|  | 
| 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    
    
 |  | 
 
    
        | Notices |  
        | 
	Do you own this game?  Write a review  and let others know how you like it.
 |  
 
 
	
		|  |  
	
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				July 2nd, 2018, 05:35 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Major |  | 
					Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Yorkshire, UK 
						Posts: 1,066
					 Thanks: 388 
		
			
				Thanked 455 Times in 327 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 CIWS/VIRSS Vs ATGM/AGM 
 A couple of quick questions about the interaction of vehicle missile counter-measures and missiles / LGBs (neither is a huge problem...):
 
 1. Timing/order of resolution - any chance to have the CIWS/smoke animation and the success or fail message play when the missile reaches it's target rather than on launch?
 
 
 2. If a missile/bomb is successfully countered (especially if destroyed by active systems) should it still explode with it's usual area of effect? (I have had, on a number of occasions, another vehicle or even the original target destroyed by the HE burst!)
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				July 2nd, 2018, 06:24 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 National Security Advisor |  | 
					Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Dundee 
						Posts: 6,004
					 Thanks: 496 
		
			
				Thanked 1,943 Times in 1,262 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: CIWS/VIRSS Vs ATGM/AGM 
 It works as it works.
 As to HE effect in the target hex - if VIRSS blinds it, it will still hit somewhere near the tank and go bang on hitting the ground or whatever. (I think VIRSS sometimes reduces hit chance to 1% but its been a decade since I looked at that code, or more).
 
 If a CIWS destroys it it'll also tend to go bang, as the CIWS can be an explosive device as well  (in fact I can't think of any vulcan type CIWS, though a rifle calibre one was experimented with for Chieftain in the 70s).
 
 So not a good thing to be infantry near any tank being engaged with ATGM, or that's merrily popping off explosive charges to save itself. That is why tanks with ERA don't carry infantry as well - ERA firing would result in "people pate" for any tank riders.
 
 cheers
 Andy
 |  
	
		
			| The Following User Says Thank You to Mobhack For This Useful Post: |  |  |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				December 15th, 2018, 08:18 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 Second Lieutenant |  | 
					Join Date: May 2012 Location: Philippines 
						Posts: 507
					 Thanks: 433 
		
			
				Thanked 151 Times in 105 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: CIWS/VIRSS Vs ATGM/AGM 
 
	Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by Mobhack  It works as it works.
 As to HE effect in the target hex - if VIRSS blinds it, it will still hit somewhere near the tank and go bang on hitting the ground or whatever. (I think VIRSS sometimes reduces hit chance to 1% but its been a decade since I looked at that code, or more).
 
 
 cheers
 Andy
 |  Just had an incident where an HJ-8 attacked a K-2. The message said that the EW defeated the missile, yet the missile struck home anyway and blew up the tank on a front hit (can't recall hull or turret). Is this supposed to happen once in awhile? |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				December 15th, 2018, 09:18 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Shrapnel Fanatic |  | 
					Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: GWN 
						Posts: 12,712
					 Thanks: 4,159 
		
			
				Thanked 5,950 Times in 2,926 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: CIWS/VIRSS Vs ATGM/AGM 
 Yes it will. There are variables built into both the missile and missile defence code that can sometimes result in what was classed as a defeat of the attack turning into something more than that.......in a RL analogy from WW2 you may have shot down the Kamikaze in flames but it still hit the deck of the carrier. Or a board game / miniatures analogy you rolled a 10 for the missile defence then rolled snake-eyes or boxcars for the final result so even though technically you defeated the attack the missile still did damage but in this case enough damage to destroy the target vehicle. 
                 Last edited by DRG; December 15th, 2018 at 10:43 AM..
 |  
	
		
			| The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DRG For This Useful Post: |  |  |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				December 15th, 2018, 09:53 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 National Security Advisor |  | 
					Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Dundee 
						Posts: 6,004
					 Thanks: 496 
		
			
				Thanked 1,943 Times in 1,262 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: CIWS/VIRSS Vs ATGM/AGM 
 There still is a 1% or so chance for the missile to hit - nothing is ever a cert. |  
	
		
			| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Mobhack For This Useful Post: |  |  |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				December 15th, 2018, 10:43 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 General |  | 
					Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Uk 
						Posts: 3,308
					 Thanks: 98 
		
			
				Thanked 602 Times in 476 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: CIWS/VIRSS Vs ATGM/AGM 
 You can indeed get a rare hit after it is defeated, as Andy mentioned says 1% chance.Only difference I can see between the 2 systems is CIWS seems (not tested) to have a slightly better chance of stopping the missile.
 Both seem to stop older (less accurate?) systems more frequently than new ones that can get through.
 
				__________________John
 |  
	
		
			| The Following User Says Thank You to Imp For This Useful Post: |  |  |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				December 17th, 2018, 08:08 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Lieutenant Colonel |  | 
					Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Hellas->Macedonia->Thessaloniki->City Center->noisy neighbourhood 
						Posts: 1,359
					 Thanks: 307 
		
			
				Thanked 128 Times in 87 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: CIWS/VIRSS Vs ATGM/AGM 
 
	Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by DRG  Yes it will. There are variables built into both the missile and missile defence code that can sometimes result in what was classed as a defeat of the attack turning into something more than that.......in a RL analogy from WW2 you may have shot down the Kamikaze in flames but it still hit the deck of the carrier. Or a board game / miniatures analogy you rolled a 10 for the missile defence then rolled snake-eyes or boxcars for the final result so even though technically you defeated the attack the missile still did damage but in this case enough damage to destroy the target vehicle. |  I don't know why but this paragraph just made me feel warm and happy inside.
				__________________That's it, keep dancing on the minefield!
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				December 17th, 2018, 12:08 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Shrapnel Fanatic |  | 
					Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: GWN 
						Posts: 12,712
					 Thanks: 4,159 
		
			
				Thanked 5,950 Times in 2,926 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: CIWS/VIRSS Vs ATGM/AGM 
 In the game, as in real life S**t happens. You could be the best-trained commando/ SF on the planet and a kid with a .22 could get lucky. If it happens too often ...well that's a problem that may need a tweak... but once in a while is perfectly normal game behaviour that has been coded to allow the occasional one in a million "who would have thunk it ?" result. I just related a story from SP1 to Andy in regards to a slight code change that I think I mentioned on the forums in the past but here it is again...
 My one outstanding memory of playing a WW2 campaign in SP1 was one I played as the German ..... I had carefully upgraded my force so that by the end of 1944 I had all the "really good stuff" ( well as much of it as you could get in SP1 ).... The first battle of 1945 was January playing against the USA. About 1/4 way into the game.....feeling cocky and doing well....... the AI unleash a hell storm of fighter-bombers.....  twin engine B-25's  and lots of rocket firing P-47's etc etc.... by the time it was done with me, my carefully husband core was decimated... I was lucky enough to have a save so I played it out again twice more and twice more the flying monkeys from hell eviscerated my panzers..... I have never seen the AI do anything like that again since. It was a truly humbling experience and why I love the game
 |  
	
		
			| The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DRG For This Useful Post: |  |  |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				December 17th, 2018, 01:39 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 First Lieutenant |  | 
					Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Ohio 
						Posts: 798
					 Thanks: 1,306 
		
			
				Thanked 589 Times in 319 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: CIWS/VIRSS Vs ATGM/AGM 
 
	Quote: 
	
		| flying monkeys from hell eviscerated my panzers |  Vonderbar! Vonderbar!
 
Oh, that was excellent!
				__________________ASL
 |  
	
		
	
	
	
	
	
	
	| Thread Tools |  
	|  |  
	| Display Modes |  
	
	| 
		 Linear Mode |  
	| 
	|  Posting Rules |  
	| 
		
		You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts 
 HTML code is On 
 |  |  |  |  |