ADA support

[Dr Zaius]

If an ADA unit is directly attached to a higher echelon unit (i.e. it is "inside" of it) will it still function the same as if it were merely under the higher unit's command?

 

[Scully]

I don't think it does. I had a real problem with this when I played a pbem with Gary. I ended up detaching the ADA units. The range appeared to be better detached. Of course, it could just be that I didn't have the unit deployed effectively. I haven't tested it since the pbem, but I recall it as an issue back then.

Brian

 

[James Sterrett]

I think that in 2.0.3 and 2.0.4 the ADA unit will only defend the unit to which it is attached - but I'm not sure.

Should be easy enough to set up a test case:

- Attach a Patriot to a brigade (you want the huge range).

- Direct enemy air sorties to a point inside the air range but well away from the brigade itself; direct transport helicopters to fly around the unit but not cross its footprint.

See if the Patsies light up the targets....

 

[CPangracs]

I would love to help,...unfortunately our current version is different in many ways to your version.

I suggest a test. Create two separate Bde's with ADA attached and place them on a map with a healthy gap between their "normal" ADA ranges . Create a red side and ensure you have air sorties. Go into 2-player hotseat or Multiplayer and start the game. Run a turn to get the ATO activated. Enter red side and fly a mission to a target which is in one of the brigade's ADA units' "normal" range and see if the flight is engaged. Do the same with the other.

Vice testing, I can't help.

 

[Dr Zaius]

Okay, I set up a test scenario and ran multiple tests. It was a little misleading at first, so I had to conduct a number of different tests with different configurations in order to be sure of the results. I even created some custom ADA units with 0 minimun range. All of the tests yielded the same results with this version of DA: ADA units assigned directly to a higher command (i.e. "inside" of the unit) do not function at all. They do not engage enemy air strikes of any kind, even those targeted directly at the parent unit.

Most units can defend themselves against air strikes with small arms and machine guns, but this tends to be ineffective for the most part. ADA units directly attached to a parent unit do not appear to aid or otherwise affect this capability at all.

In short, do not assign ADA units as direct support. This will not serve any purpose except to add the ADA unit's combat power to the parent unit's aggregate combat power. Scenario authors should keep all ADA units as separate entities and players should maneuver them individually. Perhaps Jim will address this in a future patch. For now, you will need to give orders to each of them manually.

You can see some of the results below. Each line indicates a separate air strike against that unit. "Disrupted" means the air strike was disrupted (not the target).

Tank BDE #1 (no ADA)(Combat power 44)(offense)

• Maneuver/armor -- less than 1%
• Maneuver/armor -- less than 1%
• Maneuver/armor -- less than 1%
• Maneuver/armor -- disrupted, less than 1%
• Target of opportunity -- less than 1%
• Target of opportunity -- less than 1%

Tank BDE #2 (with ADA)(Combat power 44)(offense)

• Maneuver/armor -- disrupted, less than 1%
• Maneuver/armor -- less than 1%
• Maneuver/armor -- disrupted, less than 1%
• Maneuver/armor -- less than 1%
• Target of opportunity -- less than 1%
• Target of opportunity -- less than 1%

Now, just to see what would happen, I changed each brigade to a battalion. The units strengths and everything else was left as is.

Tank BN #1 (without ADA)(Combat power 44)(offense)

• Target of opportunity -- less than 1%
• Target of opportunity -- less than 1%
• Target of opportunity -- less than 1%
• Target of opportunity -- disrupted, less than 1%
• Maneuver/armor -- disrupted, less than 1%
• Maneuver/armor -- 2% destroyed
• Maneuver/armor -- disrupted, less than 1%

Tank BN #2 (with ADA)(Combat power 44)(Offense)

• Target of opportunity -- disrupted, less than 1%
• Target of opportunity -- less than 1%
• Target of opportunity -- less than 1%
• Target of opportunity -- less than 1%
• Maneuver/armor -- disrupted, less than 1%
• Maneuver/armor -- disrupted, less than 1%
• Maneuver/armor -- 2% destroyed

As you can see, air strikes are not terribly effective against maneuver ground units, even under pristine conditions with no ADA support. Air strikes are more effective against rear area support units.

 

[James Sterrett]

REALLY FAST test with 2.0.3 at home:

Set up a Blue armor BN and attached a Patriot company.

Set up a red transport helo unit.

I flew the helo around well outside of the Armor's footprint and well inside the Patriot's range.

The Blue armor unit did 33% damage to the transport helo bn.


Don: The strength of your target units may have overwhelmed the effect you are looking for. Try RCP of 5 or 10 for both the armor and the ADA unit. Set a huge range for the ADA unit and see if it will fire on helicopters drifting around inside its range.

 

[Dr Zaius]

James, I did not test to see if ADA units directly attached would fire on helicopters flying nearby. All I tested was to see if the units would use the attached ADA to defend themselves from air strikes. In the case of air strikes, the ADA remains inactive.

 

[Dr Zaius]

Okay, I just finished some additional tests based on the feedback James provided. ADA units assigned in the direct support role will defend the unit from helicopters within their range, but they don't interfere with air strikes as far as I can tell.

So if you want to give ground maneuver units some defense from helicopters, you can directly attach an ADA unit. The unit will still probably be vulnerable to air strikes, but since air strikes are not that effective against larger ground units it may be a moot point. This is enough to cause me to reconsider my earlier position of not assigning ADA as direct support. But I would still have at lease some ADA remain separate so that it can defend against air strikes.

 

[James Sterrett]

Did some further testing using 2.0.3 - the notes being:

---
ADA attachment interactions v2.0.3

- T-55 coy loses 80% (maximum) without Patriot fires, to 2x airstrikes
- T-55 coy loses 77% with Patriot fires in support

A company is too small!

Attached ADA does not fire in support of other friendly units vs fixed-wing but does fire vs helicopters.

T-55 battalion loses 12% to 2x fixed wing when reliant on own ADA fires
T-55 battalion loses 7% to 2x fixed wing when supported by Patriot BN

Loses 9% when attached Patriot with minimum range set to 0

When all ADA removed from the situation, the BN loses 35% to the airstrike.
-----

And that's where I think we're getting confused.

In all but the last case, the Patriot fired - there's a line about "ADA fires disrupt airstrike" for every other air attack, *except* the one when I deleted all the Patriots.

So I strongly suspect that the real story is that the attached Patriots light up helicopters, and they light up airstrikes *against their parent unit* - providing the decrease in airstrike effectiveness from ~35% to ~10%.

That said, there's still a good case to be made for not attaching the ADA in 2.0.3, because it does not appear to provide cover vs fixed wing for units it is not attached to.

 

[Dr Zaius]

James, you are getting different results than I am.

And that's where I think we're getting confused.

In all but the last case, the Patriot fired - there's a line about "ADA fires disrupt airstrike" for every other air attack, *except* the one when I deleted all the Patriots.

I don't think you can take the term "ADA" from that report literally. I did the same test with no ADA units anywhere on the map. If a unit defends itself with its inherent anti-aircraft ability AND is able to disrupt the attack, you will get a message stating "ADA fires disrupt the air strike." It had me fooled at first also, but after some additional tests I came to the conclusion this is simply referring to the unit's inherent capacity.

I ran several tests with 15 air strikes per unit and observed no significant variance in the effects of air strikes targeted on units with no ADA at all vs. those with ADA assigned in the direct support role. If these ADA units are having an effect, then the way the game is implementing it is misleading to say the least. I say that because usually when ADA actually fires, it does so using the thin red line on the map. This is accompanied by a message at the top of the interface. This system gives the player a visual cue and information about what is happening. If ADA is firing in the DS role, then it is buried within the inherent anti-aircraft routine.

I'm not sure why ADA assigned as direct support fires at rotary wing targets, but fails to engage fixed wing air strikes. If this is an intentional design decision, it seems like a strange one to me. I'll run this by Jim and see what his take on it is.

 

[James Sterrett]

James, you are getting different results than I am.

Yep. Note the huge difference in the RCP of the units we use as targets. I believe that your target unit isw powerful enough that the strike effects are all in the 1% or less range, and thus we can't see the variation.

The T-55 battalions have an RCP of 3, which turns out to show variations in effects.

I don't think you can take the term "ADA" from that report literally. I did the same test with no ADA units anywhere on the map. If a unit defends itself with its inherent anti-aircraft ability AND is able to disrupt the attack, you will get a message stating "ADA fires disrupt the air strike."

True - but I'm struck by the difference in effectiveness when no ADA fired at all (unit small arms or whatever), when the unit RCP was such as to show the difference.

If ADA is firing in the DS role, then it is buried within the inherent anti-aircraft routine.

Yes, I think this is the case in 2.0.3.

I'm not sure why ADA assigned as direct support fires at rotary wing targets, but fails to engage fixed wing air strikes. If this is an intentional design decision....

IMO, it's insectious.

 

[Dr Zaius]

Yep. Note the huge difference in the RCP of the units we use as targets. I believe that your target unit isw powerful enough that the strike effects are all in the 1% or less range, and thus we can't see the variation.

I'll try a new test with smaller units.

IMO, it's insectious.

Insectious?

 

[James Sterrett]

I'm curious if you get different results when you do.

Insectious = buggy. I plucked the term out of _The Hacker's Guide to Word for Windows_, which was a superb guide to programming macros back in the mid-1990s. It gave "bug ratings" to commands, and those with 5 bugs were called "Insectious above and beyond the call of duty".

 

[CPangracs]

I'm curious if you get different results when you do.

Insectious = buggy. I plucked the term out of _The Hacker's Guide to Word for Windows_, which was a superb guide to programming macros back in the mid-1990s. It gave "bug ratings" to commands, and those with 5 bugs were called "Insectious above and beyond the call of duty".

Hey,...aren't you supposed to be in class?!:blab:

BUSTED!!!!:laugh:

See you and Cor Monday at Breakfast - 0645, the Santa Fe.

You're buying!

 

[James Sterrett]

Hey,...aren't you supposed to be in class?!:blab:

BUSTED!!!!:laugh:

That's the trouble with old farts - they just aren't up on new technology.

Starbucks for lunch = High-speed wireless access plus coffee = pretty close to heaven.

Of course, we did get out of the course early, and I'm enough of a geek that I'm now avoiding the sleet of deadly radiation outside (from the giant fusion bomb this planet orbits) by staying indoors with a nice safe computer. :cheeky: :hmmm:

 

[Dr Zaius]

Here is the latest on the ADA issue from Jim:

In version 2.03, ADA, attached to a ground unit, does provide some protection and advantage to the parent unit. The acquisition and engagement range is equal to the ground unit footprint plus the ADA weapons range (thus greater range). But, the engagement is conducted as if were a ground unit with additional combat power and not an ADA unit. That's why the sound effect sounds like AAA vice ADA The reason I did this was to provide some benefit to a ground unit for possessing SHORAD ADA without creating a "game-ism" where players could protect very capable ADA (e.g. Patriot) by burying them inside a large robust ground unit that could easily absorb SEAD fires. However, as I review the code, it appears that the effect should be identical for attacks against both helicopters and CAS. I'll examine it further.

Note: Bombers are immune to ADA

Recommendation: For now, advise players not to attach potent ADA systems to other units if they want to employ them to their full advantage. However, they can attach them to a unit to mask their movement to a planned position. Attaching Avenger batteries to a brigade is still a good idea.

Okay, so I think the verdict here is reasonably clear. Primary manuever units can have a small ADA unit such as an Avenger unit assigned, and it will help them somwhat. More potent ADA units should generally remain as independant entities.