POOK SAM PACK (May 2022)

[Skagget 11]

Zeus is a playstyle certain groups uses as a norm for their missions or as a asset to their games. You can as a GM enter Zeus, put up some more enemies, change where the AO is, call in a mortarstrike, maybe spawn some animals or whatever.. so its a tool that some use for whole missions or some use just to spice it up. So what you could do with Zeus and this SAM/AA pack is that you could do a sidemission to take out an AA before calling in the heli-extract as an example, then go in Zeus, populate a village with some civs and enemies and then put up the AA that the enemies are guarding..

My bugs Ive found:
People in the AA (do you want the exact ones, or is it a WIP?) die but dont collapse, so people think that they are alive and empty a mag into them again and again =P
Some of the CUP people you are using is just placeholders and are CSAT and not real CUP units so to say.
For some reason when I have your modpack installed; all players start crouching randomly.. is there a script somewhere that are suppose to make AI setunitpos "middle" or something like it ?
-- could be an interference with other mods for sure =)

I think aswell that the SAM missiles are alil bit to fast, I mean the turret turns and you get the lockon sound in the air, but by then the missles are almost away and it takes just a sec or two before impact.. so no time to react or to change route to flare etc.. if you get the lockon now, you might aswell just dive down and lick the ground even more =P

Major cuddos for the modpack, its superduper =)
Keep the ideas and working going, in a phase that you dont burn the energy out ofc ;)

Cheers !

[eggbeast 3673]

next up in opposition to the SAM pack will be the missilebox, so you can hunt these feckers from over the horizon (again using pooks logics built in to our ARM missiles)

[SGT Fuller 856]

Ill get with you offline Eggbeast

[Masnooper 42]

next up in opposition to the SAM pack will be the missilebox, so you can hunt these feckers from over the horizon (again using pooks logics built in to our ARM missiles)

Currently the SAM has the upper hand by far and after ARM missiles situation changes towards Jets benefits, Right now every pilot is pissed off of the SAM and later on every AA operator is in danger.

How can a AA Site defend itself against upcoming ARMs?

I mean how to maintain the balance because on a single map you may have lots of planes but how many SAM Site you can have? 

[Chairborne 2594]

People in the AA (do you want the exact ones, or is it a WIP?) die but dont collapse, so people think that they are alive and empty a mag into them again and again =P

Some of the CUP people you are using is just placeholders and are CSAT and not real CUP units so to say.

Cheers !

They are placeholders, some of the faction units (uniforms, vest, etc) are still wip.

[eggbeast 3673]

How can a AA Site defend itself against upcoming ARMs?

I mean how to maintain the balance because on a single map you may have lots of planes but how many SAM Site you can have? 

pook has made the CRAM and other CIWS type weapons able to track and shoot down incoming missiles and bombs

also if you lock radar at 10km and then fire your ARM, there is a chance it will hit a hill or building or tree or rampart unless you are high enough.

and you cannot carry more than say 4 ARMs

however some of the SAMs will get you from 20km away...

 

it's pretty well balanced

[Chairborne 2594]

Operating a radar battery is absolutely dangerous, there's a reason why they get turned on for 20/40 seconds and then relocate immediately, especially in an SEAD/ECM-heavy environment.

Serbians had to take impressive measures to operate theirs during the war in the Balkans.

[eggbeast 3673]

there was a pretty formidable ring of steel around baghdad in GW2.  Took the F16s and friends about 3 weeks to fix em all.

they were most scared of SA9 and big AAA

[serjames 357]

super busy with work, so not had a chance to try this yet - very excited !

 

can't see it on PW6 yet is that a deliberate decision or an omission by the PW6 team ? :-)

 

I'f it's an omission I'll push it their way, I'd love to get this on the server..

[eggbeast 3673]

not deliberate

[ArmaFiend 122]

Operating a radar battery is absolutely dangerous, there's a reason why they get turned on for 20/40 seconds and then relocate immediately, especially in an SEAD/ECM-heavy environment.

Serbians had to take impressive measures to operate theirs during the war in the Balkans.

I operated a Army Sentinel Radar for 4 years.  We did get very fast at setup and moving with avengers.

[hcpookie 3770]

To answer that "balance" question, yes the "shoot and scoot" tactics is how modern SAM / AAA batteries defened against ARM's.  Newer ARM's reportedly have a tracking capabilty so they "tag" the vehicle even after the radar is shut off... so it is the age old "threat-countermeasure-counter threat" discussion.

 

The ability to target incoming precision guided weapons, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, etc. is a key feature that is becoming more prominent in Real Life.  This feature HAS been added to the mod.  Some of the SHORAD systems can target some incoming weapons.  Not all of them, yet!  I intend to crack open the configs and add more of them in the upcoming week so as some of the Vanilla weapons will be targeted.  For the current version, however, this feature almost completely relies on weapons that are not yet ported into A2.  I have been told that these weapons will be ported soon, so we'll see how it pans out.  In the A2 version you can see this completely in play when launching for example AGM-154 JSOW's (Joint Stand-Off Weapons) at enemy targets.  Fly over and watch the pretty bombs glide to their target.  Then watch in horror as the enemy SHORAD system attacks it before it can reach its target!  Quite entertaining to watch! 

 

I purposely removed ARM weapons from the SHORAD targeting in this release, so that an ARM attack will still succeed.  Otherwise everyone will bitch that the ARM weapons don't work.  So there's that.

 

All this is discussed in the Guide, which someone apparently didn't read through :)

 

 

To answer the question about "how many sites can be present".  It will be up to the mod makers.  I made it so that the scripts governing when to spawn a site check to see if the site is present, before spawning another site.  This was implemented to fix the MP spawning and re-spawning due to JIP players.  It got... interesting... when every time someone joined a new SAM site spawned on top of the current one.  Frame rate went to about 1 FPS.  So that was fixed.  The trade-off is that "per mission", only one SAM site of each type will be present.  Now, how does a mission maker handle this?  They don't really... they can spawn one type of each site w/ the site spawn units, and avoid all the "create a site and place all the vehicles correctly and add the correct AI settings" so the site behaves correctly.  You're welcome :)  The trade-off of course is that the mission makers can simply spawn as many site spawn units as they wish.  They will simply be AA soldiers since the site won't spawn around them.  So if a mission maker were to make a persistent MP mission, the "random spawn" they decide to include, will yield a site for that moment if the earlier site was already destroyed.  A mission maker could add this via a script that spawns a site 1x per hour of mission time (or whatever!) so they can continually have a threat, but not worry about the MP JIP issues.  The it is up to the players in the MP mission to decide if they wish to avoid the SAM site or engage in Wild Weasel activities to destroy it!  Or drive to it with a group of SF commandos and take out the site on foot... now THAT would be interesting wouldn't it!  :D

 

Keep in mind the sites will "clean up" after about 10 minutes of game time once their central radar vehicles get destroyed.  One well-placed ARM, 10 minutes, presto no more SAM threat!  Then randomly spawn another site sometime in the future :)  During that 10 minutes however, their weaponry may still be able to engage, albeit at a reduced skill level or accuracy level.  You might get engaged, you might not, after the radar dies.  Enjoy!  :)

[J Godin 15]

I can't seem to be able to enter my configuration settings when using this mod? 

[echosixgolf 10]

I was having the same issue others were having with the SA-10 not bringing aircraft down. Actually I was having issues with several launchers vs the JSS F-18, but I'll discuss my issues with the SA-10.

 

Using ACE, RHS, and JSS F-18, and Pook SAMs, I tested the mod by letting the aircraft fly straight, no evasive maneuvers or countermeasures, and on average it would take about 8-10 SA-10 missiles to down the aircraft. Compared to when running with just Pook SAMs and the F-18, which usually resulted in first shot kills, if not on the second hit. I ran AmrA with just Pooks SAMs, the JSS F-18, and then either ACE or RHS. After testing, it appears the RHS is causing the issue. I know in RHS you have to ensure extended armor is disabled, so I imagine the problems lies somewhere in those properties. ACE seemed to cause fewer first shot kills, however, that could have just been probability at play. I hope this helps.

[eggbeast 3673]

That is very good feedback thanks E6G.

So in other words there is nothing wrong with the SAM's, which is what I thought.

However there is some basic incompatibility with ACE and RHS damage handling, which may warrant some further investigation, or not, depending on pooks viewpoint.

 

We have been watching A3 moddevelopment since the beginning and despairing at the lack of consistency in the mod population caused by BIS not setting a baseline by e.g. providing the A2 content as a cheap DLC - which we all would have bought happily..  Every man and his dog has made stuff with different armour and damage values.

[dilltron55 10]

Can you make another Patriot site with the Pac-3? I try to make it, but I dont want 4 SHORADs, 4 of the antennae things, and 4 HEMTTs. Also, why doesn't the Pac-3 launcher have 16 missiles? You think maybe you could also script the CRAM to target mortars, arty and rockets? Or have you? I haven't tested it. Also, I noticed CRAM doesn't bring down planes as easy as it should, I can fly over 10, and not get shredded because they explode mid air rather than shred me. 

[hcpookie 3770]

Can you make another Patriot site with the Pac-3? I try to make it, but I dont want 4 SHORADs, 4 of the antennae things, and 4 HEMTTs. Also, why doesn't the Pac-3 launcher have 16 missiles? You think maybe you could also script the CRAM to target mortars, arty and rockets? Or have you? I haven't tested it. Also, I noticed CRAM doesn't bring down planes as easy as it should, I can fly over 10, and not get shredded because they explode mid air rather than shred me. 

 

As I don't know what "4 of the antannae things" means, I can't really answer that.  The MIM104 sites spawn correctly when last I checked during my QC checks before release.  I can't answer "that thing over there by that truck thing"...  If you can be more specific I may be able to address your concerns.

 

PAC-3 has a mix of PAC-2 and PAC-3 missiles. The PAC-2 missile is one per section, where the newer PAC-3 missiles are 4 per section.  That's why...  A site @ 4x 12x PAC-3 and 4x 1x PAC-2 missiles means 40 missiles to throw at the enemy!   A PAC-2 only site would have 4x 4x missiles, still quite a bit to deal with.  The PAC-3 is technically a shorter-range platform in RL, of course in-game everything is short-range however.  The PAC-2 is intended for longer-range intercepts.

 

The Guide is part of the d/l and also available separately.  It addresses some of your questions.  "RTFM"

[officeramr 269]

Not sure if this is intentional but the Missile systems are able to engage targets on runways. 

 

It may be due to the Missile system sitting on a elevation higher than the runway 

[hcpookie 3770]

I thought the ground locking was fixed in A3.  Hrm...

[officeramr 269]

I thought the ground locking was fixed in A3.  Hrm...

It is for the player, the AI doesn't seem to care  

[dilltron55 10]

As I don't know what "4 of the antannae things" means, I can't really answer that.  The MIM104 sites spawn correctly when last I checked during my QC checks before release.  I can't answer "that thing over there by that truck thing"...  If you can be more specific I may be able to address your concerns.

 

PAC-3 has a mix of PAC-2 and PAC-3 missiles. The PAC-2 missile is one per section, where the newer PAC-3 missiles are 4 per section.  That's why...  A site @ 4x 12x PAC-3 and 4x 1x PAC-2 missiles means 40 missiles to throw at the enemy!   A PAC-2 only site would have 4x 4x missiles, still quite a bit to deal with.  The PAC-3 is technically a shorter-range platform in RL, of course in-game everything is short-range however.  The PAC-2 is intended for longer-range intercepts.

 

The Guide is part of the d/l and also available separately.  It addresses some of your questions.  "RTFM"

Whenever I spawn just 1 static Pac-3 launcher, it goes ahead and deploys the SHORAD, the Generator, the HEMTT, the Pac-3 Launcher, and the static radar. So, If I place 4 of these, it spawns 4 times all that stuff, I dont need 4x all of this except the launchers. I would rather have a Pac-3 site. I can only spawn in Pac-2 and NASAMS sites. In the guide, I read that the Pac-3 launchers carry up to 16 missiles. Are you talking about real life or in game because in game it carries 13 missiles when I would rather have the 16 Pac-3 instead of the 12 Pac-3 and 1 Pac-2. Also, correct if I'm wrong, but isn't there a truck borne MIM104 setup irl? I found this, http://www.simthetiqestore.com/wheeled-vehicle-mim-104-p-338.html

 

For a more 3d representation, it's on Wargame Red Dragon. You think you could make the wheeled Patriot a possibility? 

[hcpookie 3770]

Sorry, I wasn't clear.  I intentionally put 12x PAC-3 and 1x PAC-2 on the PAC-3 launcher as per RL capabilities to provide better coverage in all ranges.  A 16x PAC-3 launcher just isn't in the cards at this time.  Since PAC-3 is considered a "short range" (RL, not in-game) platform I might consider simplifying the entire Patriot site selection and simply make a unified, single Patriot selection in the editor so there is simply 1 to select.  That single site would have 4x PAC-2 launchers (4x per launcher) for a total of 16 PAC-2 and then a random SHORAD system that may or may not be a PAC-3.

 

The launcher you are selecting was intended for scripting purposes. It is becoming apparent that I need to remove that from the selection.  There is no single "standalone" launcher, period, for the MIM104 series.  All of them require the things that spawn, and then some, to operate in RL.  The notion of a "standalone patriot launcher" is incorrect and will not be modeled in this mod.  In fact, since it is causing this confusion, I may have to remove that single launcher to avoid confusion, and resort to having only a site-spawned Patriot capability.  That would avoid confusion and correctly simulate real life capabilities.  It takes quite a bit of work to make those missiles fly... if I remove any user-manned vehicles then the correct simulation will be presented.  Thanks for pointing this out!

 

"no" to any wheeled anything... if it is a static launcher then a static launcher it shall stay.  The challenges of making a towed vehicle is nearly insurmountable in this game engine, unlike other engines where towed vehicles are par for the course.  And I can think of no valid reason any of these sites - with a 10-20km range - would need to be mobile in this game anyhow.

[dilltron55 10]

Sorry, I wasn't clear.  I intentionally put 12x PAC-3 and 1x PAC-2 on the PAC-3 launcher as per RL capabilities to provide better coverage in all ranges.  A 16x PAC-3 launcher just isn't in the cards at this time.  Since PAC-3 is considered a "short range" (RL, not in-game) platform I might consider simplifying the entire Patriot site selection and simply make a unified, single Patriot selection in the editor so there is simply 1 to select.  That single site would have 4x PAC-2 launchers (4x per launcher) for a total of 16 PAC-2 and then a random SHORAD system that may or may not be a PAC-3.

 

The launcher you are selecting was intended for scripting purposes. It is becoming apparent that I need to remove that from the selection.  There is no single "standalone" launcher, period, for the MIM104 series.  All of them require the things that spawn, and then some, to operate in RL.  The notion of a "standalone patriot launcher" is incorrect and will not be modeled in this mod.  In fact, since it is causing this confusion, I may have to remove that single launcher to avoid confusion, and resort to having only a site-spawned Patriot capability.  That would avoid confusion and correctly simulate real life capabilities.  It takes quite a bit of work to make those missiles fly... if I remove any user-manned vehicles then the correct simulation will be presented.  Thanks for pointing this out!

 

"no" to any wheeled anything... if it is a static launcher then a static launcher it shall stay.  The challenges of making a towed vehicle is nearly insurmountable in this game engine, unlike other engines where towed vehicles are par for the course.  And I can think of no valid reason any of these sites - with a 10-20km range - would need to be mobile in this game anyhow.

 

 

The Pac-3 was intended for scripting? Are you talking about the Pac-2 (Static) or the Pac-3? The Pac-3 spawns with every thing it needs like the early warning and all. I was just mentioning that I wish I could spawn 4 launchers, and not have all the essentials spawn 4 times too. It really clutters the area compared to the premade sites. I just wish one of the premade sites used Pac-3 instead of Pac-2. The static Pac-2 spawns with just the launcher where as there isn't a static Pac-3. I do like using the static Pac 2 sometimes cause I can build my own site without having 4 engagement radars right next to each other. I can't really see there being a point in just the static Pac-2 because as I mentioned earlier, it's only good for building tidy sites instead of having 4 generators, 4 early warning radars, 4 short range radars, and 4 HEMTTs sitting around. I could see the Pac-3 static being an option though so I can build my own site. 

 

I love this mod though. I can spend hours building an AA net and testing it. I also like how whenever I group the units to the radar, it doesn't put them in the dumb V shape automatically. At first I didn't understand why the Tunguskas and Pantsirs weren't targeting things, then once I introduced radar and figured that out, 1 Pantsir and 4 Tunguskas can really wreak havoc. 

 

I don't get what you're saying by "no" to wheeled anything? The MEADs is wheeled, the NASAMS has a truck variant, the SA10 is on a truck. IRL the Patriot is on a truck much like MEADs, it isn't towed. Arma isn't very nice to trailers. The Patriot is on the Man Kat1 truck if you didn't click the link I posted. Mobility is always good, the ability to set up, and leave after you shoot is always good. Scoot and shoot. 

[hcpookie 3770]

YOu are thinking into this too much.  Obviously anyone can build their own sites by hand, but the point of the spawn units is to automate that.  It makes more sense in scripted missions or MP misisons.  The ability to spawn these static launchers by themselves (the ones that spawn a "mini site") should be hidden from players - a FUBAR on my part that I will rectify in the future.

 

 

Arma isn't very nice to trailers.

 

You just answered your own question as to why none of these statics are mobile!  ;)  Not making a mobile Patriot launcher.  I knew people would bitch about something, so I chose to make NASAMS, MEADS, and SA-10 launchers mobile.  Although for the purposes and scope of my mod, they really should be static and unable to move.  I really should have made everything "just" a scripted site.  However people would bitch about that if I decided to go that route.  No plans to add those extra-other things.  Besides the scope of Arma maps doesn't warrant the need for a mobile system, neither does the ARM weapon engagement solution in this mod.  Even if Arma ever gets a Global-sized map like TitanIm, a shoot-and-scoot SAM *still* wouldn't be feasible due to the AI behavior.

[dilltron55 10]

YOu are thinking into this too much.  Obviously anyone can build their own sites by hand, but the point of the spawn units is to automate that.  It makes more sense in scripted missions or MP misisons.  The ability to spawn these static launchers by themselves (the ones that spawn a "mini site") should be hidden from players - a FUBAR on my part that I will rectify in the future.

 

 

 

You just answered your own question as to why none of these statics are mobile!  ;)  Not making a mobile Patriot launcher.  I knew people would bitch about something, so I chose to make NASAMS, MEADS, and SA-10 launchers mobile.  Although for the purposes and scope of my mod, they really should be static and unable to move.  I really should have made everything "just" a scripted site.  However people would bitch about that if I decided to go that route.  No plans to add those extra-other things.  Besides the scope of Arma maps doesn't warrant the need for a mobile system, neither does the ARM weapon engagement solution in this mod.  Even if Arma ever gets a Global-sized map like TitanIm, a shoot-and-scoot SAM *still* wouldn't be feasible due to the AI behavior.

 

If you do happen to update the mod soon, would you mind throwing in a Pac-3 site then? Or a Pac-3 static. 

 

I'm not bitching about the Patriot not being mobile. I was just requesting that maybe you could make a mobile one since we got NASAMS, MEADS, and the SA-10. I don't think I answered my question as to why none of the statics are mobile. I'm not even talking about towing anything with any trailers. I just thought that is NASAMS could be put on the bed of a truck, you could do the same with a MIM104 set up.