[1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post bug reports and ask for game support here.

Moderator: MOD_Command

Post Reply
Knightpawn
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2024 12:28 pm

[1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by Knightpawn »

Using as test scenario the MDSP Tutorial 4 it appears that a 4 plane strike flight will have all planes releasing their payload when the pattern is "Formation Single Aim" (with "off axis attack" off or on), while with all other variations (multi axis stacked - single axis stacked) only one or two planes will release. Try for yourself.

PS. Looking at the flight patterns, I don't get the difference among the various mulit/single axis stacked variations in terms of how the planes attack the target. The pattern is more or less the same.
Last edited by Knightpawn on Wed Aug 27, 2025 10:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
DWReese
Posts: 2446
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 11:40 am
Location: Miami, Florida

Re: Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by DWReese »

My observations:

I have done very little with formations as they don't seem to be consistent in their performance.

Single planes delivering all of their ordinance on one target seems to work fine. Single planes attacking multiple targets occasionally seem to work well, as long as the ordinance is equally distributed (i.e. two bombs her and two bombs there.) If you have four bombs and three targets, the program doesn't know what to do, and it may drop everything on the first target, and then RTB. Who knows?

Multiple planes attacking single targets seem to work okay, but not always. (If you really want it done properly, with this build, you need to launch single planes with individual missions. Otherwise, the lead plane may drop its ordinance, and the rest fly home with their bombs still on-board. This can be problematic because the unspent bombs are heavy, and that can result in refueling issues. I believe that they said that they were working on it, but it didn't make it into the release, or the new beta.)

Multiple planes attacking multiple targets is a crap shoot. It could work, or not at all. You could have one attack, and three returning to base without dropping anything. Se above reference fuel.

All of this is frustrating because you can't really create any scenarios until the issue is resolved as the new build will likely change everything when it starts working properly.

And, this doesn't even cover the issues associated with air-to-air refueling. That can also be very problematic, unless it involves just a single plane.

I believe that the best bet is to just wait until the devs fix these things and post them in a new beta or a new release.
sg2002
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2025 4:30 pm

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by sg2002 »

I did plenty of strike testing too. And my conclusion was similar. But I got the impression that attacking multiple isolated targets with a single strike mission is not even intended in the first place. I think the ability to add multiple strike targets exist so that you could ensure that a couple of targets are hit in the same area, but nothing more. E.g. two tanks standing together.

If you need dynamic behavior, patrol missions seem the way to go.

And in practice it's hit hardened\high value targets with strikes and then finish up with a couple of patrols.
giantsquid
Posts: 289
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 7:01 pm
Location: Milan, Italy

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by giantsquid »

Thanks for the explanations.

I made some test with those result so far. https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopic.php?t=412667

Tried to use Formation Singly Aim with no success (1 flight, 4 planes, one target).
I'm not sure if I need to redo the flight plan (create or update the flightplan) after changing the attack method in the mission editor window.

Francesco
sg2002
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2025 4:30 pm

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by sg2002 »

Yes, you do need to recreate flight plan, because different formations result in visually distinct flight plans. You should be able to see the difference.
Knightpawn
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2024 12:28 pm

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by Knightpawn »

sg2002 wrote: Wed Aug 27, 2025 10:43 pm I did plenty of strike testing too. And my conclusion was similar. But I got the impression that attacking multiple isolated targets with a single strike mission is not even intended in the first place. I think the ability to add multiple strike targets exist so that you could ensure that a couple of targets are hit in the same area, but nothing more. E.g. two tanks standing together.

If you need dynamic behavior, patrol missions seem the way to go.

And in practice it's hit hardened\high value targets with strikes and then finish up with a couple of patrols.
I agreed that strike missions do not work well for multiple targets. I have no issue with that. This test was specifically on a single target with a flight of 4. The issue that I try to understand is under what circumstances some a/cs will not drop all their payload and why.
BDukes
Posts: 2678
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:59 pm

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by BDukes »

Ok the only time I saw not all weapons launch was when I used a long separation, and the first bomber's weapons killed the unit before bomb release with later aircraft. Knightspawn is this your experience? If so this is WAD.

Somebody asked this, but when you make a change, are you hitting the Update Flight Plan button? You must do this for the plan to use your new setting. The plans do visibly change, including the differences you may not be seeing. Move the mission planner over so you can see it.

M
Last edited by BDukes on Thu Aug 28, 2025 12:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
Don't call it a comeback...
DWReese
Posts: 2446
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 11:40 am
Location: Miami, Florida

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by DWReese »

I agreed that strike missions do not work well for multiple targets. I have no issue with that. This test was specifically on a single target with a flight of 4. The issue that I try to understand is under what circumstances some a/cs will not drop all their payload and why.

Here's something to check out:
1.) Create your group of four and assign a mission whereby they are all designated to strike the same target, regardless of formation.
2.) All of the planes in the group launch and form up, but only the LEADER shows as be heading for the next waypoint. The other 3 planes are listed as HOLDING at Waypoint 2 (or Waypoint 3, I've forgotten).
3.) If that is the case, then you don't need to go any further with the test. The other three will follow the LEADER, but because they still show as being "Heading for Waypoint 3, even though they have passed it by, they will never drop their ordinance.
4.) The LEADER will strike, and the rest will fire, but never launch.
See if this is what you are experiencing.
BDukes
Posts: 2678
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:59 pm

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by BDukes »

DWReese wrote: Thu Aug 28, 2025 12:02 am I agreed that strike missions do not work well for multiple targets. I have no issue with that. This test was specifically on a single target with a flight of 4. The issue that I try to understand is under what circumstances some a/cs will not drop all their payload and why.

Here's something to check out:
1.) Create your group of four and assign a mission whereby they are all designated to strike the same target, regardless of formation.
2.) All of the planes in the group launch and form up, but only the LEADER shows as be heading for the next waypoint. The other 3 planes are listed as HOLDING at Waypoint 2 (or Waypoint 3, I've forgotten).
3.) If that is the case, then you don't need to go any further with the test. The other three will follow the LEADER, but because they still show as being "Heading for Waypoint 3, even though they have passed it by, they will never drop their ordinance.
4.) The LEADER will strike, and the rest will fire, but never launch.
See if this is what you are experiencing.
Yes I can confirm the different waypoint thing, and the aircraft twirl to correct at each waypoint. Something is definitely up. File added.

Mike
Attachments
UnfollowtheLeader.zip
(23.47 KiB) Downloaded 2 times
Don't call it a comeback...
Knightpawn
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2024 12:28 pm

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by Knightpawn »

BDukes wrote: Thu Aug 28, 2025 12:01 am Ok the only time I saw not all weapons launch was when I used a long separation, and the first bomber's weapons killed the unit before bomb release with later aircraft. Knightspawn is this your experience? If so this is WAD.

Somebody asked this, but when you make a change, are you hitting the Update Flight Plan button? You must do this for the plan to use your new setting. The plans do visibly change, including the differences you may not be seeing. Move the mission planner over so you can see it.

M
The target in the test has 100,000 damage points, it cannot be "killed". I have tried short separations at your suggestion and still only single formation ensures release of full payload from all 4 flight members.
BDukes
Posts: 2678
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:59 pm

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by BDukes »

Knightpawn wrote: Thu Aug 28, 2025 6:58 am
BDukes wrote: Thu Aug 28, 2025 12:01 am Ok the only time I saw not all weapons launch was when I used a long separation, and the first bomber's weapons killed the unit before bomb release with later aircraft. Knightspawn is this your experience? If so this is WAD.

Somebody asked this, but when you make a change, are you hitting the Update Flight Plan button? You must do this for the plan to use your new setting. The plans do visibly change, including the differences you may not be seeing. Move the mission planner over so you can see it.

M
The target in the test has 100,000 damage points, it cannot be "killed". I have tried short separations at your suggestion and still only single formation ensures release of full payload from all 4 flight members.
Ok thanks for taking a look. I can't replicate this, but it doesn't mean it isn't happening.

If a dev digs in and can't replicate. I'd suggest taking a short video using the snipping tool.

Thanks!

M
Don't call it a comeback...
Knightpawn
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2024 12:28 pm

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by Knightpawn »

Here is a video (zip too large to post as attachment, so I give a cloud link)

https://1drv.ms/u/c/6dc2f61afdb60203/EV ... A?e=TEzEMI

How do I convert videos to gifs as, for example, Nikel does?
Nikel
Posts: 2228
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:51 am

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by Nikel »

I use this software.

https://www.screentogif.com/

The animated gifs may be huge so adjust the size of the recording window to the zone of interest.
Knightpawn
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2024 12:28 pm

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by Knightpawn »

Nikel wrote: Thu Aug 28, 2025 7:34 pm I use this software.

https://www.screentogif.com/

The animated gifs may be huge so adjust the size of the recording window to the zone of interest.
Thanks. Much appreciated
giantsquid
Posts: 289
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 7:01 pm
Location: Milan, Italy

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by giantsquid »

Thanks for the detailed video!

I tried a similar scenario with iron bombs, just to check.

One strike mission > One flight > 4 planes > only one target for all

It didn't work, only one plane released the bomb, the other 3 kept them

Save attached file

Francesco
Attachments
MDSP Tutorial 5 - Advanced Flightplan Management 1.zip
(31.01 KiB) Downloaded 4 times
Knightpawn
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2024 12:28 pm

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by Knightpawn »

giantsquid wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 4:24 pm Thanks for the detailed video!

I tried a similar scenario with iron bombs, just to check.

One strike mission > One flight > 4 planes > only one target for all

It didn't work, only one plane released the bomb, the other 3 kept them

Save attached file

Francesco
Do not ask me why but with irons "Single aim" only leader drops the ordinance (EDIT it is not a formation issue as the behavior is the same when the flight is in perfect column formation).
However Single Axis staked works!
Screenshot 2025-08-30 211451.png
Screenshot 2025-08-30 211451.png (35.66 KiB) Viewed 237 times
giantsquid
Posts: 289
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 7:01 pm
Location: Milan, Italy

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by giantsquid »

Thank you, I confirm it works properly.
With the Single Axis Stacked Attack method, all four planes released their iron bombs (see save).
This seems to be the only method that allows more than one aircraft in a flight to release iron bombs on a target.

If I have multiple targets for a flight or a single aircraft with standoff weapons, I still use a strike mission with flight plans. However, I set the planes on weapons hold and assign wepons manually to individual targets, because the current system seems even more confused when asked to engage more than one ground target with a single flight of multiple planes.
Attachments
MDSP Tutorial 4 - Attack Methods & Basic Flightplan Management_test_1.zip
(38.46 KiB) Downloaded 2 times
User avatar
blu3s
Posts: 1091
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2022 9:45 am

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by blu3s »

Just a reminder:
4. Always create a new thread on this forum for your issue. Don't add your report to an existing thread even if the OP there looks 100% identical to your own. If you wish to report multiple potential issues then please create one thread for each issue, even if these were observed on the same game session.
Piling multiple issues on a single thread makes it much more difficult for the devs to keep track of what is resolved and what is still pending. This means less time & energy for the devs to resolve your issue.
So if you want to report something related to this discussion, open a new thread with a specific save and description of the issue.
BDukes
Posts: 2678
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:59 pm

Re: [1706] Some conclusions on strike behavior

Post by BDukes »

blu3s wrote: Tue Sep 02, 2025 6:57 am Just a reminder:
4. Always create a new thread on this forum for your issue. Don't add your report to an existing thread even if the OP there looks 100% identical to your own. If you wish to report multiple potential issues then please create one thread for each issue, even if these were observed on the same game session.
Piling multiple issues on a single thread makes it much more difficult for the devs to keep track of what is resolved and what is still pending. This means less time & energy for the devs to resolve your issue.
So if you want to report something related to this discussion, open a new thread with a specific save and description of the issue.
Sure. Thanks!

M
Don't call it a comeback...
Post Reply

Return to “Tech Support”