Ultimate Cheat : CBU-105

[Frostiken]

I honestly don't see what's so hard about simulating the skeets.

 

1) Release skeets.

2) Raycast from every vehicle to nearby skeets.

3) If range = ____ and angle = ____, the skeet has a high probability to fire a single shot into the vehicle with moderate accuracy.

 

I really don't see what's so demanding about this. At the very worst, you could simply have the cloud of submunitions randomly shoot up to forty 'bullets' at vehicles below them, instead of the huge WTF explosion we have now. CBU-97s really don't explode at all.

 

Things to note:

 

- I'd really like the graphic effect at least simulated, with the skeet carrier deployment, skeet release, and puffs of the submunitions exploding above their targets.

- The real life CBU-97 isn't effective at all against buildings, infantry... it really is a precision weapon since anything that isn't big, hot, and able to be taken out by a molten copper rod is going to be pretty safe.

Edited May 28, 2011 by Frostiken

[GGTharos]

So today it's modeled as an explosive weapon, when in reality, it's a direct impact, but you have no way to model 40 direct impact weapons searching out targets and prosecuting them.

 

There are many problems with achieving this.

 

EDIT: What OutOnTheOP said. Seems like a good idea to me. Is every round from the cannon modeled or is it a percentage of what is fired? If it's every round, it doesn't seem like too much of a leap to model 40 submunitions.

 

All rounds are fired, but none of those rounds simulates any form of sensor.

 

But shoudlnt target type come into play? An EFP is going to do vastly different damage depending upon what it strikes, right? If we just model damage numbers (while simplifying the modeling, yes) doesn't that lead to skewed results, as we have now?

 

This is all part of damage modeling; you have to change the targets also in some way, but just changing the hit-point values probably isn't the way to go.

[GGTharos]

You won't be happy for very long :) A probabilistic approach would work best in this case.

 

The CBU-97 only has 40 skeets... why not just simulate some of them instead of all of them? I'd be happy with a compromise.

[Frostiken]

Tharos - edited.

 

Raycasts are very cheap and easy calculations (where is X in relation to Y). You would simply assume that any skeet within certain altitude and a cone shaped vector above a vehicle 'sees' it and can shoot it.

[GGTharos]

Yep, that's something along the lines of what I was thinking. You need to collide with a cone and then calculate some probability that the projectile will detect. If it does, aim and trigger it, and let the damage mechanism handle the rest.

[imac12]

Yep, that's something along the lines of what I was thinking. You need to collide with a cone and then calculate some probability that the projectile will detect. If it does, aim and trigger it, and let the damage mechanism handle the rest.

 

Is there a flag to separate different object types? I.E. - Vehicles, static objects, personnel, etc etc?

 

What I'm getting at is with this method, would just any object trigger it?

[OutOnTheOP]

Imac, I suspect not. If there were, we wouldn't (shouldn't) have issues with Mavericks ignoring a tank to lock on personnel standing next to it. But I can't imagine adding one line of code to the vehicle database files denoting what they are (building, vehicle, person, etc) would be all that difficult... unless of course code is referenced by line number in the database files, which would be very inconvenient indeed

[imac12]

I look a lot and all I could see is 6 were ever dropped from a B-52.

 

You mean as in... ever? 6 SFW total?

 

I was reading something yesterday (having the damndest time finding it right now) that something along the lines of 20,000 were used in 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Edited May 28, 2011 by imac12

[OutOnTheOP]

I guarantee more than 6 have been dropped. I AM familiar with the engagement slackerD is referring to (an advancing US column ran into a scattered force of IFVs, which turned out to be an Iraqi armor force unloading from a train yard), but I assure you it's not the only instance in which they were used; Iraq had significant armor forces even in 2003, and there would have been numerous times the CBU97 would have been the most appropriate ordnance. However, I'm not sure where to look up ordnance expenditures by type.

 

That said, I can also guarantee they weren't dropped in ODS (first gulf war). Their first operational deployment was in Operation Allied Force, and none were actually used, they were just available. I'm pretty sure they haven't even MADE 20,000 of them. Unofficial production data I've seen says 5,000.

[GGTharos]

You need some sort of size indicator, rather than target type IMHO.

 

Is there a flag to separate different object types? I.E. - Vehicles, static objects, personnel, etc etc?

 

What I'm getting at is with this method, would just any object trigger it?

[Eldur]

Set one for a HOF of 3000 and drop it over the center of a city and tell me you don't think its over powered.

 

Then it's rather a problem of the buildings' damage model. It's as unrealistic as whacking them down with pure simple cannon fire which is also possible.

[imac12]

 

That said, I can also guarantee they weren't dropped in ODS (first gulf war). Their first operational deployment was in Operation Allied Force, and none were actually used, they were just available. I'm pretty sure they haven't even MADE 20,000 of them. Unofficial production data I've seen says 5,000.

 

My mistake, I meant the 2003 invasion. I think the 20,000 referred to the BDU-108s, not a 97 or 105.

[imac12]

Then it's rather a problem of the buildings' damage model. It's as unrealistic as whacking them down with pure simple cannon fire which is also possible.

 

I disagree. Its a problem with the target type not being modeled appropriately. They way I understand it today, each target, be it a building, tank or troop, has a specific hit point value. There is no differentiation between each target type.

Edited May 28, 2011 by imac12

[OutOnTheOP]

I find that very, VERY hard to believe. Show me where the official US Air Force ordnance registry indicates that only 6 have been dropped in combat. They may have only been used in one short conflict, but I very much doubt only 6 have been dropped.

[159th_Viper]

I find that very, VERY hard to believe. Show me where the official US Air Force ordnance registry indicates that only 6 have been dropped in combat. They may have only been used in one short conflict, but I very much doubt only 6 have been dropped.

 

The six in question refer to 6 CBU-105's dropped from a B-52 in a single engagement on April 2 2003 when prosecuting an Iraqi tank column defending Baghdad.

[Frostiken]

Well, it makes sense... there's no need for it in Afghanistan and for reasons of collateral damage it wasn't used in Libya... not much need for it recently.

[arteedecco]

Whether or not the CBU-105 has seen more action than the one account in 2003 is inconsequential to this discussion, though it would be an interesting topic as a separate thread in the correct section of the forums.

 

I think the main thing here is, in the interest of improving this awesome SIM, I felt like the results of the 97 / 105 on buildings was disproportionately destructive. I've really appreciated the discussion surrounding the game's damage model as that is really what we're talking about here.

 

Obviously working on improving the game is a series of cost (time) / value decisions, so I completely understand the predicament. Refactoring the damage model is no small task. However, it seems to have been insinuated that there is a potential for reworking the damage model down the road at some point. I would strongly encourage that effort. To me this game has two major aspects, 1.) Realism of aircraft modeling (flight dynamics, instrumentation, systems, ...), 2.) Combat modeling (weapons, targets, reactions of weapons on targets).

 

Many SIMs have done the first point pretty well and I think it's safe to say that the time and effort ED put into this SIM is evident every time I go through the startup procedures for the aircraft and fly it around. It truly is amazing.

 

The second point is also pretty effectively accomplished. It took me several months of intense play to get to the point where I was even aware enough to realize the subtleties of how targets react to taking damage. However, ED has set the amazing standard of being a part of the community, absorbing feedback, and making improvements, which I applaud. It makes the game experience so much richer and it makes me excited each time a new release is coming out. With that said, returning to my original post, it seems to me that the CBU-105 exposes an area in this amazing SIM (damage model) that could stand to be on the slate for improvement in a future release. After all, it is the subtleties about a game that make it timeless. ED has already hit so much of that, but as someone who is truly in love with this game, I would be remiss if I didn't talk about ways to make it even better.

 

I would be interested to hear what the feasibility of implementing a damage model that considered the difference between a CBU skeet hitting a building and a 500 lb Mk.82.

 

The game already has database objects for each object in the game, which I've reviewed in the Scripts/database/ directories in the install directory. When the game runs, it builds a large global table "_G" containing just about everything used in the game, from function references to individual vehicle references. Would it be possible to simply say, if object X is hit by Weapon Y, check to see (a value in the table) if a modifier should be applied to the damage taken by object X based upon Weapon Y's damage type and object X's armor / structure type?

 

Thanks again for all the good thoughts! One of the reasons I love this game is the interaction of the community and developers. Thanks so much!

 

Bombs away! :)

Edited May 29, 2011 by arteedecco

[159th_Viper]

....However, it seems to have been insinuated that there is a potential for reworking the damage model down the road at some point. I would strongly encourage that effort....

 

It will follow as a matter of course.......One only has to compare Flanker with DCS to vindicate said statement. Patience to await said course - now that's a different story altogether :)

[Fakum]

Been searching, this is one of the threads I found that might be appropriate to ask this question:

 

Does anyone know where I can find a quick reference sheet as to what the actuall weapon is that is displayed in the DMS on each station? In other words, when I bring up the DMS and see the weapons stations, and the description of what is loaded, I have to minimize the game and go in the manual to see what exactly it is that is on that station. Im still learning here and I suspect in time I will know without looking, but in the mean time, Im still hanging quick reference sheets all around my PC. I have a long way to go I know, but every little thing helps, thanks

[Fakum]

Ok,,, perhaps the terminology is misleading,,, Im looking for a quick reference chart for the A-10 weapons,,,, was a bit surprised my WIKI & Google search was not successful,,,,, eh,,, maybe one doesnt exist,,, figured Id ask anyway

[tusler]

I can tell you I hate those bomblets when I am playing Steel Beast Pro PE!

[Krebs20]

I didn't read all 5 pages but I think I have a simple solution to the problem. Raise the hit points of a building high enough that a cbu can't bring it down. But a direct 500 pounder will. Is it possible to make a building have more hp?

[cichlidfan]

Been searching, this is one of the threads I found that might be appropriate to ask this question:

 

Does anyone know where I can find a quick reference sheet as to what the actuall weapon is that is displayed in the DMS on each station? In other words, when I bring up the DMS and see the weapons stations, and the description of what is loaded, I have to minimize the game and go in the manual to see what exactly it is that is on that station. Im still learning here and I suspect in time I will know without looking, but in the mean time, Im still hanging quick reference sheets all around my PC. I have a long way to go I know, but every little thing helps, thanks

 

This is just a page from my own notes...not actually intended for anyone else to use but it might be similar to what you want. No warranty included.

Available Weapons.pdf

Edited July 19, 2011 by cichlidfan

[latearrival]

Been searching, this is one of the threads I found that might be appropriate to ask this question:

 

Does anyone know where I can find a quick reference sheet as to what the actuall weapon is that is displayed in the DMS on each station? In other words, when I bring up the DMS and see the weapons stations, and the description of what is loaded, I have to minimize the game and go in the manual to see what exactly it is that is on that station. Im still learning here and I suspect in time I will know without looking, but in the mean time, Im still hanging quick reference sheets all around my PC. I have a long way to go I know, but every little thing helps, thanks

 

Here's mine (with same caveats as cichlidfan!)...

Latearrivals Weapon Type Reference.pdf

[Fakum]

Excellent,, looks great at 1st glance,,, many thanks