Difference between revisions of "Talk:Electronic warfare"

From EVE University Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(7 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
Editing this page to bring the content in line with changes to EWAR modules and mechanics in the March 2016 patch.
 
Editing this page to bring the content in line with changes to EWAR modules and mechanics in the March 2016 patch.
 
I plan to move cap warfare out of this page--I don't think it aligns with the four flavors of EWAR that go with the EWAR frigates and cruisers. The UniWiki also has separate content for Cap Warfare that is probably more appropriate than the little blurb here. -Antei
 
I plan to move cap warfare out of this page--I don't think it aligns with the four flavors of EWAR that go with the EWAR frigates and cruisers. The UniWiki also has separate content for Cap Warfare that is probably more appropriate than the little blurb here. -Antei
 +
 +
-----
 +
 +
Graphical changes from 2018 help this article a lot--I like the module images, they make the sections a lot clearer. I could take or leave the changes to colored text; I think they helped, but I can also understand how someone could see them as distracting. Either way is good I think.
 +
 +
I disagree with putting equations in this page. The UniWiki currently has two large articles that discuss ECM: this article, and the ECM page (used to be called the ECM Guide). I think the ECM Guide is intended to be a more mathematical, technical guide to the topic; in principle, we could have math and equations for any of the four EWAR types, but it is distinctly valuable for ECM, so I'm glad we have that page. But I don't think you *have* to know math to use ECM, and so the EWAR page is, IMHO, better as an introductory, simpler approach to all four EWAR types. The EWAR article was written to suggest that you really don't *need* to know the math to use EWAR, and to get you in quickly. I recommend moving the equations to the ECM page (which is mentioned and linked at the bottom of the ECM section of this article).
 +
 +
Interested in others' opinions on this. -Antei
 +
 +
-----
 +
 +
Is the below really "Discussion"? You could put it in your User: Sandbox.
 +
 +
:The brightly colored text was really distracting. I don't see a reason for making not so important thing like item names so bright and attention grabbing.
 +
 +
: The [[Electronic Countermeasures]] could do with a complete restructure and the details could be moved there.
 +
 +
:The thing below is just for preserving the info that was on old target spectrum breaker page https://wiki.eveuniversity.org/index.php?title=Target_Spectrum_Breaker&oldid=119588<br>
 +
:It doesn't really fit enywhere but research like that should be kept somewhere easier to find than in history of a redirect page. [[User:Hirmuolio pine|Hirmuolio pine]] ([[User talk:Hirmuolio pine|talk]]) 05:03, 19 February 2018 (CST)
 +
 +
=Target Spectrum Breaker Data Summary=
 +
Moving target spectrum breaker experiment data here from the article. [[User:Hirmuolio pine|Hirmuolio pine]] ([[User talk:Hirmuolio pine|talk]]) 05:41, 12 December 2017 (CST)
 +
 +
*Enemy sensor strength, resolution, and type seems to have no effect on chance to be jammed.
 +
 +
*Jams happen throughout cycle. So number of ships jammed isn't as important as number of ships jammed over time.
 +
 +
eg. 5 ships continuously jammed over 10 seconds or 12 ships continuously jammed for only 4.16 seconds.
 +
 +
*For 31 rats targeting user, 68% of the time 2 to 8 are jammed at any given point in cycle and 95% of the time, 0 to 11 are jammed at any given point in cycle.
 +
 +
* ''Overall, it seems no matter how many targeting, about 11% to 33% will be jammed continuously for cycle''
 +
 +
==Evidence/Data==
 +
It should be noted test results aren’t likely to be shared, in order for those to maintain a tactical advantage.
 +
 +
 +
18 npc targeted. 33% lost lock. 100% user jammed.
 +
 +
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=112460
 +
 +
......................
 +
 +
''[the following was recorded before discovery that jams aren't simultaneous; however, it does document NPC reaction and a general idea of the effectiveness of the Target Breaker Amplification skill progression]''
 +
 +
User targeted NPC station. Module activated. User did not jam self. No aggression. Target breaker skill 0.
 +
 +
User next to station. User has nothing targeted. Module activated. No aggression. Target breaker skill 0.
 +
 +
Module active. User targeted 7 (gate, Gallente customs, billboard etc). User did not jam self. No aggression. Target breaker skill 0.
 +
 +
L4 Recon 1 of 3 (Serpentis) Room 1: takes too long to target (sensor damped), 3 to 5 of 13 rats jammed. User 100% jammed. Target breaker skill 0.
 +
 +
L4 Recon 1 of 3 (Serpentis) Room 1: takes too long to target (sensor damped), 3 to 5 of 13 rats jammed. User 100% jammed. Target breaker skill 1.
 +
 +
L4 Recon 1 of 3 (Serpentis) Room 1: takes too long to target (sensor damped), 3 to 5 of 13 rats jammed. User 100% jammed. Target breaker skill 2.
 +
 +
L4 Recon 1 of 3 (Serpentis) Room 1: takes too long to target (sensor damped), 4 to 5 of 13 rats jammed. User 100% jammed. Target breaker skill 3.
 +
 +
L4 Recon 1 of 3 (Serpentis) Room 1: takes too long to target (sensor damped), 3 to 5 of 13 rats jammed. User 100% jammed. Target breaker skill 4.
 +
 +
''[End of record]'' This was done pre-Retribution with -50% scan res and 12sec cycle
 +
 +
...........................
 +
 +
[[File:AE1.jpg]]
 +
 +
L4 Angel Extravaganza, Bonus Room, Single Spawn Not Triggered. Target breaker skill 4.  Full Room Aggro. Rattlesnake: 30 Gravimetric Sensor Strength. Nothing Targeted. Target Spectrum Breaker activated once (set autorepeat off), screenshot to count results.
 +
 +
 +
If you watch carefully, the jams aren't simultaneous. Difficulties include printscreen when non-jammed rats are blinking faded.
 +
 +
 +
 +
beginning of cycle:
 +
 +
1x Gist Malakim 24 (L)adar sensor strength
 +
 +
1x Tower Sentry Angel II 100 for all types
 +
 +
TOTAL: 124L, 100(M)agnetometric, 100(R)adar, 100(G)ravimetric
 +
 +
 +
1/4 through cycle:
 +
 +
1x Angel Webifier [NEW!] 10L
 +
 +
1x Gist Malakim
 +
 +
1x Tower Sentry Angel III [NEW!] 100G 100R 100M 100L
 +
 +
1x Gistatis Legatus [NEW!] 19L
 +
 +
2x Tower Sentry Angel II [1 NEW!] 100G 100R 100M 100L
 +
 +
TOTAL 229L 200(M)agnetometric, 200(R)adar, 200(G)ravimetric
 +
 +
 +
1/2 through cycle:
 +
 +
1x Angel Webifier
 +
 +
1x Gist Malakim
 +
 +
2x Arch Gistum Breaker [NEW!] 34x2=68L
 +
 +
1x Gistatis Legatus
 +
 +
1x Gistatis Tribunus (yellowbox) [NEW!] 19L
 +
 +
1x Tower Sentry Angel III [NEW!] 100G 100R 100M 100L
 +
 +
TOTAL 187L 100G 100R 100M
 +
 +
 +
3/4 through cycle:
 +
 +
1x Gist Malakim
 +
 +
2x Arch Gistum Breaker
 +
 +
1x Gistatis Legatus
 +
 +
1x Gistatis Tribunus (yellowbox)
 +
 +
1x Gist Nephilim [NEW!] 31L
 +
 +
TOTAL 31L
 +
 +
 +
Rats jammed: 11 of 28 (39%) in one 9.60 second cycle.
 +
 +
Sensor strength doesn't seem to play a role since 100L towers jammed.
 +
 +
Total sensor strength jammed: 571L 400MGR out of 1382L 700MGR (41% 57%)
 +
 +
Median of jammed rats' sensor strength: 34L (100MGR), average: 51L (100MGR)
 +
 +
Median of all rats' sensor strength: 34L (100MGR), average 49.3L (100MGR)
 +
 +
The 41% 57% could suggest that the more variety of sensor types on the field, the better chance to jam.
 +
 +
The 39% and 41% seem very close; perhaps the total sensor strength of all targeters plays more of a roll than each targeter ship's sensor strength.
 +
 +
The fact the median for rats jammed and the median for all rats are identical as well as the similar averages may indicate that there is no preference to any ship type.
 +
 +
This was done pre-Retribution with -50% scan res and 12sec cycle
 +
 +
.....................
 +
 +
 +
Nothing targeted. L4 mordus headhunter, 1st pocket. Full room agro.
 +
 +
 +
Test MH1
 +
 +
10 jammed of 31 rats (32.3%)
 +
 +
166G sensor strength jammed of 538G (30.8%)
 +
 +
0, 3, 7, 10, 10 rats jammed; total 30 of 155 (19.4%)
 +
 +
0, 24, 114, 184, 184 sensor strength jammed; total: 506G of 2690G (18.8%)
 +
 +
 +
 +
Test MH2
 +
 +
8 jammed of 31 rats (25.8%)
 +
 +
144G sensor strength jammed of 538G (26.8%)
 +
 +
0, 6, 7, 7, 7 rats jammed; total 27 of 155 (17.4%) [4th snapshot shows switch of bounty hunter to lion]
 +
 +
0, 64, 94, 104, 104 sensor strength jammed; total: 366G of 2690G (13.6%)
 +
 +
 +
 +
Test MH3
 +
 +
6 jammed of 31 rats (19.4%)
 +
 +
64G sensor strength jammed of 538G (11.9%)
 +
 +
0, 5, 6, 6, 6 rats jammed; total: 23 of 155 (14.8%)
 +
 +
0, 54, 64, 64, 64 sensor strength jammed; total: 246G of 2690G (9.1%)
 +
 +
 +
 +
Results
 +
 +
median 20G, average 17.4G TOTAL 20/17.4 = 0.87
 +
 +
median 10.5G, average 16.4G jammed test1 = 1.6
 +
 +
median 10G, average 14.25G jammed test2 = 1.425
 +
 +
median 8G, average 12G jammed test3 = 1.5
 +
 +
 +
 +
Tests MH4 to MH10
 +
 +
Since sensor strength doesnt seem to matter and can jam and lose jam within 1 cycle, decided to take printscreens. Just count how many jams within TSB's cycle and calculate stuff.
 +
 +
 +
Calculations from Test MH1 to MH10
 +
 +
31 rats from Mordus Headhunter L4
 +
 +
58 printscreens. 10 cycles.
 +
 +
User targeted nothing. Waited for all red.
 +
 +
Yellowboxes included with red loss. Counts occur only when TSB timer circle active.
 +
 +
Jam Average: 5.05
 +
 +
Jam Median: 5 (16.1%)
 +
 +
Standard Deviation: 3.18
 +
 +
Minimum: 0
 +
 +
Maximum: 12
 +
 +
If I understand standard deviation 68% of the time 2 to 8 are jammed (1.82 to 8.18) and 95% of the time, 0 to 11 are jammed
 +
 +
-print screens not posted because too many
 +
 +
This was done pre-Retribution with -50% scan res and 12sec cycle
 +
 +
.....................................
 +
 +
L4 mordus hunter room 1 only initial agro (8 rats)
 +
 +
nothing targeted. print screen only when TSB circle timer active
 +
 +
TSB set to autorepeat off. waited for all 8 to become red again before reactivating
 +
 +
40 print screens. 8 rats
 +
 +
average 0.125
 +
 +
median 0
 +
 +
standard deviation 0.404
 +
 +
max 2, min 0
 +
 +
This was done pre-Retribution with -50% scan res and 12sec cycle
 +
...................................
 +
 +
L4 mordus hunter room 2
 +
 +
51 rats (had to kill a few so all fit on overview for print screen)
 +
 +
nothing targeted. print screen only when TSB circle timer active
 +
 +
TSB set to autorepeat off. waited for all 8 to become red again before reactivating
 +
 +
34 print screens (quite a few screens had the blinking during off, so difficult to differentiate)
 +
 +
average 7.8
 +
 +
median 10
 +
 +
standard deviation 4.938
 +
 +
max 15, min 0
 +
 +
This was done pre-Retribution with -50% scan res and 12sec cycle
 +
 +
.....................................
 +
 +
Using the AE (4 screen shots) and the all Mordus Hunter print screens with the trend tool of a spreadsheet...
 +
 +
if 100 targeting, 11 to 31 (about 11% to 32%) will be jammed continuously for cycle
 +
 +
if 150 targeting, 17 to 48 (about 12% to 32%) will be jammed continuously for cycle
 +
 +
if 200 targeting, 24 to 65 (about 12% to 33%) will be jammed continuously for cycle
 +
 +
if 250 targeting, 30 to 82 (about 12% to 33%) will be jammed continuously for cycle
 +
 +
* so it seems no matter how many targeting, about 11% to 33% will be jammed continuously for cycle
 +
 +
This was done pre-Retribution with -50% scan res and 12sec cycle
 +
 +
==Proposed Testing/Questions of Curiosity==
 +
Sisi Mass Test Performance
 +
 +
Do opponents lose lock on just the ship using the mod or are the opponents unable to lock anything at all?
 +
 +
Confirm: low sensor strength ships (eg. frigates) more likely to be affected?
 +
 +
Would a sensor booster with a resolution script be effective in preventing host ship from jamming itself?
 +
 +
==Aggression Mechanics==
 +
Solo: causes no aggression
 +
 +
In corp, not in fleet: ???
 +
 +
In corp, in fleet: ???
 +
 +
Out of corp, not in fleet: ???
 +
 +
Out of corp, in fleet: ???
 +
 +
 +
==Hypothesis==
 +
 +
1- (targeting ship’s sensor strength / total of all ship’s sensor strength) + magic = chance to jam targeting ship
 +
 +
since sensor strength doesn't seem to matter...
 +
 +
number of ships * magic + target breaker skill = chance to jam targeting ship
 +
 +
no magic, just between 11% and 33% jammed

Latest revision as of 11:03, 19 February 2018

Editing this page to bring the content in line with changes to EWAR modules and mechanics in the March 2016 patch. I plan to move cap warfare out of this page--I don't think it aligns with the four flavors of EWAR that go with the EWAR frigates and cruisers. The UniWiki also has separate content for Cap Warfare that is probably more appropriate than the little blurb here. -Antei

Graphical changes from 2018 help this article a lot--I like the module images, they make the sections a lot clearer. I could take or leave the changes to colored text; I think they helped, but I can also understand how someone could see them as distracting. Either way is good I think.

I disagree with putting equations in this page. The UniWiki currently has two large articles that discuss ECM: this article, and the ECM page (used to be called the ECM Guide). I think the ECM Guide is intended to be a more mathematical, technical guide to the topic; in principle, we could have math and equations for any of the four EWAR types, but it is distinctly valuable for ECM, so I'm glad we have that page. But I don't think you *have* to know math to use ECM, and so the EWAR page is, IMHO, better as an introductory, simpler approach to all four EWAR types. The EWAR article was written to suggest that you really don't *need* to know the math to use EWAR, and to get you in quickly. I recommend moving the equations to the ECM page (which is mentioned and linked at the bottom of the ECM section of this article).

Interested in others' opinions on this. -Antei

Is the below really "Discussion"? You could put it in your User: Sandbox.

The brightly colored text was really distracting. I don't see a reason for making not so important thing like item names so bright and attention grabbing.
The Electronic Countermeasures could do with a complete restructure and the details could be moved there.
The thing below is just for preserving the info that was on old target spectrum breaker page https://wiki.eveuniversity.org/index.php?title=Target_Spectrum_Breaker&oldid=119588
It doesn't really fit enywhere but research like that should be kept somewhere easier to find than in history of a redirect page. Hirmuolio pine (talk) 05:03, 19 February 2018 (CST)

Target Spectrum Breaker Data Summary

Moving target spectrum breaker experiment data here from the article. Hirmuolio pine (talk) 05:41, 12 December 2017 (CST)

  • Enemy sensor strength, resolution, and type seems to have no effect on chance to be jammed.
  • Jams happen throughout cycle. So number of ships jammed isn't as important as number of ships jammed over time.

eg. 5 ships continuously jammed over 10 seconds or 12 ships continuously jammed for only 4.16 seconds.

  • For 31 rats targeting user, 68% of the time 2 to 8 are jammed at any given point in cycle and 95% of the time, 0 to 11 are jammed at any given point in cycle.
  • Overall, it seems no matter how many targeting, about 11% to 33% will be jammed continuously for cycle

Evidence/Data

It should be noted test results aren’t likely to be shared, in order for those to maintain a tactical advantage.


18 npc targeted. 33% lost lock. 100% user jammed.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=112460

......................

[the following was recorded before discovery that jams aren't simultaneous; however, it does document NPC reaction and a general idea of the effectiveness of the Target Breaker Amplification skill progression]

User targeted NPC station. Module activated. User did not jam self. No aggression. Target breaker skill 0.

User next to station. User has nothing targeted. Module activated. No aggression. Target breaker skill 0.

Module active. User targeted 7 (gate, Gallente customs, billboard etc). User did not jam self. No aggression. Target breaker skill 0.

L4 Recon 1 of 3 (Serpentis) Room 1: takes too long to target (sensor damped), 3 to 5 of 13 rats jammed. User 100% jammed. Target breaker skill 0.

L4 Recon 1 of 3 (Serpentis) Room 1: takes too long to target (sensor damped), 3 to 5 of 13 rats jammed. User 100% jammed. Target breaker skill 1.

L4 Recon 1 of 3 (Serpentis) Room 1: takes too long to target (sensor damped), 3 to 5 of 13 rats jammed. User 100% jammed. Target breaker skill 2.

L4 Recon 1 of 3 (Serpentis) Room 1: takes too long to target (sensor damped), 4 to 5 of 13 rats jammed. User 100% jammed. Target breaker skill 3.

L4 Recon 1 of 3 (Serpentis) Room 1: takes too long to target (sensor damped), 3 to 5 of 13 rats jammed. User 100% jammed. Target breaker skill 4.

[End of record] This was done pre-Retribution with -50% scan res and 12sec cycle

...........................

AE1.jpg

L4 Angel Extravaganza, Bonus Room, Single Spawn Not Triggered. Target breaker skill 4. Full Room Aggro. Rattlesnake: 30 Gravimetric Sensor Strength. Nothing Targeted. Target Spectrum Breaker activated once (set autorepeat off), screenshot to count results.


If you watch carefully, the jams aren't simultaneous. Difficulties include printscreen when non-jammed rats are blinking faded.


beginning of cycle:

1x Gist Malakim 24 (L)adar sensor strength

1x Tower Sentry Angel II 100 for all types

TOTAL: 124L, 100(M)agnetometric, 100(R)adar, 100(G)ravimetric


1/4 through cycle:

1x Angel Webifier [NEW!] 10L

1x Gist Malakim

1x Tower Sentry Angel III [NEW!] 100G 100R 100M 100L

1x Gistatis Legatus [NEW!] 19L

2x Tower Sentry Angel II [1 NEW!] 100G 100R 100M 100L

TOTAL 229L 200(M)agnetometric, 200(R)adar, 200(G)ravimetric


1/2 through cycle:

1x Angel Webifier

1x Gist Malakim

2x Arch Gistum Breaker [NEW!] 34x2=68L

1x Gistatis Legatus

1x Gistatis Tribunus (yellowbox) [NEW!] 19L

1x Tower Sentry Angel III [NEW!] 100G 100R 100M 100L

TOTAL 187L 100G 100R 100M


3/4 through cycle:

1x Gist Malakim

2x Arch Gistum Breaker

1x Gistatis Legatus

1x Gistatis Tribunus (yellowbox)

1x Gist Nephilim [NEW!] 31L

TOTAL 31L


Rats jammed: 11 of 28 (39%) in one 9.60 second cycle.

Sensor strength doesn't seem to play a role since 100L towers jammed.

Total sensor strength jammed: 571L 400MGR out of 1382L 700MGR (41% 57%)

Median of jammed rats' sensor strength: 34L (100MGR), average: 51L (100MGR)

Median of all rats' sensor strength: 34L (100MGR), average 49.3L (100MGR)

The 41% 57% could suggest that the more variety of sensor types on the field, the better chance to jam.

The 39% and 41% seem very close; perhaps the total sensor strength of all targeters plays more of a roll than each targeter ship's sensor strength.

The fact the median for rats jammed and the median for all rats are identical as well as the similar averages may indicate that there is no preference to any ship type.

This was done pre-Retribution with -50% scan res and 12sec cycle

.....................


Nothing targeted. L4 mordus headhunter, 1st pocket. Full room agro.


Test MH1

10 jammed of 31 rats (32.3%)

166G sensor strength jammed of 538G (30.8%)

0, 3, 7, 10, 10 rats jammed; total 30 of 155 (19.4%)

0, 24, 114, 184, 184 sensor strength jammed; total: 506G of 2690G (18.8%)


Test MH2

8 jammed of 31 rats (25.8%)

144G sensor strength jammed of 538G (26.8%)

0, 6, 7, 7, 7 rats jammed; total 27 of 155 (17.4%) [4th snapshot shows switch of bounty hunter to lion]

0, 64, 94, 104, 104 sensor strength jammed; total: 366G of 2690G (13.6%)


Test MH3

6 jammed of 31 rats (19.4%)

64G sensor strength jammed of 538G (11.9%)

0, 5, 6, 6, 6 rats jammed; total: 23 of 155 (14.8%)

0, 54, 64, 64, 64 sensor strength jammed; total: 246G of 2690G (9.1%)


Results

median 20G, average 17.4G TOTAL 20/17.4 = 0.87

median 10.5G, average 16.4G jammed test1 = 1.6

median 10G, average 14.25G jammed test2 = 1.425

median 8G, average 12G jammed test3 = 1.5


Tests MH4 to MH10

Since sensor strength doesnt seem to matter and can jam and lose jam within 1 cycle, decided to take printscreens. Just count how many jams within TSB's cycle and calculate stuff.


Calculations from Test MH1 to MH10

31 rats from Mordus Headhunter L4

58 printscreens. 10 cycles.

User targeted nothing. Waited for all red.

Yellowboxes included with red loss. Counts occur only when TSB timer circle active.

Jam Average: 5.05

Jam Median: 5 (16.1%)

Standard Deviation: 3.18

Minimum: 0

Maximum: 12

If I understand standard deviation 68% of the time 2 to 8 are jammed (1.82 to 8.18) and 95% of the time, 0 to 11 are jammed

-print screens not posted because too many

This was done pre-Retribution with -50% scan res and 12sec cycle

.....................................

L4 mordus hunter room 1 only initial agro (8 rats)

nothing targeted. print screen only when TSB circle timer active

TSB set to autorepeat off. waited for all 8 to become red again before reactivating

40 print screens. 8 rats

average 0.125

median 0

standard deviation 0.404

max 2, min 0

This was done pre-Retribution with -50% scan res and 12sec cycle ...................................

L4 mordus hunter room 2

51 rats (had to kill a few so all fit on overview for print screen)

nothing targeted. print screen only when TSB circle timer active

TSB set to autorepeat off. waited for all 8 to become red again before reactivating

34 print screens (quite a few screens had the blinking during off, so difficult to differentiate)

average 7.8

median 10

standard deviation 4.938

max 15, min 0

This was done pre-Retribution with -50% scan res and 12sec cycle

.....................................

Using the AE (4 screen shots) and the all Mordus Hunter print screens with the trend tool of a spreadsheet...

if 100 targeting, 11 to 31 (about 11% to 32%) will be jammed continuously for cycle

if 150 targeting, 17 to 48 (about 12% to 32%) will be jammed continuously for cycle

if 200 targeting, 24 to 65 (about 12% to 33%) will be jammed continuously for cycle

if 250 targeting, 30 to 82 (about 12% to 33%) will be jammed continuously for cycle

  • so it seems no matter how many targeting, about 11% to 33% will be jammed continuously for cycle

This was done pre-Retribution with -50% scan res and 12sec cycle

Proposed Testing/Questions of Curiosity

Sisi Mass Test Performance

Do opponents lose lock on just the ship using the mod or are the opponents unable to lock anything at all?

Confirm: low sensor strength ships (eg. frigates) more likely to be affected?

Would a sensor booster with a resolution script be effective in preventing host ship from jamming itself?

Aggression Mechanics

Solo: causes no aggression

In corp, not in fleet: ???

In corp, in fleet: ???

Out of corp, not in fleet: ???

Out of corp, in fleet: ???


Hypothesis

1- (targeting ship’s sensor strength / total of all ship’s sensor strength) + magic = chance to jam targeting ship

since sensor strength doesn't seem to matter...

number of ships * magic + target breaker skill = chance to jam targeting ship

no magic, just between 11% and 33% jammed

Retrieved from "https://wiki.eveuniversity.org/index.php?title=Talk:Electronic_warfare&oldid=133038"