The first air ops tutorial

[mikmykWS]

HI Mark

Sorry you're having all these issues. We'll definitely take a look to see if there is anything funny going on.

Mike

[MarkShot]

Four planes take it out, but how can I meet my objectives with such high demand?

Time to play with pulse settings and such.

[mikmykWS]

Not sure.

Perhaps we should look into an easier air opts tutorial at some point.

Mike

[MarkShot]

Pulse settings make no difference.

[mikmykWS]

They shouldn't

[MarkShot]

Okay 1 GBU is enough for a kill.

[mikmykWS]

Depends where it hits. Try lower altitude for better results with dumb bombs.

Also notice we use CEP so close misses cause damage etc. Fire also burns things down albeit not immediately.

Mike

[MarkShot]

Okay 1 Walleye is a kill.

[MarkShot]

If I lower the altitude from the AI 800', it fails to release. Hours of fire has not affect.

[MarkShot]

Okay, I got 24 guide weapons with probably enough dumb bombs for another 4 kills.

It looks like I can achieve the 20 building kills.

However, I must gain air superiority and kill all SAM sights.

Also, despite using the mission planner this will require some serious micromanagement.

Finally, the brief is very misleading. It implies that you can win with a single mission. I doubt it. But I will try a single with WRA fine tuning next and see what happens.

[MarkShot]

My alpha strike using WRA and allocating 24 building only resulted in 7 buildings lost. Less than it would I have expected.

Perhaps I would try to concentrate in a single complex to take advantage of blast compression waves.

More experimentation tomorrow with real scoring.

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: MarkShot

If I lower the altitude from the AI 800', it fails to release. Hours of fire has not affect.

You can see the drop parameters in the db viewer.

Mike

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: MarkShot

Okay 1 Walleye is a kill.

Precision optically guided weapon.

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: MarkShot

My alpha strike using WRA and allocating 24 building only resulted in 7 buildings lost. Less than it would I have expected.

Perhaps I would try to concentrate in a single complex to take advantage of blast compression waves.

More experimentation tomorrow with real scoring.

Sure its worth a shot.

[MarkShot]

Keeping the targets as tight as possible got me 12 buildings lost.

[mikmykWS]

Great news.

Mike

[MarkShot]

Mike and team,

This is pretty much the best I can do with program parameters and given resources. This is assuming I was to wipe out the SAM threat. (Which I believe that I can do.) (The air threat is totally trivial.)

I believe this number could be increased by manually managing every planes' attack run. As it would allow you to spot and concentrate on buildings already suffering damage. Doing so would reduce your total weapons expenditure. (Buildings randomly seem to suffer damage as a result of nearby blast concussion. So, even with guided weapons good candidates for follow on strikes appear. Further, in theory a preponderance of strikes which good locality working out from a damage center would probably achieve the most with the least.)

Now, this has all been very interesting. (an exercise in understanding the air strike options and UI.) You have no idea the number of things which I tried.

But I don't think I want to micro-manage my battles for maybe a 100% improvement in combat results. Part of the attraction of this game is that it is operational and not a flight simulator. I want to make strategic and operational decisions as opposed to determine platform by who to target; exactly how many weapons to allocate; and follow up on every weapon strike to repeat the whole cycle.

Having spent 10 years working on a premier operational title, you only have one way to make micromanagement NOT to be the certain choice in all scenarios: That is that micromanagement will result in a performance penalty of some form such that the more micromanagement the greater the penalty. Thus, you reach a tipping point where the AI and high level routines are a better choice.

Additionally, it helps to model the OODA loop. I don't mean in how quickly a missile can come off the rails, but that two much hands on commanding introduces intolerable delays which allows the enemy to get inside your OODA loop and be calling the shots. (I hope I am being clear.)

SIDE: CVW-15
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
8x AGM-62B Walleye II ER/DL
16x GBU-10E/B Paveway II LGB [Mk84]
160x Mk82 500lb LDGP



SIDE: Red Side
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
3x A/C Hardened Aircraft Shelter (1x Medium Aircraft)
10x Building (Large)


EXPENDITURES:
------------------

[MarkShot]

Mike and team,

Note the scenario calls for 20 buildings to be destroyed.

First, as the briefing mainly focuses on introducing missions, I think it falls short of what the real solution is here (manual ops).

Second, it may just be my biased, but tutorials should not be hard to win. They are to illustrate concepts and teach mechanics. Not to be puzzle problems.

Now, I know this scenario has changed as I watched Baloogan play it on YouTube with v1.00. Also, I know as a beta tester that few want to do regression testing of remedial stuff with each new patch. It's the expert scenarios with sizzle that keeps beta testers content and busy.

A tutorial scenario for a new player should take hours and not days.

Feel free to delete my experience again (but experience is relevant to contributions):

* I have a career of systems design.

* I've beta/designed/documented games for over 10 years.

* And I've done the business side of indie games too.

NOW, DELETE AWAY. (But before you do, realize time and effort goes into sharing test results and perceptions with you. I have a life and other things to do, but I appreciate the dedication it takes to make such products that I can experience worlds unknown. So, it is with experience and generosity that I write ... not trolling or disparaging your work.)

[mikmykWS]

Mark we appreciate anything positive you contribute but unfortunately got no time for whatever this is. Sorry you're angry and feel like you have to validate yourself. I have no idea why as we've been responsive. We've got updating the air ops scenario on our list.

Thanks

Mike

[ComDev]

Hold on, I'll dig into [8D]