Factory Targets
-
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
-
-
oh, one of those
i’ll seriously consider DCS a contender when it gets literally any content past the maybe 20 good missions made in it’s entire lifetime that even resemble a random generated BMS mission
it’s pretty but besides that it’s lackluster at best. half the systems in it barely work. the flight models are “OK” but everything surrounding them is barely there.
-
At the risk of continuing this more than it deserves… BMS is not exactly feature complete either
-
Wow, seems I missed all the fun. No worries, that guy was waaaaaay down at the bottom of my list of concerns. Judging by the PM I got from Mr. Banger, I’m guessing he had some problem with my reply to Frederf.
At the risk of continuing this more than it deserves… BMS is not exactly feature complete either
Most of us understand what you are saying, Blue. Even among the one’s that do not, most of them come to terms with this and enjoy the sim for what it is. That being, a concept ahead of its time for 1998, considering the original bugs and the cost of hardware to even run it at that time.
Now we have BMS 4.33U1 and someone comes along, and after getting the answer to his question from a theater developer (albeit, not the answer he wanted) and other help (whether he wanted it or not), wants to compare it to another sim and judge it sarcastically, and quite frankly, disregarding forum rules. I personally thought he was a goner at post #47. Maybe the European moderators thought he was asking Redshift20 he wanted a cigarette from him.
At any rate, I’m not going to lose any sleep over it. Could have been a good thread. I am on my fourth CP since U1, and I gotta say…It is closer to F4AF in regard to CP, than previous versions of BMS. Being able to control ground troops makes it so much quicker to achieve objectives and cuts down on the stagnant periods where you can’t find any good targets that are left and just waiting for your troops to start moving.
I’d love to hear from anyone who has knocked out bridges in strategic positions, and if they have noticed the same results as I have. I feel like Arty doesn’t believe me on that point. @ Arty -
I am enjoying the hell out of BMS. It brings out the kid in me that wanted to grow up to be a fighter pilot. Unfortunately, only a small percentage of us have the attributes, and I’m not one of them.
Cheers.