Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

Love:
1. Hmmmm... let's see... every unit, nationality, type of terrain and weapon from WW2 to the present day. Yeah that's frickn' awesome!
2. The campaign engine. Everything about it!
3. The little details that really make this game pop.
4. That tiny tear that wells up in my eye every time my sniper successfully assaults a tank (against my better judgement) and leaves it in smoldering ruins. That reminds me of Metal Gear Solid.
5. The ability to customize this game and create my own materiel.
6. The tireless efforts of Don and Andy to continue enhancing this one of a kind product.
7. This community.


Hate:
1. The doushieness of many scenarios. Example: Scenario designers that love to play Chinese checkers with mines and anti-tank guns.
2. The fact that weapons are not as lethal as they should be.
3. The fact that weapons do not break down or malfunction. Exception: Vehicles immobilize, totally awesome.
4. The fact that modern jets operated by some of the best pilots in the world will fire on their own tanks, even when engaging an enemy that possesses no armor assets. :doh:
5. The lack of a high quality printed manual or strategy guide. Come on, the Dominions guys have one! Wouldn't it be awesome if you guys would pass on some of your years of strategy experience for the newcomers in book form?

Just got my butt whipped a few minutes ago and needed to vent.
Thanks!

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

I recall an unfortunate friendly fire incident in Afghanistan where an A-10 straifed Canadian troops despite the fact they were right beside their LAV's...

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

I'm certain that you are correct. It looks as though some minute amount of friendly fire will be part of tactical air power for many years to come. I'm by no means denying that it exists and I appreciate you bringing that incident to my attention.

What I'm trying to indicate is that SP's level of friendly fire from the air is oftentimes completely ridiculous. Frankly, the system is almost broken. All too often I've completely ruined what would have been a nice victory because of a drunken SP pilot knocking out a critical unit.

Of course the manual and the forums have extensive advice on calling in air strikes. You know... make sure you've chosen the best entrance/exit path, make sure the sighting unit has a clear LOS, blah blah but when you really get down to it, after a certain time frame say mid '90's this doesn't reflect reality anymore. It's also terribly frustrating when battling an enemy, regardless of time frame that doesn't have armor and your overworked friends in the sky are bombing your tanks! I mean seriously!

Naturally, anyone can comb the internet and find outliers to any data set. Myself, I'm an avid Falcon 4 player and "air force" fanboy. For a civilian I have a pretty darn good knowledge of whats going on technologically speaking, at least as it pertains to this game and I feel confident in making my prior statement. How many air sorties has the U.S. flown in the past 20 years that have resulted in American KIAs. I doubt that statistic is in alignment with the way the game plays out.

Lastly, as always its not my intent to whine about this great game. This is simply one of those things that irritates me and while it is not the case with this thread... yet. When someone voices any constructive criticism about the game on this forum they are shouted down by droves of Wikipedia stooges claiming how accurate the game is when what they are really quoting is remote or obscure situations.

Sorry for rambling, thanks for the reply.:soap:

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

Know how you feel. I hate it when that happens to me too. Just remember miltary jets go very fast, and when they attack targets on the ground they can't go to slow otherwise they will fall right out of the sky because of their weight, as they are highly armored weighing tons. To fix the problem of hitting my own guys, I carefully plot the aircraft's entry point and exit point, being careful to attack targets only when friendly units are nowhere near the target. I figure there’s no way I can hit my own guys if they're not in the vicinity. When I did this I hit my own guys only one time in about 20 pass-overs. Don’t know how often it happens to you, but it’s a lot better than half the time as what was happening to me before. Found out that air strikes don’t always shoot in a strait line either. Sometimes the aircraft will be lined up for a good shot and it shoots at an angel. Don’t know if it’s a graphic problem or if has to do with the visibility or it’s a simple matter of me not knowing enough about the aircraft. Anyway with careful planning you can cut the rate of hitting your own guys by a large degree!

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

Wow, truth be told, I'm surprised that people are only mentioning the air strike comment. Thanks for the input.

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

If your main enemy is not heavily vehicle-oriented, then choosing the "COIN Fighter" formations would likely help, since they are more grunt-oriented in targeting and they also tend to have a more HE load-out than regular strike air.

But fixed wing aircraft should never be aimed at target areas within a KM or so of your own boys, best to keep them for targets way back on his baseline (e.g. killing his arty park).

But since all SP battles are within artillery range - barring any scenario the designer decided not to allow that option - if you want to deliver HE presents, then why not just use artillery?. Cannot be shot down by a lucky Dushka round. Don't care if it is night or fog (planes want to see the target for most weapons other than guided missiles). Deliver more ordnance per unit of time etc.

If the enemy has little or no AAA capability, then the attack helo and scout helos win over fixed wing air, esp for recce. And they can be reloaded too. Just don't blithely fly all over enemy territory or you can get an embarrassing burst of AK fire should you get too close. Helos are best kept on your side of the FLOT.

Or, just do not buy air, and then any points he has invested in ADA assets are wasted, bar any cannon that can do grunt-bashing on the side.

(Air would make more sense in a campaign type game, with its ability to be concentrated from airfields all over the place and far away. Whereas your supporting arty may have lagged behind. But then again, in a corps+ campaign type game I would be using my air on its natural targets - his supply dumps and convoys, counter-force on his airfields etc. after first reducing his ADA network. Only once all of that was dealt with would I use air as a tactical support - i.e. when there was nothing important for them to deal with. Like the WW2 allied forces used battleships for invasion fire support - they were not really all that good at that task (cruisers were better in terms of accuracy and weight of actual HE delivered), but by the end of the war there was nothing much else for them to usefully do, since the enemy battleships were dealt with ).

Cheers
Andy

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

Thanks for the tip about COIN fighters Andy, never thought of that despite noticing the COIN aircraft.

Also, I agree that air power is really more of large scale item. I'm not suggesting that SP become a 'tactical air strike game'.

Given the geographical area of most maps and the amount of game time used in the average SP battle, air power should really only be a minor aspect. Of course there is defiantly room for nice, perfectly placed airstrike just in the nick of time. Not to mention the fact that air power is FUN! The issue with the game isn't one that I can see a solution to simply because from the most basic level the game doesn't simulate modern tac air methods.

Generally speaking non-strategic ground targets are attacked from the air in one of three ways.
1. Pre-Plan CAS: In this kind of operation targets are carefully handpicked on the ground well before take-off. Pilots enter the combat area and destroy the designated targets and leave the area.
2. On-Call CAS: This comes in different forms, with improved communications technology and the addition of the JSTARS aircraft/comm. system basically anyone in the service can get on the horn to strike elements. Thus during mission creation flights are designated a specific piece of the battlefield that they are responsible for. During the flight an FAC (forward air controller) who themselves are in another jet will designate targets for the CAS aircraft in real time. This could be done through ground or air based laser target designators and also good ol'fashioned white phosphorus rockets. Of course, target data is also sent through traditional radios and data links as well. Thus, the pilots enter the operational airspace and destroy targets as they come up and leave when they are relieved or when out of ammo.
3. CAS: Pilots are given a geographical area and allowed to destroy ground targets at will.

Of course these definitions are not exhaustive and there are countless variations to these. SP is not really set up for these tactics nor should it be. This is a GROUND combat game and we are privileged to have a neato air support FEATURE.
You could argue that pre-plan CAS is similar to designating "bombardment" flights before the game but this isn't a good example because you can't get "recon" on the enemy positions. What SP emulates is something in between On-call CAS and CAS whereas the player designates a hex (on-call) but when the jet actually arrives it attacks whatever they feel like (CAS).

My issue is one of common sense. I just want my jets to stop shooting my dang tanks! Jets rarely accidentally attack friendly units anymore.

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

It would be very cool to allow the human player to select targets for an aircraft in mid-flight. Something similar to the OpFire confirm option in SPWaW - a red line goes from the unit to a target and the game asks if you want to shoot it, and gives you five seconds to respond yes or no before it fires automatically. That would solve a lot of the issue, I think. A further option to select which weapon to fire would also be useful.

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

Agreed :)

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

I would forgo buying any fixed wing aircraft,too iffy until enough expertise in using them.
They are just eye candy for the game anyway,
AT Helio's used properly are more effective,and as Andy stated,they can rearmed.

Buy heavy arty with cluster bombs,add some hvy and med. morters in your golf bag way more effective and safer than strike aircraft,and some SAM teams on points of good visabilty to deter enemy air strikes:)

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

Valid point!
Most planes will fire at adjacent hexes on thier flight path,also entry and exit flight paths can be possibly not the exact flight paths they were ordered to use, can variate one way or another,whoops!

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

Firstly I agree with Mobhacks assesement air is risky on the whole if facing a decent enemy arty gives better bang for the buck. I use fixed wing only for atmosphere or if given a fair amount of sorties. Used to hit my own chaps fairly often but last 5 years have hit my own troops once maybe twice. Its simple really remember you ploted it & dont put units along the flight path. The only planes that can act a bit eratically in my view are SEAD aircraft that have used all there radar seaking ordanance & still have regular weapons left, on occasion they just dont seem to fire.
No expert but watch vids on you tube strikes are called in a longway off if for nothing else to stop getting hit by debris & there are several vids of freindlys bricking it when an A-10 decided to take on a target of opportunity. Its not as cut & dried as it looks things dont work as well on the battlefield as on paper.
As to being able to select a target nope apart from possibly a hex with a building in it even now I would say its not as easy as you think, planes are best used to attack easy targets like buildings & convoys because of this. Take the Iraq war & whatever that commanders quote was "Survived 7 days of air attack for the loss of 3 tanks & lost my entire brigade in 5 mins of tank fire" Ohh didnt the planes do well & that was in the dessert so good visibility & vs none or outdated AAA.
As to your point 2 what weapons are not as leathal as they should be? Possibly modern programable anti personnel rounds fired from tanks & IFVs but the firer has to be stationary to use it & game engine cant differentiate or do over the slope fire. Maybe possibly GL a fraction more leathal but needs right terrain.
Again stuff does not work as well on the battlefield as you might think, look at the ratio of rounds fired to somebody actualy getting killed esp if your talking the simple bullet, thats why infantry battles take a while in SP.
And on air sometimes they do wonderfull things I had a SEAD arcraft (cant remember what) on its pre plotted attack kill 2 SAMs & as it turned out my opponents FOO vehicle in 1 pass, It could not have found a better secondary target.

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

My point about weapon lethality is simply my opinion that units can take way too much fire before breaking. This is only an opinion. I have no factual basis for this. Its very exhausting and boring to lay full auto fire on a unit turn after turn to no effect (or a only a negligible amount of suppression).
Generally, I modify the settings on both sides to bring this to a descent level.

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

Doesn't that solve your problem as you see it?

Thats why they are ajustable.

I just leave all that stuff alone and deal with the game as it is.

It is a game after all,and not reality.

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

Well I would say the guys that designed the game based it on fact, I read years ago so forget but try chucking shots per kill or something in google hope your not thinking in the 100s. Yes it means firefights can go on for a while if you dont use decisive force but thats the way it is unless one side is very demorilised or badly trained. Change tactics long firefights are bad you lose men & arty is a coming use decisive force when possible & you will take virtually anywhere in 2-3 turns though dug in units can be a bit tough. That assumes mobility so you can quickly bring the correct units into play if your force is mainly on foot need to be a very good tactician or firefights are inevitable, You shoud still go for encircling using smoke etc though not just going head to head.

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

I think the game code should be changed so that if a friendly plane bombs friendly troops that friendly ADA/SAMs can shoot them down. Before anybody gets all upset and begins to cry I am joking of course.

Nothing can make a typically quite guy curse like a Sailor than a friendly plane bombing friendly troops. I say swear words that have not even been made yet. I like heavy arty and no air support. Its called the King of Battle for a reason.

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

In response to Skirmisher's comment...

Yes, it does remedy the problem. One day I simply grew tired of aging while trying to take out an enemy position. Customization, is possibly the greatest feature of this game.

Now... where is the slider for "pilot idiocy level"?:deadhorse:

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

Remember that the air power foul-ups work both ways; there are few things more amusing than watching enemy vehicles getting attacked by their own air force. Though having enemy advancing into their own artillery fire zone can be equally amusing (though not all that common occurrence).

As for infantry small arms, in real life long range firefights with them tend not to be particularly decisive if both sides have some cover. Check out for accounts of real life small unit firefights.

Granted, in game terms trying to shift those dug-in infantry units with small arms fire can get boring. However, if you manage to close in, the firefights tend to suddenly turn a lot more deadly. And for long range fire, proper usage of heavy support (tripod-mounted MGs, mortars, artillery etc.) usually gives a definite edge.

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

So if you need to approach dug-in infantry by use of direct fire superiority (rather than just smoking them off and dropping indirect HE as you approach - which can work fine as long as you have smoke ammo, or dropping a humongous HE barrage on them, which works if you have the arty and the ammo. Both approaches may fail against a human opponent, who will adjust his troop positions..):


- Place snipers and M/HMG just outside their rifle range or thereabouts, and fire at units in the trenches with them. Try to keep them on the same target for a couple of moves, so the accuracy increases if you want kill results rather than Suppression.

- Use other M/HMG units and snipers, accompanying tanks, APC etc firing generally at the target infantry to suppress them. H/MMG have an effect in neighbouring hexes - so their ideal target is any enemy element with neighbours). The main idea is to have all of the target infantry well suppressed (hopefully in retreat or routed mode. You can tell by mousing over the enemy unit what status they are.). Any snipers or M/HMG used in "killing" mode should concentrate on key enemy elements you may have spotted (snipers, M/HMG, ATG, ATGM etc).

- Fire the long-range direct-fire assets first, before any assaulting riflemen take pot-shots. Since they are usually out of rifle range or at extreme enemy rifle range then any reply is then nil or ineffective. Only then fire rifle elements at any targets once the supports have suppressed the enemy firing line, and start with the riflemen further from the targets and then work closer. The riflemen should concentrate fir on any enemy that is still "frisky" (not neutralised) as a priority, at longer ranges. Keeping heads down is the task, until close range.

- Try to advance any assaulting riflemen just one hex at a time, two at the most (if you determine that the enemy is beaten down) as they approach the trench line. Keep about half of the infantry elements stationary to give cover to the movers and next move those that moved should hold still while the others move in turn (fire and movement). Any rifle elements that are depleted (50%+ casualties) probably should just remain in place and should not fire voluntarily but be left to provide op-fire. If you need to move a depleted squad (perhaps if it is a commander and so needs to keep up) - then move those at the very last.

- Platoon command elements should fire last of all. They should move last as well, and be in the rear of the infantry and not leading the bunch. "Follow me lads!" gets your leaders killed.

- If moving your rifle elements attracts too much enemy fire, then the enemy is still too "frisky". So stop advancing them, and keep shooting that turn.

- Don't start advancing on the trench line until your indirect fire assets are pounding that ground, and try to have an observer class element in place with direct LOS to adjust fires. A regular HQ with eyes-on may do, but has longer shift delays. If possible, pound the trench line for 2-3 moves before advancing any infantry towards it (depends on available time of course).

- Of course - a scout team or two may well advance slowly (1-2 hexes/turn) before the rifle line starts to advance. Reduce their range with the Y key to 1 of course. Do not advance the scouts more than 1-2 hexes ahead of the rifle line (they will need support if spotted). Their role is to find any lurkers you may have missed (e.g hidden in a dip), not to get involved in the brawl.

- To approach a dug-in defensive position then you will need about a 3-1 superiority (2-1 may work against the AI, a human will not tend to be as passive). That number is the riflemen count, ignoring any support troops you will also need to keep the enemy heads down with. (Accompanying tanks, and arty).
So a leg rifle company should be able to carry an assault against an enemy rifle platoon, unaided by any other assets, but will take casualties doing so if not aided by the support weaponry.
Minimum budget for support troops to aid a rifle company against a dug in rifle platoon target would be An MMG section, the battalion's entire mortar platoon (6 or so tubes) and an arty battery (6-8 tubes). A tank platoon firing direct would be handy as well.

The basic game plan is to get and keep the entrenched enemy neutralised (suppression at retreat status or worse) as your squaddies approach. Then advance the rifle line to 50 metres and blast the cowering stunned enemy out of their trenches or even enter the same hex and melee them if desired. It does not matter muchly about how many casualties you may do on the approach, as long as you keep them neutralised. The killing starts when you shoot the routers in the back as they retire from the close range fires.

The best way to do that is to let your support weapons do the job of keeping the enemy heads down, so avoiding own infantry casualties in the approach. The grunts work is to be done at "bomb and bayonet" range - so any firing of their weapons at >100 metres or so should only be as an addition to the support weapons suppressive fires, if they have not been able to beat down the enemy enough to let the grunts advance this turn.


===

The above is of course geared to classic "leg" infantry. Mech infantry has a different dynamic when dealing with dug-in enemy leg infantry.

- if mounted and you get into contact then your first greeting may be an RPG. Hopefully a miss...

- If so, you are too close, so retire outside effective rifle range, and only dismount then, and preferably in a covered position out of LOS. Pop smoke against RPGs if required before pulling back from the initial contact. Use any APC in the rear to spray detected enemy or Z-fire if desired as part of the pull-back.

- Call your arty onto the area as you start the pull back and forming up for the assault so it will be firing when you are ready to start your advance.

- Get formed up about 600 metres from the enemy defensive position (ie outside rifle range)

- Now advance like the leg grunts do, with the addition of the APCs following behind the rifle line. Do not advance the APC within effective RPG range (say 200-250m).

- The APC will do the job of the MMG units on the enemy, especially if they have an auto-cannon or AGL mounted (area effect on neighbouring hexes). If modern, they may have thermal sights, so consider smoking the enemy off and shooting some "fish in a barrel".

The above is for advancing on enemy leg infantry with APC troops, assuming they have some effective anti-tank weaponry. (with a decent range, say at least 150m)

Should they not, then you are invulnerable if you do not close to 1 hex where you may get assaulted. You can keep the troops mounted, and just hose the enemy from ~100 metres with the APC weaponry. Once all are neutralised, then the dismounts can de-bus from the "pigs" and bayonet any they so desire. However - remaining mounted while close to the enemy is risky as you may well find a previously unspotted anti-tank weapon of some sort and then there may well be tears before bedtime. So it is generally best to dismount at 2 hexes or so from known enemy and walk the grunts the final few yards, rather than try to do a mounted attack right into bayonet range.

Cheers
Andy

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

One thing missing is that FLAK never shoots at its own sides' aircraft. Really, it should blaze away at everything that flies.... (in SPWW2, and maybe early SPMBT time-frame, at least)

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

Should they really?
I would think there is some training on aircraft ID's and a leader with glasses within AA units:rolleyes:

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

Tell that to the Argentinians who shot their own dagger down as it approached Stanley in '82. Or the UK tornado shot down by a US patriot battery in the gulf war, etc....

"Blue on Blue" is still quite common, even with modern electronic IFF etc - in fact that can make it worse, if a programming error creeps in.

Modern kids tend to believe the software without questioning it (see the endless GPS navigation hiccup news stories) - us old folks still tend to rely on those paper things called maps...


Cheers
Andy

ugh... the friendly fire discussion is wearing out.

Yes, their will always be friendly fire:
1. from the ground to the air.
2. from the air to the ground.
3. from the air to the air.
4. from the ground to the ground.

My point is simply that in a modern air force tactical air power has reached a point that friendlies are infrequently, accidentally killed. Note that I said friendlies, yes we accidentally bomb the wrong building, farm, mosque, 7/11 or even the wrong country;), whatever. But we rarely bomb our own guys in uniform. You can comb the internet all day long but the numbers don't add up. The USAF/coalition has basically been flying non-stop since Sept. 11 2001 and we only have a handful of accidents.
Also, the type of friendly fire I'm referring to is the completely absurd and atrocious type "Lets shoot at vehicles when the enemy does not have any in the whole country" type. For instance Soviet incursion into Afghanistan. Mujahideen forces had minimal if any vehicles but try telling that the Su-25 pilots when your totally sweet Spetsnaz mech column goes up in flames.

As for Flak/AAA attacking friendlies. The original comment by JohnHale pertained to WINSPWW2. Which would make sense because (to my knowledge) those systems did not have IFF interrogation systems. They just had the Mark I eyeball.
Flak/AAA friendly fire in the present tense is hard to judge. So many nations purchased a complete IADS system from Russia that it would be very difficult to determine how reliable the IFF is. There's just so many factors to account for, most of which are well beyond the scope of this game. Lets put it this way, if I were a pilot in one of those countries with the old Russian systems, I would be nervous.

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

One more thing that just dawned on me...

Isn't friendly fire from the guy standing behind you much more likely than a jet flying about your head?

Just some food for thought.

Re: Why I love SP and why I hate SP
 

Okay this is now degenerating so last post agree air could work a bit better but its an old game & a very minor part of it. All your issues could probably be fixed by changing your playing style/ tactics.
Like I said have no trouble with blue on blue airstrikes because I call them in sensibly & you did notice from Mobhacks very clear description of decisive force 3-1 is a minimum 6-1 plus a load of arty is better. Dont share the love concentrate it 6 units firing at 1 rather than spreading it about.
Anything concentrated fire over a short period is better than light fire over a long period & heres an example of why.
Fire an artilery piece for 10 turns at a target it gets to recover by attempting rally each turn so once per recieved fire.
Fire 5 arty pieces for 2 turns so same number of shots it gets to attempt to recover twice & is in a worse state to recover from.
As I said even if experince moral are in the 70s or 80s doing what Mobhack said you will take virtualy any position in 2-3 turns.
Taking long to medium shots with a couple of units you will most likely be there all day.
The mobility & ease of calling arty making it easier to achieve decisive force & the extra lethality of weapons comes through in the game if playing a modern force. MBT games of this nature last far fewer turns than WWII games because of these factors if you use tactics that suite the force you are using.