Matrix Games Forums

While experimenting with the new features in BVR and WVR combat mechanics I noticed a few potential problems with BVR engagements. More specifically;

Case 1
WCS, air: (Tight)
WRA: (Default)
Other relevant options: Ignore plotted course: (Yes)

Execution: Select Reno 1 -> Engage Targets, Manual -> select Bogey #6 as target.
The F-4E launches an AIM-7F but despite it is actively engaging a target its status remains “unassigned”.
If you now select Reno 1 again and hit F3 (in order to clear the plotted course), the Phantom will turn away from the target thus breaking CW illumination.

Case 2
WCS, air: (Free)
WRA: (Default)
Other relevant options: Ignore plotted course: (Yes)

Reno 1 will automatically launch an AIM-7F. If you now drag its sole navigation waypoint to a random direction (say 90deg to the left of the original course),
the F-4 will… ignore the “ignore plotted course” setting and the missile will quickly go blind (Alternatively, if you hit F3 to clear the plotted course the Phantom will act the same way as in case1).

Is this BVR combat behavior intentional or am I missing something here?

I'll add an item on the F-3 key but honestly it is meant to clear any course regardless of anything else going on and not sure how many players would do this while shooting SARH missiles.

Thanks for reporting this though. Very astute observation!

Mike

I think what you may be missing is some of the intricacies of how WCS, WRA, F1, Shift-F1 and missions relate to each other.

The way I see it (as a fellow player, this is not an official dev answer [:)] ) is like this:
- WCS does not control whether or not the AI will execute an attack or not, it merely controls whether or not the AI will launch a weapon if allowable launch parameters (which you can control with WRA) have been met.

- Engage Target, Manual: maybe the name is a bit misleading in this case. I see it more as "Launch Weapon, Manual". Here again, this means not the WCS decides if there will be a launch, I decide that, regardless of WRA, hostile/neutral etc. But again it is just a launch, not an attack.

- If I want the AI to run a full attack, not just launch weapons, but including running its full logic (to crank, support the weapon if needed, shoot again if the first is a miss etc) I basically have two options:
- Use just F1 to order an Engage Target - Auto, or
- Assign the airplane to a mission that will lead to an attack (e.g. an AAW Patrol).

- The Ignore plotted course setting is "when attacking". Just launching a weapon does not mean the AI is executing an attack and as such it does not apply.

Taking what I've said above to your two cases:

Case 1:
Instead of doing an Engage target, manual with Reno 1, do an Engage Target - Auto. He will launch a weapon and go to Engaged Offensive (Executing BVR attack).

Now, you can try plotting its course all you want, it will ignore it because it is running attack logic (unless you set the Doctrine option to No of course).


Case 2:
If you make a patrol mission that includes the Bogey in the patrol area, and assign the Renos to it, they will engage and support their weapons and ignore the plotted course as well.


To me this behavior is great. You see, I am a notorious micromanager [:D]
And just because I am ordering my jet to launch a missile (with Shift-F1) does not mean I suddenly want him to decide if he should crank etc. Hell no, I'm in charge of that.

And you say: well then just turn Ignore plotted course to No so that when you are playing he will not ignore your plots, but that is cumbersome as well because I might in some occasions just want to F1 an attack with a unit that is on a long plotted course. He will now run his attack (because Ignore plotted course is set to YES) and then afterwards resume it.

To summarize:
- WCS controls not if the AI should execute attacks, but purely if it should launch weapons at Enemy only, any non friendly, or nobody, when in launch parameters
- WRA allows you to completely control these launch parameters
- Actual attack execution (cranking etc) is either player controllable with course plotting and (if using WCS Hold) Shift F1.
- or it is up to the AI by using F1 to manually order which targets to attack at what point, but then giving the execution to the AI (with WRA as its guideline for when to shoot, note that if you have WCS tight and F1 a neutral it will declare hostile and engage. With WCS Hold it will never allow the AI to shoot, even if you F1. It will run the intercept but you will have to loosen WCS or fire using Shift-F1)
- The alternative AI way is as said by assigning planes to missions (this is how you mainly build an AI opponent when creating a scenario). Of course these missions also need an appropriate WCS and WRA. The great thing is that you can not only set this per side but also per mission as required.

I hope this clears some stuff up. To me this is all working as it should, but it can be complex. Of course this isn't Ace Combat so a bit of depth and complexity is a good thing as far as I'm concerned [:)]

If you have further questions please fire away (just go WCS Free )

Thanks for the prompt reply guys (mikmyk: aren't you supposed to be on a break? [:)])

Tomcat84: you are absolutely correct about auto engaging targets or setting up patrol zones, etc. (I am aware of how these work). The point I was trying to make is that when the AI is firing a SARH weapon (regardless of whether this is called "Engage Target, Manual" or "Launch Weapon, Manual") it should make sure the target stays within the radar gimbal limits. Otherwise what's the point of firing a missile that is not properly supported and is destined to go blind a few seconds after launch?

I don't think the demonstrated cases would justify a zero PK launch.

ORIGINAL: Gus112GR
when the AI is firing a SARH weapon (regardless of whether this is called "Engage Target, Manual" or "Launch Weapon, Manual") it should make sure the target stays within the radar gimbal limits. Otherwise what's the point of firing a missile that is not properly supported and is destined to go blind a few seconds after launch?

I don't think the demonstrated cases would justify a zero PK launch.

Well, if the tactical situation changes after launch (SAM launch, or being needed elsewhere to protect other asset from an emerging threat) it might be warranted to waste the missile that's in flight and change the fighters' vector.

But I can also understand your way of thinking. [:)]