BAT but not having success to get it either launch or get the aircraft to carry it properly. So, I thought JWE had weighed in with the fact that just like the Ohkas you can built BAT or something else but getting the dice rolls for a successful launch or hit were at the same levels of having 3 US carriers survive meeting the KB with low damage.

[JeffroK]

Thanks for the link Alfred, better than the mysterious comments and "PM me" approach of some.

This confirms my use of AtG rockets, I allowed each aircraft type 2 salvos of rockets and really bad accuracy.

Given that it was possible to recreate the Bat "bomb", has anyone any ideas on how to add the "Loon" (US V-1)

[US87891]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

US87891,

Is this thread, plus the embedded link contained therein post #8, the threads from 2010 you had in mind?

tm.asp?m=2394894&mpage=1&key=missiles?

Alfred

Hello Alfred,

Not positive, but I think that’s the one. I don’t know much about how it’s done, but there are people who do. An invasion problem a few months ago had two Marine CAS Airgroups with 5” Hvar and 11.5” ARs that was epic. Any of the Allied team can show and tell, but it’s not good to post email addresses. So, yes, send a pm and I’ll send the contact. If there’s anything different in the technique you can use it to update your already amazing encyclopedia (The Alfred Files) [:D]

Matt

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Thanks for the link Alfred, better than the mysterious comments and "PM me" approach of some.

This confirms my use of AtG rockets, I allowed each aircraft type 2 salvos of rockets and really bad accuracy.

Given that it was possible to recreate the Bat "bomb", has anyone any ideas on how to add the "Loon" (US V-1)

First off, I agree with the whole cryptic thing, its really annoying. Personally, if I learn something, I'll just share it with the community.

On the JB-2 Loon, I've gotten some ideas, the only thing is I really have no idea how to set up the penetration for a missile. Is it more or less than a gun? As far as accuracy and warhead, those are rather easy. The JB-2 had an accuracy of 0.25 miles when fired at a target 100 miles away...translated, if you launched it at a land target 100 miles away, the missile would land within 1/4 of a mile of the target. Max range is 150 miles (264 in editor settings). Effect should be 2000 given the JB-2s 2000 lb warhead.

You would assume that the JB-2, if used against a ship would easily penetrate (or at least if not penetrate massively damage) even a BB. The real question is, given the state of the technology in 1945, was it capable of engaging a ship? The only references I have to its proposed use was saturation bombardment of Japanese defenses on the Home Islands. Of course with the newest beta giving us the ability to define different payloads for different missions, then this becomes less of an issue as you can assign the JB-2 Loon to bombers carrying out ground attack or city attack missions, but use standard bombs for the Naval Interdiction mission.

JB-2s were also successfully launched from ships and submarines, and there could lie a problem. If there were not capable versus ships, but you add them to ships, the game will likely use them against ships anyway.

[US87891]

ORIGINAL: Shark7
First off, I agree with the whole cryptic thing, its really annoying. Personally, if I learn something, I'll just share it with the community.

I am surprised at you Shark7. You know darn well there's nothing cryptic going on. JWE's banned from posting here and most of the Babes people don't care. So if someone wants an answer to something just what the heck is wrong with sending a pm to get an email address to get an intelligeant answer to the question? All the answers are in open form and I do believe every single one can be quoted in its entirety to the open forum if the questioner wishes.

Anyone wanting anything about how and why Babes works can simply ask. And they will be answered.

If you all don't care for the simple steps one should take, then I refer you to the immortal words of Bullwinkle58 ... bite me.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: US87891

ORIGINAL: Shark7
First off, I agree with the whole cryptic thing, its really annoying. Personally, if I learn something, I'll just share it with the community.

I am surprised at you Shark7. You know darn well there's nothing cryptic going on. JWE's banned from posting here and most of the Babes people don't care. So if someone wants an answer to something just what the heck is wrong with sending a pm to get an email address to get an intelligeant answer to the question? All the answers are in open form and I do believe every single one can be quoted in its entirety to the open forum if the questioner wishes.

Anyone wanting anything about how and why Babes works can simply ask. And they will be answered.

If you all don't care for the simple steps one should take, then I refer you to the immortal words of Bullwinkle58 ... bite me.

Actually, this has been going on a long time before that. Everything is always so secretive. Why? And there is always such a hostile attitude about it. Again why?

You seem surprised that long time posters who have watched this going on for as long as it has are a tired of it? Oh well. Hmm, reminds me why I quit caring.

For anyone who wants to see what I post, I won't be holding back anything I learn. For those that don't like what I have to say, hit the green button and ignore me, it will save us both a lot of heartburn.

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: US87891

ORIGINAL: Shark7
First off, I agree with the whole cryptic thing, its really annoying. Personally, if I learn something, I'll just share it with the community.

I am surprised at you Shark7. You know darn well there's nothing cryptic going on. JWE's banned from posting here and most of the Babes people don't care. So if someone wants an answer to something just what the heck is wrong with sending a pm to get an email address to get an intelligeant answer to the question? All the answers are in open form and I do believe every single one can be quoted in its entirety to the open forum if the questioner wishes.

Anyone wanting anything about how and why Babes works can simply ask. And they will be answered.

If you all don't care for the simple steps one should take, then I refer you to the immortal words of Bullwinkle58 ... bite me.

Actually, this has been going on a long time before that. Everything is always so secretive. Why? And there is always such a hostile attitude about it. Again why?

You seem surprised that long time posters who have watched this going on for as long as it has are a tired of it? Oh well. Hmm, reminds me why I quit caring.

For anyone who wants to see what I post, I won't be holding back anything I learn. For those that don't like what I have to say, hit the green button and ignore me, it will save us both a lot of heartburn.

I think the issue is really that some don't quite understand exactly how onerous the restraints are on the developers. That someone like Shark7 regularly discloses fully what and how he addresses an issue is very laudable and worthy of replication by others. But to the best of my knowledge Shark7 has not signed a no disclosure agreement. All who have been given direct access to the game code have had to sign a non disclosure agreement. That includes not just the developers of Henderson Field but also other third party developers such as the Tracker guys.

I am constantly amazed at just how much detailed information has been provided by developers regarding the actual algorithmns. Consistently I feel that the developers expose themselves to potential retaliatory legal action from Matrixgames. It would be quite easy for the developers to remain completely silent on the workings of the game code, yet they continue to provide solid hints which allow a fair amount of reverse engineering to occur.

I remember back to the old days of Second Front and PacWar when actual algorithmn formulas were provided in the printed manuals. Those days of explicit data disclosure are long gone. If anyone is to be blamed for the current state of affairs, the criticsm should be primarily directed at the overriding intellectual copy owners who insist on non disclosure agreements. That they do so is understandable, but it does foster "secrecy".

Alfred

[Shark7]

Alfred, if it is due to a NDA, then all they'd have to say is 'Sorry, I have signed and NDA and cannot release that information.' Then there are no hard feelings, as I think we all understand that. You have signed a contract and are legally obligated and liable when you sign an NDA.

There are certain jobs out there that have the same requirements...that is do not talk about it under any circumstances. I myself have told many a person, "sorry I can't talk about it," and left it at that.

So yes, I can understand being restrained by an NDA. But I also understand that not disclosing the information covered by a NDA applies to anyone who is not on the development team, meaning you tell no one that doesn't work on the game. Read: no PMs or Emails of the information.

So it leaves me and others (I'm sure) rather confused about the whole situation.

So I guess if it really is information that can't be released, then please just say 'I can't release that information.'

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Thanks for the link Alfred, better than the mysterious comments and "PM me" approach of some.

This confirms my use of AtG rockets, I allowed each aircraft type 2 salvos of rockets and really bad accuracy.

Given that it was possible to recreate the Bat "bomb", has anyone any ideas on how to add the "Loon" (US V-1)

First off, I agree with the whole cryptic thing, its really annoying. Personally, if I learn something, I'll just share it with the community.

On the JB-2 Loon, I've gotten some ideas, the only thing is I really have no idea how to set up the penetration for a missile. Is it more or less than a gun? As far as accuracy and warhead, those are rather easy. The JB-2 had an accuracy of 0.25 miles when fired at a target 100 miles away...translated, if you launched it at a land target 100 miles away, the missile would land within 1/4 of a mile of the target. Max range is 150 miles (264 in editor settings). Effect should be 2000 given the JB-2s 2000 lb warhead.

You would assume that the JB-2, if used against a ship would easily penetrate (or at least if not penetrate massively damage) even a BB. The real question is, given the state of the technology in 1945, was it capable of engaging a ship? The only references I have to its proposed use was saturation bombardment of Japanese defenses on the Home Islands. Of course with the newest beta giving us the ability to define different payloads for different missions, then this becomes less of an issue as you can assign the JB-2 Loon to bombers carrying out ground attack or city attack missions, but use standard bombs for the Naval Interdiction mission.

JB-2s were also successfully launched from ships and submarines, and there could lie a problem. If there were not capable versus ships, but you add them to ships, the game will likely use them against ships anyway.

I dont believe it was capable of the accuracy needed to hit shipping , it was basically a V1 built in the USA. I've got/read something about the number proposed to be used.

Its a pity there isnt a SSM weapon type. But if you approach it the same as the LST(R) would they be limited to shore bombardment??

Another trial I did was not linking the effect to bomb weights 1:1, most fillings were around 66% of weight with AP closer to 25-30%, did something towards limiting the effect of what I saw as too accurate bombs.

[Shark7]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

ORIGINAL: Shark7

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Thanks for the link Alfred, better than the mysterious comments and "PM me" approach of some.

This confirms my use of AtG rockets, I allowed each aircraft type 2 salvos of rockets and really bad accuracy.

Given that it was possible to recreate the Bat "bomb", has anyone any ideas on how to add the "Loon" (US V-1)

First off, I agree with the whole cryptic thing, its really annoying. Personally, if I learn something, I'll just share it with the community.

On the JB-2 Loon, I've gotten some ideas, the only thing is I really have no idea how to set up the penetration for a missile. Is it more or less than a gun? As far as accuracy and warhead, those are rather easy. The JB-2 had an accuracy of 0.25 miles when fired at a target 100 miles away...translated, if you launched it at a land target 100 miles away, the missile would land within 1/4 of a mile of the target. Max range is 150 miles (264 in editor settings). Effect should be 2000 given the JB-2s 2000 lb warhead.

You would assume that the JB-2, if used against a ship would easily penetrate (or at least if not penetrate massively damage) even a BB. The real question is, given the state of the technology in 1945, was it capable of engaging a ship? The only references I have to its proposed use was saturation bombardment of Japanese defenses on the Home Islands. Of course with the newest beta giving us the ability to define different payloads for different missions, then this becomes less of an issue as you can assign the JB-2 Loon to bombers carrying out ground attack or city attack missions, but use standard bombs for the Naval Interdiction mission.

JB-2s were also successfully launched from ships and submarines, and there could lie a problem. If there were not capable versus ships, but you add them to ships, the game will likely use them against ships anyway.

I dont believe it was capable of the accuracy needed to hit shipping , it was basically a V1 built in the USA. I've got/read something about the number proposed to be used.

Its a pity there isnt a SSM weapon type. But if you approach it the same as the LST(R) would they be limited to shore bombardment??

Another trial I did was not linking the effect to bomb weights 1:1, most fillings were around 66% of weight with AP closer to 25-30%, did something towards limiting the effect of what I saw as too accurate bombs.

From what I've read, the JB-2 HE weight was 2000lbs of TnT. The overall weight was 5000 lbs (2300 kgs).

The navy did use it, but only as a guided missile test vehicle. Though prior to the end of WWII there was a plan to launch them from escort carriers (I assume in the land attack/shore bombardment role). Anyway, I've worked up a possibility (though it may need lots of tweaking). I'll post a screenshot of it in the editor at the end of the post.

And, I just had to laugh so figure I'll share given what happened in here this afternoon. I ate dinner at a Chinese restaurant and got my fortune cookie which read: 'If you tempt a squirrel with a nut, be prepared to be bitten.' I got a good laugh out of that...

Guess I'm a rabid squirrel after all, watch out cause I'll bite your fingers and toss acorns at you. [:'(]

[JeffroK]

I might try this and mod the Downfall scenario and try to sink Anami Shoto

[JSG]

I tested this device (see atatchment) and it did not hit.
Crews were flying at 15,000 ft, NavB skill about 70, exp no less. One per P1Y Ginga/Frances bomber ("center line)".

P1Y1: Loadout one is a torpedo, loadout two is "IJN Guided Bomb 2".
Cannot get them to use the missile, as they use a mix of 250 kg and 60 kg bombs instead when I switch torpedoes off.

P1Y3: Both loadouts each one "IJN Guided Bomb 2".
They drop the missile and never hit. Hundreds of drops in successive turns, not a single hit.

Target: A modded convoy of more than ten freighters with a few DDs.

[Shark7]

You may need to bump the accuracy up. I get a sneaking suspicion that there is something hard coded since the PGM was really designed for Okha use.

You could try increasing accuracy to 255 (the max) and running a set of tests to see what happens. If they don't hit with that, then we are missing something.

[JSG]

ORIGINAL: Shark7

You may need to bump the accuracy up. I get a sneaking suspicion that there is something hard coded since the PGM was really designed for Okha use.

You could try increasing accuracy to 255 (the max) and running a set of tests to see what happens. If they don't hit with that, then we are missing something.

One hikotai of 48 P1Y3 bombers (both loadouts each one "IJN Guided bomb 2" with accuracy set to 255), no HQ present

Day 1
32 missiles launched
0 hits

Day 2
1st strike
2/32
2nd strike
0/13

Day 3
1st 1/13
2nd 0/13
3rd 0/18

Day 4
1/31

Day 5
(convoy spotted and in range, but no attack flown)

Day 6
1st 2/31
2nd 0/18

Summary
6 hits / 201 missiles launched

3% hit is ridiculous. I would better equip them with 800 kg AP bombs!

(My test scenario is a modified "Downfall" scenario.)

[Shark7]

The work around may be to treat them as bombs instead of used the PGM tag.

Guess I'll set up a test scenario of my own and see how it works, try and figure out what we're missing.