Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Filitch

We can place more than six (6) hulls of 2235.0 at the flying deck of the CVN 78, but never mind! 1/6 of square of flying deck has RCS bigger than whole deck.

Question to DEVs and database editors. I really don't know. Is anywhere any mentions about composite deck for CVN 78 or RAM for it?

ORIGINAL: Scar79

You never stop amaze me, gentlemen.
...
SRSLY?!

The Pentagon wants to take a weapon originally designed for offense, flip its punch for defense and demonstrate by 2018 the potential for the Army and Navy to conduct missile defense of bases, ports and ships using traditional field guns to fire a new hypervelocity round guided by a mobile, ground variant of an Air Force fighter aircraft radar.

The system was designed to provide both tracking of an incoming warhead, and command guide the outgoing projectile to ranges of 25 kilometers. The project demonstrated critical technologies associated with the command guided weapon system. Demonstrations included cross range precision CEP of 18 centimeters at 24.8 kilometers, tracking of hypervelocity projectiles fired at up to 2 kilometers per second (6.561 feet per second or Mach 5.87), and developing and communicating with a miniature g’s hardened transceiver at 25 kilometers. Tracking of the hypervelocity projectiles was performed using a binary phased coded waveform.

ORIGINAL: hellfish6
That's one way to come across as an asshole.

ORIGINAL: Filitch

In fact, this is a question of the quality of the goods. We all paid money for the game. But it turns out that not everything in the game is the quality for which it is worth paying money. And sellers for some reason keep silent, when they are asked - why some of the product is spoiled. Guys, you made a great game, but do not spoil the reputation of a realistic simulator and your reputation for honest people. And if there is an accidental error or deliberate distortion - then an honest person should speak directly, and not keep silent, taking away other people's money.
I would really like to see the answer of Sunburn, mikmyk to the simple questions asked above.

ORIGINAL: Scar79

ORIGINAL: Filitch

We can place more than six (6) hulls of 2235.0 at the flying deck of the CVN 78, but never mind! 1/6 of square of flying deck has RCS bigger than whole deck.

Question to DEVs and database editors. I really don't know. Is anywhere any mentions about composite deck for CVN 78 or RAM for it?

Sad thing is that we, community, can't change this absurd. Ironically, people who used to make DB's for Harpoon won't let us to do the same for CMANO.

Database Editing

Does the simulator come with a database editor?

There are pros and cons in supporting third-party databases for a simulator that is being actively maintained by the developer. Our current view is that the disadvantages are more profound. So Command does not come with a database editor.

The ability to modify a database has been taken from a stand-alone programs and integrated into the Scenario Editor. You can customise platforms in the scenarios by adding/removing mounts, magazines, sensors and comms gear as well as changing weapon types and quantities, but you aren’t able to add units or otherwise edit the database. This gives you the ability to do some new nifty things e.g. stick a Club-K container on an innocent merchant ship. And there is nothing stopping you (well, except common sense) to equip a Perry-class frigate with the SS-N-19 complement normally reserved for a Kirov. The scenario design section of the manual explains how you can do this either through the editor or via templates.

There are many reasons why databases in Command are not directly editable.

First and foremost we did not want to repeat the database mess/confusion observed in Harpoon. The scenario authors handled more than their fair share of support mails on database/scenario mismatches for that game. So for Command we wanted to shift all focus to scenarios. Command is pretty much a ‘scenario sandbox’ that started out as a scenario editor and evolved into a simulator. Everyone on the Command development team have a long history of scenario design behind them, mainly for Harpoon2/3, and we wanted to make the ultimate scenario editor for ourselves and other naval war gaming fans out there – without the noisy database element.
As such, in Command there is no need to copy/overwrite database files or edit configuration files, followed by odd behaviour and crashes if database and scenarios don’t match one hundred percent. Command scenarios know exactly what database they were built with based on the database’s checksum (!), and a scenario will pick the right database upon load. We have received much positive feedback on this solution, as the players only have to care about what scenario to play rather than worrying about whether the scenario will crash with the currently installed database or not.

Second, the database for Command is very complex. Anyone who has spent time in the Harpoon2/3 database editor will immediately notice the increased number of parameters when they look in the Command DB Viewer. Editing or leaving out the wrong parameter could have rather negative impact on gameplay, generating a ton of unnecessary support tickets for the developer.

Third, having multiple user-created databases makes continued expansion of Command far more difficult. Any schema changes would also have to be applied (correctly!) to any 3rd party databases, each of which may or may not have been abandoned by its author at that point in time. There would also be the risk of making associated material (scenarios) unusable. The Command database schema & enum tables are updated regularly and keeping all database hobbyists up-to-date would be a monstrous task, both on the dev end and on the 3rd party end. It would not take many weeks (or days!) before a new db author simply would give up.

ORIGINAL: Filitch

In fact, this is a question of the quality of the goods. We all paid money for the game. But it turns out that not everything in the game is the quality for which it is worth paying money. And sellers for some reason keep silent, when they are asked - why some of the product is spoiled. Guys, you made a great game, but do not spoil the reputation of a realistic simulator and your reputation for honest people. And if there is an accidental error or deliberate distortion - then an honest person should speak directly, and not keep silent, taking away other people's money.
I would really like to see the answer of Sunburn, mikmyk to the simple questions asked above.

ORIGINAL: Scar79

Excuse me, gentlemen, but this your "algorithm" is too selective. As many ships as i managed to check, tells me that all NATO vessels have much smaller RCS than Russian vessels, even if NATO vessel is significantly larger and older. And somehow, i'm sure i will find the same if i will start to inspect Chinese ships, which i didn't yet.

So, yes, you may call me rude, again, but i'm 100% sure there is a strong bias towards Russian(and i presume Chinese) tech. I felt it during the Closed Beta and i still feel it today. After all, i was a part of the CMANO group at Facebook and i can say it is THE MOST TOXIC(towards Russia and China) combat-simulation community i ever was part of.

This is how i see it now, judging by the facts i investigated.

P.S. For example, checked one Chinese vessel, Type 052 D - i was right, its RCS is two times larger than RCS of Arleigh Burke.

ORIGINAL: Scar79

but i'm 100% sure there is a strong bias towards Russian(and i presume Chinese) tech.

ORIGINAL: Scar79

Ok, if DB's made by community is not an option - may be it would useful for all of us, if we had a Community Working Group with some sort of utility for production/review/extraction DB-ready standalone entries? Then community members could make new units or readjust broken ones and all what would be needed from you, Devs, is a final check. As soon as the entry is checked and approved, you just add it to the game's DB.

ORIGINAL: Dysta
...you can find in this forum about the godlike S-400...

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

ORIGINAL: Filitch

In fact, this is a question of the quality of the goods. We all paid money for the game. But it turns out that not everything in the game is the quality for which it is worth paying money. And sellers for some reason keep silent, when they are asked - why some of the product is spoiled. Guys, you made a great game, but do not spoil the reputation of a realistic simulator and your reputation for honest people. And if there is an accidental error or deliberate distortion - then an honest person should speak directly, and not keep silent, taking away other people's money.
I would really like to see the answer of Sunburn, mikmyk to the simple questions asked above.

Hi Filitch

Sorry for the lack of response. Just looking this over it seems like a picture has been painted that is not true and that has excited you. Looking at the mentioned platforms all were implemented very early at a player's request and simply haven't been updated to reflect the new info. RCS stats are auto calculated in a tool so there is no purposeful slant unless you think a ton of extra work fudging Russian RCS values is really worth it? Then again if we were willing to spend the time doing that why would we spend it there and not somewhere more meaningful like within the code? Does it make sense to you? Seriously? The carrier vs DDG issue might even be an error () but I will need to dig on this one. These will be added to our list to review in the future and sorry that you're upset at this.

Now a question for you.

Should the team take on more stringent data requirements before implementing? Let me know what you think.

Thanks

Mike