[FIXED B1115.7] Defenders not defending

[Gunner98]

Am noticing a reluctance for the AI to defend itself. See save file, my F-5s are clearly in the range of the Tashkent's SA-N-3s and when I jump to the AI side, WCS is tight but my AC are positively identified as hostile with a firm location for them. They are at 200ft but the Goblet can engage down to 35ft. The weapons allocation box (Shift + F1) says that there is too much ambiguity - but there is none that I can tell

Post save I flew directly over the ships but they wont engage, weapons allocation is now green and clear to fire. I think there is something going wrong here.

Tx

[Gunner98]

Updated to latest DB, thought that might be an issue - it's not. Same result

[DWReese]

I have experienced the same thing, but mine was even worse.

When I switched to sides, the SAM was in GREEN and ready to fire. There was no AMBIGUITY issue listed. They simply wouldn't fire. I ran it all the way through, and my attackers destroyed the defenders without being fired upon. I then replayed it, but this time I manually fired the SAMs and they worked perfectly. Something is wrong.

[Peacemaker32]

I noticed this issue in the "Port Haucurt" user-made scenario. This involves two LCS (armed with Hellfire/RAM/Bushmaster) in an extraction mission on the Niger Delta.

When multiple "vampires" were detected as inbound (with Air doctrine set to Weapons Tight), the RAMs were not fired despite the missiles closing well within their engagement range. The LCS would only fire if I used the "manual attack" option (F1) and selected the inbound missiles.

[mavfin]

I'm seeing this some as well.

Steal the old Surface Warfare Intro from CMANO, where the P-3 shoots SLAM-ERs at the DDG.

The P-3 acts weird, and flies by a few times, and finally fires the missiles, but then the DDG doesn't seem to want to fire to defend itself. If you tell it to, it'll do fine.

Something in the decision loop is hanging up, I think. The missile firing from a/c or helo doesn't seem to have this issue.

Having some other mission issues, but haven't really zeroed in on them yet. Getting a/c groups launched by missions...then a minute later it says it can't launch them...but they're already in the air?

Getting weird flight paths, and not attacking well or not at all, and at bad heights (iron bombs from 36K ft?), especially with off-axis attacks...but if you unassign the group or plane, then assign it back to the mission, it'll proceed correctly from there, most of the time.

Using scenarios that I know what *should* happen, and it's not quite right.

Also, air intercepts: If I let them launch on their own, half the time they'll RTB within the first minute. Get them in the air, *then* assign them, and they'll generally go fine, if you have proper targets to intercept.

EDIT1: of course, now I test it, and it works fine. Inconsistent, in a way, is worse. If it breaks every time, we know what to fix...

[4Emprah]

Having this problem big time with surface units/facilities. I'll have thin-skinned mobile groups drive right up to hostile MBTs and if I don't manual engage, they sit and stare at each other for minutes before sometimes one of the several enemy armor units finally turns and starts shooting.

[DWReese]

Having this problem big time with surface units/facilities. I'll have thin-skinned mobile groups drive right up to hostile MBTs and if I don't manual engage

Yes, I have been able to switch sides and manually fire the weapons, but the AI won't fire SAMs or AA on its own to defend itself. This makes for a very lopsided battle when the opposition doesn't defend itself.

[thewood1]

I think the devs have said in another thread they are working on it.

[Dimitris]

Thanks, logged and we'll investigate as a priority issue.

[Dimitris]

Can you please give this test build a try: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... 91&mpage=1

[DWReese]

This version works well. The defenders fight back. I have conducted at least 12 tests, and it works.

The attack profiles of the strike aircraft, however, is not fixed. I know that you have not addressed it as of yet, and the only reason that I mention it is because it makes the testing of this problem a little more difficult. If you could tackle the strike aircraft profile (altitude/speed/RTB, etc.) issue that would be great and it would allow for a more thorough test of the "defending" issue.

Good job fixing this!