Matrix Games Forums

I am playing the NM_BS_Rhino scenario for the 2nd time. 1st one I barely won and I noticed that my AD units (tracked rapier) were totally useless against Russian attack helis. They used up all their ammo without a single hit. The only unit able to take them down were the warrior APC's with their 30mm cannon. Is that working as intended? I guess there must be a modelling problem. I am always careful not to move units without an air defense screen.

We'll take a look at that.

Blowpipe is a worthless piece of very expensive pipe. [:@]

Rapier has worked well for me in the past. [8D]

Thanks for the heads up.

On a side note, we all think the British are the hardest nationality to play in the game. It will be interesting to see what you guys views on that is after you've played some more.

Good Hunting.

MR

ORIGINAL: Haudrauf1962

I am playing the NM_BS_Rhino scenario for the 2nd time. 1st one I barely won and I noticed that my AD units (tracked rapier) were totally useless against Russian attack helis. They used up all their ammo without a single hit. The only unit able to take them down were the warrior APC's with their 30mm cannon. Is that working as intended? I guess there must be a modelling problem. I am always careful not to move units without an air defense screen.

Looks like the same kind of thing as my questions re Stingers vs MG's in the "AA vehicles" thread.

In my play through of Rhino I had quite a few misses with Rapier as well but I managed to get a few hits as well. Apparently tracked rapier was quite maintenance intensive and needed a quick fiddle with after it was moved.

I will take a quick look into the model later this week after getting through the slow process of the modding guide. I think part of this issue is missiles are perceived as these one shot never miss weapons (same discussions can be found on the Command page too). They are in optimal conditions very good. In combat against live opponents the numbers drop off quickly. Best numbers I've seen for this time period are Desert Storm in 91. 87 AAMs fired by US fighters for a whopping 13 kills. Those number are pretty much matched in other conflicts as well. We have modeled the best we can to take a lot of these historical numbers into account. Ground warfare makes things trickier still with the terrain and LOS being a major factor. We have run a number of tests of air and AD units to check accuracies and such from both sides of these types of fights.

We will continue to keep an eye along with you guys playing.

I thought that the relative ineffectiveness of AA rockets against helicopters was intentional. It seemed right to me that helicopters would be hugging the ground close enough to throw anything but AA MGs in their desperate attempt to stay alive. AA rockets certainly have no problem with aircraft challenging the battlefield.

Speaking of helicopters. It is really interesting to see how well modeled they seem to be in the game. In my limited experience Hinds work as doctrine says they should. Always moving making lighting strikes over enemy units. Apaches on the other hand are beasts as hovering weapons platforms.

As I recall it, US SHORAD stuff in the eighties wasn't very good, in either quantity or quality. Our focus on the USAF for our air cover, coupled with our "not invented here" bias (no Gepards or Rolands or Rapiers for joo!) meant we had, what, Stingers, Chaparrals, and Vulcans, which really didn't measure up to the stuff the Soviets could and did field. Now, we really don't know what would have happened because, thankfully, there was no war like the one depicted in this game, but I'm pretty satisfied with the lackluster performance of particularly American air defenses as modeled. I suspect that, until the NATO air forces could wrest control of the skies from the Russkies, it would have been a very grim experience for the ground pounders in terms of Pact helo and air power.

ORIGINAL: TheWombat

As I recall it, US SHORAD stuff in the eighties wasn't very good, in either quantity or quality. Our focus on the USAF for our air cover, coupled with our "not invented here" bias (no Gepards or Rolands or Rapiers for joo!) meant we had, what, Stingers, Chaparrals, and Vulcans, which really didn't measure up to the stuff the Soviets could and did field. Now, we really don't know what would have happened because, thankfully, there was no war like the one depicted in this game, but I'm pretty satisfied with the lackluster performance of particularly American air defenses as modeled. I suspect that, until the NATO air forces could wrest control of the skies from the Russkies, it would have been a very grim experience for the ground pounders in terms of Pact helo and air power.

I think the other key difference is the Soviets didn't expect to gain/retain air supremacy (unless the war went nuclear), so the divisions were equipped to operate in a hostile air environment, NATO hoped/wanted to believe/was trying to save cash (delete to taste) that control of the airspace was the best AA available so skimped on this aspect?

May have been less true in the late 80s timeframe but was the case in the 70s - remember in SPI's Next War you did not risk putting NATO airpower near a Soviet division that had not depleted its air defences.

ORIGINAL: The Plodder

In my play through of Rhino I had quite a few misses with Rapier as well but I managed to get a few hits as well. Apparently tracked rapier was quite maintenance intensive and needed a quick fiddle with after it was moved.

Same here,all the misses were at close range and all the hits at longer range.