Factory Targets
-
Guys here once again we are talking about the essence of theaters and BMS campaign and war engine.
Many think of it as if you create a terrain and some units - sqdrns and battalions and some 3d models and some skins you have a great theater. :lol:
Not at all.
About working bridges well till now no one has given proof of concept. If it works for you I take it, but please provide more info and let’s have a look at it. Are u 100% that it was only the bridges and not other factors that you missed that made that result?
About the semigods well they are not doing a very good job for the community… as for many years they still hold the info and results and all the time and effort is just offered to one-two theaters tops…
For all those proof of concepts and if there is no one to help and provide manuals and info the theater developers need tools to quickly do their tests. This means good quick database tools.
Falcas Tool is great Falcon Editor is great F4browse was - is great but without a manual or a general guideline at least you are working in the dark… and the war engine of falcon is so complex that you can’t just do two magical things and all done.
I’m sure those semigods spend thousands of hours headbanging to rich their outcomes and “so this is how it works”.So someone must work with those guys and extract that valuable info and put it on a guide or a manual. That way theater makers will have a basic context to work on.
RedDog spend and created great manuals for how to use the app and how to train.
But no one is spending the time of the core thing… how you build it. -
About working bridges well till now no one has given proof of concept. If it works for you I take it, but please provide more info and let’s have a look at it. Are u 100% that it was only the bridges and not other factors that you missed that made that result?
Not sure how to provide proof of concept, but I will relate to you how it went down in my CP.
KTO Tiger Spirit…
It is Day 2 of the Campaign, and after spending all of Day 1 reducing the DPRK and PRC air defenses to just a few AAA battalions, gaining air superiority, and knocking out key airfields, I begin moving my forward troops North, towards the five objectives (not counting P’yongyang and Wonson) I need to control in order to win the CP.
As my troops start moving towards Kaech’on, I see the prospect of a large ground battle ahead as there are several (5-7) Chinese tank battalions with some infantry mixed in, headed south to stop my advance. I frag a flight to take out the P’arwon-ni bridge, and successfully eliminate said bridge.
When the PRC forces reach the broken bridge, they all reverse course and start moving North, all the way up to Wondomal and start heading East toward Tadae-Dong, then turning South toward the Huich’on Bridge. I take down that bridge as well, and when the enemy reaches the broken Huich’on bridge, they once again turn back to the North. During this time I am chipping away at their ground forces and reducing their numbers.
I can see that the enemy is making it’s way to P’yongnamjin City and frag a mission to take out the P’yongnamjin Bridge. At this point they are completely cut off from the South, save for a hundred mile (estimated) trip around the mountains east of P’yongnamjin City. It is around this time (nearing the early morning hours of Day 3) that my ground troops are nearing the last objective required to win the CP. I start working on what is left of the enemy battle group and in the early morning hours of Day 3, the last objective is taken, and I get cakes and medals!
:bdance:In an earlier Rolling Fire CP, I used similar tactics to keep reinforcements from reaching P’yongyang.
Now I am aware that in 4.32, troops would pass right through a road block like this, but the CP is changed in 4.33/U1. If someone “in the know” wants to support or dispute what I am saying, I would appreciate the comments, but it seems to me that bridges actually need to be in place for crossing bodies of water. Another thing I do not see anymore, are random troops in the water (i.e. tank battalion in the ocean).
-
Since you cut off those bridges how your troops advanced and captured P’yongyang?
-
Since you cut off those bridges how your troops advanced and captured P’yongyang?
In the Rolling Fire CP, I only took out bridges North of P’yongyang, leaving the bridges to the South open for my troops to advance into the city unhindered.
In Tiger Spirit, P’yongyang is already occupied by blue forces, so no need to mess w/ bridges around P’yongyang.
I am only taking down a few bridges that are disrupting and/or cutting off troop movement from the North. In the UI, on the priorities window, I have the slider for infrastructure moved all the way left, so that the AI doesn’t hit any of the bridges, allowing me to decide which ones get hit, and which ones stay open.
In the above post, I only took down the three bridges I mentioned in Tiger Spirit. All other bridges remained open. IIRC, I only took 2-3 bridges out in Rolling Fire as well.
-
FWIW…
You can see that supply is affected more than in the previous version. Still have no idea how it affects the war though.
-
I don’t see many answers to this question. People want to talk but can’t answer if they don’t know so they talk about something unrelated instead.
Supply, reinforcement, replacement should be generated by objectives. Last I checked everything and their Chinese grandmother was outputting 100 supply which over saturated the situation making starving supply completely impractical. However the underlying system should be working. Detailed tests by editing supply to very low levels and watching for how it affects various units get replenished in their various ways would be the straightforward but laborious test.
I’m quite interested to see schnidrman’s screenshot of a significant supply dip. I don’t know enough about the campaign system to say if “supply” and the other replenishment values are always equal. Perhaps it is possible to have low supply but high reinforcement or maybe they are one and the same.
-
well this area needs a good ERD analysis. Entity–relationship model - Entity–relationship diagram.
Those values are set in the beginning of the campaign as I recall and then the code kicks in and auto calculates things up.
So the key point is how to balance and set correct (realistic) initial values for those many many entities…Also this might be the case why I say bridges are not operational. If the correct values are set on the database entity maybe they will be respected and not used if they are destroyed… IIRC must have to do with the cost values. If the value is off the entity limits then it will be not used cause it’s out of cost. But how do we determine those values and limits?
I remember an example of someone saying how can troops go from a high mountain when they can’t actually and someone responded that it was wrong settings os cost values (way back in the past) if the values where correct troops would not climb the mountain and go around.
In case I’m totally wrong please correct me.
-
@7Banger:
Hello again, another question I had was about the supply system in BMS. I was reading an earlier post on this forum on another thread, also in the Super Pak 3 Manual that factories and other industrial targets actually replace destroyed units such as SAM radars and Battalion units. Does this still hold true in the 4.33.1 version of BMS ?? If so I will start bombing/destroying these targets.
I’ve never really taken them on before because I thought if I took out the enemy’s ground forces and my friendly ground forces capture the campaign objectives they’d win. But if I can halt reinforcements/replacements then that just opens up the door for more immersion and somewhat actual reality of a war.
From my very basic and little knowledge when it comes to the ground war or attrition of ground targets, Falcon4AF (2005 - 2011 ) was the last version of Falcon to have a properly working ground strategy and functionality.
-
Bump…
People want to talk but can’t answer if they don’t know so they talk about something unrelated instead.
Guilty as charged. (No offense taken BTW) I may have gotten a bit OT with bridge discussion, but when I made that statement, I was under the impression the OP was looking for tactical targets w/ campaign effects. As for the supply screenshot, I have posted another one of those in another thread around here when the supply issue was brought up before.
Seems you found it interesting at that time as well.
Due to a lack of response about bridges and supply levels working in campaign, I get the feeling that there are some changes in the campaign that the devs want us to figure out the old fashioned way. I personally don’t mind the fly it and see approach. So maybe I should just let the devs answer these questions (if they feel the need to) from now on and maybe not share what I have figured out in the campaign on this forum.
I’m not here to ruffle any feathers.
Clear skies!
-
Yes supply system is integrated in the calculations, also army bases. Basically everything has some effect, some more some less.
FWIW, I thought I-Hawk answered his question pretty definitively.
-
sweet!! A few few more post and you will get that member status promotion!!!
Cancer in the poopen ?
-
:lol: Someone drunk more than he can take.
Sent from TapaTalk
-
Aw !!! your still throwing your toys out of your pram ?
-
And fabulous !!!
-
Oh your not shouting any more…… progress ?
-
That was some burst attack ha? what a great way to start the day :mrgreen:
-
Sorry for getting him on a roll Yoni… Could not help myself.
-
I get the impression I missed half this conversation… thread seems to have wound up anyway?
-
sweet!! A few few more post and you will get that member status promotion!!!
Cancer in the poopen ?
OH!! He got a promotion :rolleyes:
… I thought they let this guy live a little longer on here than normally… Hahah!
-
hey guys what’s going on in this thread