stable #114. Missiles WIP interception chances. WATAFAQ.

[_RAM_]

Dear devs have you ever tested this even once?

Most of ships don't even much missiles in rack to try intercept 1 harpoon. But those who have such a number of missiles simply cant. 6 harpoons pierce through 7 ships group + ECM cover (kirov, slava, 2 udaloy, 2 sovremenniy) like they even dont tried to defend.
You have better chances to spoof missiles than intercept it.
4 broadsided Ticos managed to intercept only 1 SS-19 (with CIWS lol)

Literally unplayable.

[SHVAKS]

Nguyên văn bởi Julhelm:

Nguyên văn bởi SHVAKS:

Then how come systems like SM-2 and S-300 all have launch altitude as 200-100000ft? Can’t they not be launched on sea level?

In the case of SM-2 it is because the seeker in block 1 and block 2 isn't reliable at lower altitudes. Anti-sea skimmer performance didn't come until block 3 in the late 80's.

Continuing on this issue, if a missile is "not reliable" at lower altitudes, how unreliable? Again I am not talking about real life capabilities, there are plenty of people ready to argue about that in this thread. What I mean is whatever stuff you model in-game you need to make it understandable to the player rather than hiding everything behind the scenes.

Do you want SM-2 to have 100%pk at 200ft and 0%pk at 199ft? Or do you want it to have 80%pk @200ft and flat 10%pk @<200ft? Or do you want SM-2 to have 80%pk @200ft and a smooth curve to 0%pk when the target altitude drops to 0ft? I wouldn't care either way and it is probably going to be moddable in the future, but if you don't make it clear in a tutorial/encyclopedia, people are going to see features as bugs and bugs as features all day.

There has been people frustrated at the large amount of harpoons needed to sink a fleet (because of a bug that makes interceptors more effective) and the answer is that yeah you do need a lot of missiles and now people are frustrated because only a few will do because sea skimming makes harpoons invulnerable and the answer is interceptors are just not that effective IRL...honestly it is so funny to see all of these happen.

[Stix_09]

[MOD] Missiles WIP: Rebalance of interception chances. Removed CEP from SAM/AAM entirely. Altitude penalty moved from CEP to interception chance.

It may be a little to aggressive in this patch , something to discuss on discord in the bugs section I think

[Hobel]

Nguyên văn bởi _RAM_:

Chance to intercept harpoon or TASM by SAM is 0.13
For SS-19 it was 0.03
That was for top SAMs like SA6, SA9. Worse ones did with 0.01

Just check "MISS" entry
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3387343300
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3387344370
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3387344463

0.5 bonus for altitude is thing that kills

how do i open this window?

[Stix_09]

Debug is F10

I just tested this in a custom mission and has no problem killing ss-n-19's with proper fleet placement well before terminal phase with tico's and a kidd and SM1 & 2's while they still have altitude, they are fairly easy to kill (but its likely u will lose boats so this is not ideal situation). The PK is considerably higher at .54 for the SM2 and .47 for the SM1 from the kidd. I just did a salvo of 8 and shot all down no losses. Thats and average of 1-2 missiles per kill.

AS I said in the OP your problem is fleet positioning is WW2 not coldwar

If your a carrier group and your doing this you already made a strategic error.

[National Film Board of Canada]

Am I missing something - I am not seeing the 0.5 reduction intercepting harpoons.

[Stix_09]

Nguyên văn bởi National Film Board of Canada:

Am I missing something - I am not seeing the 0.5 reduction intercepting harpoons.

because they are sea skimming on the deck until terminal popup , much harder that low

the ss-n-19 very dif flight profile its how they get that long range until right at the end,and they are faster , so u get more speed pk malus than the harpoons , every missile has its advantage and disadvantages. the Granit's also cooperate in group the harpoons do not. Granits are also armoured and bigger so more resistant to CIWS in terminal

Granit
Maximum speed(supersonic)
Mach 1.6 (low altitude)
Mach 2.5+ (high altitude)
Mass 7,000 kg (15,400 lb)
Length 10 m (33 ft)

The guidance system is mixed-mode, with inertial guidance, terminal active radar homing guidance and also anti-radar homing. Mid-course correction is probable.

It is widely claimed that the missile, when fired in a swarm (group of 4–8) has a unique guidance mode. One of the weapons climbs to a higher altitude and designates targets while the others attack. The missile responsible for target designation climbs in short pop-ups, so as to be harder to intercept.

Harpoon
Flight altitude
Sea-skimming
Maximum speed(subsonic)
537 mph (864 km/h; 240 m/s;
Mass 1,523 lb (691 kg) including booster
Length
12.6 ft (3.8 m), air-launched;
15 ft (4.6 m), surface- and submarine-launched

[Julhelm]

Nguyên văn bởi BBsquid:

Nguyên văn bởi Dot:

So? Screw reality and let sea skimmers be interceptable below min system level even if in RL sysem probably just could not get a lock and fire at all?

The game is borked. The PK of most SAM systems is significantly higher than reflected in game; do you really think the AEGIS system with SM 2/3/6 has a .13 PK?

I'm going to import the PK percentages from Harpoon if that's even remotely possible.

You just don't understand the concept of modifiers to the base PK value. Our base PK values are realistic and don't really deviate from other sims. And we're not simulating modern day AEGIS with SM-2/3/6. This is SM-2 Block II which had no capability at all against sea-skimming threats.

[whatdoesthisbuttondo?]

Nguyên văn bởi Julhelm:

Nguyên văn bởi BBsquid:

The game is borked. The PK of most SAM systems is significantly higher than reflected in game; do you really think the AEGIS system with SM 2/3/6 has a .13 PK?

I'm going to import the PK percentages from Harpoon if that's even remotely possible.

You just don't understand the concept of modifiers to the base PK value.

If I'm reading the log entry from screenshots correctly, and my apologies in advance as I haven't had the time to play with the current build, we are seeing this for the SM-2:

base = 0.8, after modifiers = 0.03, and a dice roll 0.0-1.0 range

Again, apologies as I've not had the time either to review stats in the .ini files for all the different matchups from these screenshots, but at a glance it appears to me that this is a flat 0.5 altitude bonus instead of a graded bonus?

If that is the case, that doesn't seem to do the more nuanced reality of the problem enough justice.

I'm not arguing the floor here being 0.5, that seems pretty reasonable, rather I'd expect that floor to not be reached in practice, instead a bonus somewhere between 0.0-0.5 depending on system minima vs target altitude graded towards sea level. Potentially even increased to 0.0-0.6, but again graded from minima to sea level.

Might also be a compounding issue with speed and size bonuses playing into this more than they should, and a system of diminishing returns would be better here? By this I mean largest bonus applies 100%, after that 75%, then 50%, etc.

Long story short, I'd expect some serious degradation of performance with the SM-2 against SS-N-19, but backed by SPY-1 on the Ticonderoga, a 0.03 feels a little extreme to be honest.

Hard to say where a good spot would be, 0.08-0.1 maybe?

Just imho, really appreciate your work, and a healthy debate :)

[_RAM_]

Nguyên văn bởi Julhelm:

Nguyên văn bởi _RAM_:

Sourse for Target practise? Mk1 eyeballs.

You have personal experience with the S-300 system?

I'm not a sam operator if you mean that.
But before 22 i could help you with tricky questions about SAMs reality. But now i dont have that opportunity.

[Dot]

Launch Altitudes in Encyclopedia are valid only for planes and helicopters.
But they are displayed for all weapons. So in case of missiles like S-300, launch altitudes are irrelevant (unless it is attached to plane by the will of the mod maker).

[SHVAKS]

Nguyên văn bởi Dot:

Launch Altitudes in Encyclopedia are valid only for planes and helicopters.
But they are displayed for all weapons. So in case of missiles like S-300, launch altitudes are irrelevant (unless it is attached to plane by the will of the mod maker).

Nguyên văn bởi Julhelm:

Nguyên văn bởi SHVAKS:

Then how come systems like SM-2 and S-300 all have launch altitude as 200-100000ft? Can’t they not be launched on sea level?

In the case of SM-2 it is because the seeker in block 1 and block 2 isn't reliable at lower altitudes. Anti-sea skimmer performance didn't come until block 3 in the late 80's.

Then you need to align on how this game should show information to the player and stop adding to the confusion.
I asked how could all SAMs have the same launch altitude and Julhelm says SM-2 is not effective against low altitude targets. And you say actually these does not matter for SAMs and only matter for AAMs... See? This is why there are people confused about the game and post here and you have to keep explaining the same thing to them.

1. Get rid of launch altitude for missiles that are launched from surface platforms in encyclopedia.
2. Clearly label the altitude band of the target that can be effectively engaged by each missile.
3. Label all fire control radars in encyclopedia and their effective altitude band as well.
4. Prevent any systems from attacking sea skimming targets if the FC radar or the missile is totally incapable of doing so IRL.
5. Add a log/voiceline that says unable to engage when player manually targets these missiles against sea skimming targets.

This is the realism you want right here and you can now take your time to balance the rest against sea skimming targets without that many people seeing your feature as a bug.

If you feel like it, you can further add a toggle "take low probability shots" for people that want to throw 10+ missiles with <10%pk against a harpoon because trying is better than giving up.

It is not hard to do.

[Dot]

Dont mix launch altitudes and attack altitudes.

[SHVAKS]

Nguyên văn bởi Dot:

Dont mix launch altitudes and attack altitudes.

Exactly this, yet there is no attack altitude labeled in game, hence the confusion.

[_RAM_]

Hey Dot. Can you explain something.
How CIWS work in game.
I suppose it works as bubble. Every missile entering it immediately roll dice. If lucky then proceed. If unlucky then after X seconds kaboom. All that brrrrrrr is just pure visual effects. And looks like there is no cooldawn and no limits.
Am i right?

Just saw Kirov simultaneously kill 4 TASM with CIWS. And it was look like that pesky plasma shield because no brrrr animation.

[Dot]

Nguyên văn bởi _RAM_:

Hey Dot. Can you explain something.
How CIWS work in game.
I suppose it works as bubble. Every missile entering it immediately roll dice. If lucky then proceed. If unlucky then after X seconds kaboom. All that brrrrrrr is just pure visual effects. And looks like there is no cooldawn and no limits.
Am i right?

Just saw Kirov simultaneously kill 4 TASM with CIWS. And it was look like that pesky plasma shield because no brrrr animation.

Bug atm. If 1 misile is intercepted, all others hit by same CIWS are also intercepted.