Hold at Risk

MarkShot · 01-27-08, 09:32 PM

I don't see how you can make your scenario work.

Clearly, checking for counter detection is easy and would be a failure.

However, simply being in weapons range does not imply that the player has a good solution.

You would need something in the goal doctrine language to measure the distance between the plotted contact and the show truth contact versus some measure of the weapon performance relative to distance in order to measure how good the solution is. Then, it would mainly be an exercise in TMA and navigating for the player.

As an MP mission it might be really interesting to see how well the RED player could derail the solutions of the BLUE player or attempt to make a detection.

01-27-08, 09:32 PM	#4
MarkShot Ace of the Deep Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 1,134 Downloads: 93 Uploads: 0	I don't see how you can make your scenario work. Clearly, checking for counter detection is easy and would be a failure. However, simply being in weapons range does not imply that the player has a good solution. You would need something in the goal doctrine language to measure the distance between the plotted contact and the show truth contact versus some measure of the weapon performance relative to distance in order to measure how good the solution is. Then, it would mainly be an exercise in TMA and navigating for the player. As an MP mission it might be really interesting to see how well the RED player could derail the solutions of the BLUE player or attempt to make a detection. __________________ War games, not wars! --- Only a small few profit from war (that should not stand)!