PDA

View Full Version : DF Suppression


kbluck
18 Oct 04, 22:19
OK, on to the next pressing issue: what the heck happened to direct fire suppression in v.1.03 and later?

I remember when I was first tinkering with my custom DB back in v.1.02, I found that once I lowered the pKs for small arms vs. infantry enough so that dismounts weren't killed the instant they received a couple of bursts, a very satisfying effect was realized. As you laid fire on a target, its suppression marker built up to max gradually but smoothly. It stayed up as long as you continued to pump in fire, and when you stopped, the marker stayed up for a while longer and then gradually started to diminish until it was gone.

Then v.1.03 came out, and that all changed. Now, the same fire on the same target would result in a "flickery" suppression state, as it flashed back and forth between max and no suppression in the course of a second. The net result, even when maintaining fire on a target, is that the target will be unsuppressed during the in-between burst intervals, even though it had been fully suppressed the second before, and is thus able to return effective fire largely unimpeded. Even with heavy weapons, when you tag something it generally goes to max for a couple of seconds, and then very rapidly falls back to zero. Units spend hardly any time in the "partial" state. The net result is that DF suppression has lost most of its practical utility unless you are able to arrange to have something impacting the enemy literally every single second, something not easy to arrange even with large forces given the game's "lockstep" rates of fire.

So, what happened with that patch?

Here's how I think it *should* work. Of couse, my understanding of the internals is limited, so this might be totally impractical, but here goes.

Suppression is more about sheer volume of fire than "kill potential" of that fire. There is some relationship, but volume trumps precision every time in terms of suppression effect, if not in overall effectiveness. Troops can often be suppressed by fire that is not likely to actually hurt them. There are even numerous accounts to be found of armored forces being turned back by vigorous small arms resistance, even though the defenders had no chance of actually seriously hurting anything. You have to look at it from the point of view of the tank crew. Resistance is resistance. It might just be a machine gun now, but what if there is an unspotted antitank weapon right next to them getting ready to fire? At the least, small arms can force a tank crew to "button up", reducing their visibility substantially, and it can also damage vision devices. The nerve-racking experience of hearing a hail of fire "pinging" off the armor can certainly inhibit the crew's smooth function as well. That all adds up to suppressive effect, although of course of a lesser magnitude than would be suffered by a less well-protected target.

As such, I would make the suppressive "value" of any given hit a function of the suppress radius for the weapon and the protection factor for the target. The suppress radius, to me, is a measure of "fire volume". I would *not* factor in the pK to this function. The radius also has the advantage of being zeroable. If a weapon has a suppress radius of zero, then it should never be fired on Suppress SOP. If the radius is nonzero, then it will be fired in Suppress SOP, even against targets it can't possibly kill.

The effect of suppression in game terms is simply to slow everything down. A possible implementation might be to make it so that suppression levels range from 0% to 100%. Every iteration of the game main loop once per second, the unit has suppress% chance of "skipping" its action for that second.

Oh, and I absolutely hate the Suppress SOP "circle". I understand the concept behind it, that a given group of weapons should only be able to suppress a limited area, but the circle is a logical-sounding idea that just doesn't work well in practice. For the player it is merely clumsy and easy to forget to update. For the scenario designer it pretty much rules out any use of suppression by the AI, which particularly hamstrings the AI enemy on the attack. I'm an advocate of getting rid of the Suppress circle altogether, and allowing units on Suppress SOP to simply distribute their fire among all enemy units they can see, perhaps weighted for range and threat value, and constrained only by Fire Control SOP. The "limited effect" issue would take care of itself; a squad trying to suppress a company isn't going to accomplish much with or without the circle. Fire Control would do a perfectly good job of limiting suppressive fire to a specific concentrated sector if the player wished to do that; if not, you wouldn't have a forgotten circle preventing your units from firing when there is a clear and present threat outside the circle.

I have no idea if any of this is practical. But it ought to give you an idea of how I think suppression *should* work in the game.

Irregardless of my "wish list", I really would like to know what happened with v.1.03 suppress effects.

Thanks,

--- Kevin

kbluck
20 Oct 04, 12:30
Here's a quick example scenario of what I'm talking about. I used the Beach Party map this time, which is something anybody with RT should have.

On my system, running v.1.13, when the firefight kicks off in the lower right area of the map, the suppression markers flash on and off every second or two, even though steady fire is generally being concentrated on one team or the other. The enemy teams (or friendlies, for that matter) continue firing unabated throughout, regardless of whether a suppress marker is on them or not.

It didn't do this in v.1.02.

I'd be interested to know if others observe the same behavior, or if this is specific to my system. You may have to run it more than once, if by chance teams should get killed too soon.

Thanks,

--- Kevin

Hub
20 Oct 04, 14:07
It's not specific to your system- I get it all the time, every scenario and every target unit...

Cabron66
20 Oct 04, 15:24
Actually, now that you mention it, I was having a hell of a time with that T-80 in the DVA scenario for the same reason. My M1s couldn't seem to fire enough rounds fast enough. Even when marked as suppressed the T-80 would still be capable of firing his MGs and maingun in very effective bursts. In the end I resorted to a sustained barrage of DPICM to do the job.

I'll have to run a test or two to be sure, but I think you may be on to something.

Cheers

Paul

Pat Proctor
21 Oct 04, 11:04
Suppression in ATF works differently than in BCT. A unit must be 100% suppressed before it can't fire. Otherwise, its accuracy and rate of fire are degraded in proportion to its amount of suppression.

The amount of suppression a weapon provides is proportional to its pK for the suppresed vehicle.

kbluck
21 Oct 04, 12:38
Suppression in ATF works differently than in BCT. A unit must be 100% suppressed before it can't fire. Otherwise, its accuracy and rate of fire are degraded in proportion to its amount of suppression.

The amount of suppression a weapon provides is proportional to its pK for the suppresed vehicle.


I thought as much. As I mentioned, I personally would favor a function of suppress radius vs. protection factor, with pK being left out entirely. But that's just my opinion.

Is the suppression "bar" an accurate indication of suppression level?

If so, the bar seems to indicate that the targets are flashing up to 100% and back down to 0% very quickly, and they are continuing to fire even when the bar seems to be at 100%. Is this expected behavior?

Attached is a screen shot showing an apparently 100% suppressed enemy icon firing.

--- Kevin

Pat Proctor
21 Oct 04, 20:45
The bar is not an indicator for enemy units, only friendly.

Cabron66
21 Oct 04, 22:24
The bar is not an indicator for enemy units, only friendly.

Huh?

kbluck
21 Oct 04, 23:45
The bar is not an indicator for enemy units, only friendly.

So, if I understand your meaning, the bar is either all on or all off for enemy units. If the bar is on at all, they might be anywhere from 1% to 100% suppressed.

Furthermore, the root of the "flicker" situation is that the enemy units are not being suppressed very much, probably only one or two "notches" at any given time. Based on your mention of pK's relationship to suppression, this is undoubtedly a direct side effect of my lowering of small arms pKs to single-digit values in kbDataModern.

Given that the small arms pKs found therein seem to have been legitimized as "canon" by the release of Raging Tiger, which also features single-digit pKs for most small arms, perhaps it would make sense at this point to revisit the suppression formulae?

I think it is reasonable to expect 3:1 fire superiority to produce a convincing level of suppression on the target unit, but at the moment 3:1 gets you essentially nowhere, producing no noticeable slowdown in enemy fire. And, of course, vice versa for the friendlies if they receive fire.

Without adequate suppression, it is very difficult to conduct dismounted ops, which I think puts a real crimp in RT's style given its greater emphasis on dismounts than ATF. And we can expect even more dismounted action from Afghanistan and especially Falklands. Might as well take some stabs at rebalancing now, since some fundamental assumptions have changed from ATF and database1, because I think the issue is only going to become more glaring as new games come along.

--- Kevin

CPangracs
17 Dec 04, 13:08
Huh?
The indicator bar above the "S" is only active for friendly units, meaning it shows different "levels". When you see the suppression symbol on an enemy unit, it just means you are suppressing them to some extent, but you do not know to what level - you have to gauge the effectiveness of your suppression by the volume of fire from the suppressed unit.

Fairly realistic, IMO, though others argue about HOW units are supressed. ;)

kbluck
17 Dec 04, 13:55
The indicator bar above the "S" is only active for friendly units, meaning it shows different "levels". When you see the suppression symbol on an enemy unit, it just means you are suppressing them to some extent, but you do not know to what level - you have to gauge the effectiveness of your suppression by the volume of fire from the suppressed unit.

I'd gathered that from Pat's response, and it seems reasonable enough to me.

The important issue in my mind is the almost complete ineffectiveness of direct fire suppression, even when fire is poured on in what should be overwhelming volumes. I would expect, for example, 5:1 fire superiority to provide a level of suppression on a target close to 100% in fairly short order, but it never comes even close to that level. Judging by the flickery marker and the largely unabated return fire, I'd say the suppression level rarely cracks 10%.

It wasn't always like that. Something changed in 1.03 that broke DF suppression, and it has remained broken ever since.

--- Kevin

CPangracs
17 Dec 04, 15:40
I'd gathered that from Pat's response, and it seems reasonable enough to me.

The important issue in my mind is the almost complete ineffectiveness of direct fire suppression, even when fire is poured on in what should be overwhelming volumes. I would expect, for example, 5:1 fire superiority to provide a level of suppression on a target close to 100% in fairly short order, but it never comes even close to that level. Judging by the flickery marker and the largely unabated return fire, I'd say the suppression level rarely cracks 10%.

It wasn't always like that. Something changed in 1.03 that broke DF suppression, and it has remained broken ever since.

--- Kevin I understand your problems with the suppression, just clarifying Pat's response to Cabron66. Thanks.