Choosing the right weapon

[Nicals]

Pretty new to this game, I'm trying to understand how to read the DB and choose an appropriate weapon to deal with the enemy.

Playing Shifting Sand scenario 2, I'm confronted with an syrian Arty Bty (152mm/25) (CW#1100).
I read in the database that it is composed of 6 units, and have a Component Dispersal Radius of 120m.
It has an armor value of 0 and a DP value of 0 too.
So I have 6 guns with servant about 120 appart of each other.

I assumed I could send a flight of two Mystere IVA each armed with 76 TBA 68mm rockets (CW#411).
Those rocket have a anti-land range of 2nm, an 8DP warhead.

The attack didn't do anything. According to the log, all rockets missed their target by more than 300ft.
I checked the database again, TBA 68mm rocket have a nominal CEP of 80m (260ft) and target is in mountain. Could be related. Am I right ?

I though this could be because they were flying to high (didn't change the settings). So I sent another flight, this time at 2000ft AGL and the rocket landed much closer. I event managed to make one hit.

All this to say: I'm understanding all this by trial and error. I would rather prefer to read all those number in the DB and understand: ok, this target is small so I should at least fire from xxx altitude with xxx weapon. How could I have planned this attack using the DB and not with save and reload until it worked ?

Thanks

[Gunner98]

Nicals

Welcome to the game.

Air to ground is tricky for a whole bunch of reasons. Have you completed the Strike Tutorials? They might help you understand munitions a little better.

A couple thoughts:

-Pinpoint target - if you don't have a PGM it will take a few (several) weapons to get a hit (Soviet loadout with lots of 100kg bombs are great)
-spread out target (like your artillery battery) are perfect for cluster munitions
-hardened targets (like tanks) - cluster munitions if they have armor piercing capability or rockets
-bunkers - penetrating munitions - or if you don't have those, large bombs

B

[boogabooga]

Unguided rockets are quite primitive. Some more points to consider:

-The 260ft CEP means that 50% of your rounds will fall inside this radius, but 50% will still fall a little outside.
-IIRC, the published CEP value only accounts for rockets fired one at a time. When they get salvoed all at once, there is a sort of "walking" behavior modeled such that only a few rockets are considered "aimed" and the rest strike in a line along the ground. There is a thread on this forum somewhere from a year or so ago (by Dimitris?) about stick bombing that goes into the details of the statistical model. For best results, I suggest that you change the WRA of the rockets to only fire 6 or 8 or something per salvo and not the whole lot, unless facing intense AAA.
-Those arty. pieces have light armor, but I don't think those rockets have AP ability. Not a deal breaker, but they will be harder to destroy.
-2000 ft AGL is still a little high. Try going to min altitude (with adjusted WRA) and see what happens.
-I agree Gunner98, especially that AP cluster munitions are the best here if you can get them.

[thewood1]

There's also a little real world common sense coming into play. Just watch any youtube video of unguided rockets being fired and you'll see they're all over the place. The other thing to do is turn on weapon calculations. This will give you some insight into what factors go into the in-game weapon effectiveness.

[c3k]

Missing from the above advice, which is all very good, is a direct answer: No, there is nothing that will guide you in the manner which you'd like. (You're not alone. )

It would be nice to have a small paragraph for each weapon describing it's operational intent and best envelope, etc. Meantime, the database is pretty comprehensive and you can imagine what a chore it would be to create such an entry for each weapon!

[boogabooga]

ORIGINAL: c3k

Missing from the above advice, which is all very good, is a direct answer: No, there is nothing that will guide you in the manner which you'd like. (You're not alone. )

It would be nice to have a small paragraph for each weapon describing it's operational intent and best envelope, etc. Meantime, the database is pretty comprehensive and you can imagine what a chore it would be to create such an entry for each weapon!

There ARE description packs for the database: https://command.matrixgames.com/?page_id=1876
Otherwise, try Wikipedia?

Also, a background in combat flight simulation helps. DCS might be a bit too much for many people, but you can pick up Falcon 4.0 on Steam for about $7. You can try out most of the modern Cold War era weapons yourself. Or just read the Falcon 4.0 manual. It goes into a lot of detail about the various weapons and how they are used.

[thewood1]

Interestingly enough, most of the descriptions either originate from Wiki or have the same source. So if you just like in games like Combat Mission or Steel Beasts, having Wiki on hand can solve that problem.

[BradOrbital]

Just as some extra reading, here's an interesting link on weaponeering and analysis, will be of interest.
https://irp.fas.org/doddir/usaf/afpam14-210/part06.htm

[kevinkins]

"It would be nice to have a small paragraph for each weapon describing it's operational intent"

Not that this is practical within the CBO database given the size of the DB, but actually this is a great idea for players to look into on their own when deciding loadouts and/or understanding why certain weapon systems were paid for and fielded over the years. Before the era of multi-role everything, systems were deigned to do 1 or 2 things really well. Now systems are supposed to be jacks of all trades.

[Gunner98]

It would be nice to have a small paragraph for each weapon describing it's operational intent"

I'm sure that all this info exists on Wikipedia or other sites - acutely with descriptions in a lot of the entries are already a lift from Wiki I think.

Perhaps what is needed - over time - is the ability to embed links in the DB entry that will link a curious player to a Wiki page in a separate window. The links would take time to build but so did the photos and descriptions.

B

[kevinkins]

My thought was about what was, is, or will be the operational intent of any system. I never thought to look at it this way. Many capabilities are becoming overlapping today. Perhaps that's why loadout questions are coming up in the forum. A B17 flight in WW2 would have like 2 loadouts while being escorted by P-51s with one. Today, there are multi-role a/c that can carry many more types of munitions in packages of a/c. This situation can be daunting to new players.

[Gunner98]

Add in these babies and you have a bewildering choice. Although I don't think a mixed load like this is available in game.

B

[michaelm75au]

Looks more like a 'Look at me, see me roar' stance[:D]
Don't think that loadout would be mission-specific.[&:]

[Gunner98]

If it is not a demo load (by the terrain it looks domestic) than it might be a specific targeting run - several targets with specific weapon solutions

Not a standard loadout and would take a couple days to plan (targeting etc) I would think

B

[Gunner98]

On the other hand, just pulled up the A-10 and they have some very diverse loadouts in game.

[boogabooga]

ORIGINAL: kevinkins
A B17 flight in WW2 would have like 2 loadouts while being escorted by P-51s with one.

Without getting too far off topic...uhh...no.

[thewood1]

For a B-17, this is from the actual manual on loading the various configurations. From ALternate-wars. A decent site for info. They alwyas give detailed sources.

https://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Airc ... _Chart.jpg

Not as varied as a multi-role fighter today, but add in different types of fuzing and such and there was more variation that I thought.

[kevinkins]

Thanks for the chart. I think others will be interested in the amount of variety there was back then.

[c3k]

The wide variety of modern munitions, and their arcane names, makes it difficult to determine what to use for best effects. I'd love to see something like:

Air-to-Ground munition, unguided, primarily effective against troops in the open or unarmored vehicles. Best used at 300 knots (or less) and 1,000 feet altitude, or lower.

Or...

Air-to-Ground munition, guided by TV (visible wavelengths) from the releasing aircraft. Best against light to heavily armored targets Created to keep the aircraft beyond AAA fire. Best used at 300-600 knots, 10,000 to 40,000 feet, not more than 10 nautical mile range. Evasive maneuvering by the guiding aircraft may break guidance.

[boogabooga]

ORIGINAL: thewood1

For a B-17, this is from the actual manual on loading the various configurations. From ALternate-wars. A decent site for info. They alwyas give detailed sources.

https://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Airc ... _Chart.jpg

Not as varied as a multi-role fighter today, but add in different types of fuzing and such and there was more variation that I thought.

And that's just the USAAF, before we talk about RAF Coastal Command.