Exorcet

I don't know about this. The bomb did hit the solider's helmet. So he was protected, that's the job of armor after all. More seriously, the game already has some of the tools to do a damage calculation here. Weapon mass and velocity give momentum. Add some estimate of time to transfer that momentum and you get force. Or you could just use mass and velocity to get kinetic energy and convert that to an explosion of equivalent energy.

The AI in general needs some kind of request assistance option, and it should also take into account AWACS or similar units if they are present. So if a CAP flight is near by, but has no current task, AWACS can direct them to the unit needing help. There should probably be two components to make sure we don't get unexpected behavior. The unit requesting help should have either a waypoint/triggered command to call for help (so that it's up to the mission designer to call it) or an option to call for help (so the AI can decide if it needs help and call on its own). While other units would have an option checkbox for responding to calls. The checkbox would be needed to prevent a unit from being pulled from something more important (ie you don't want the CAP protecting AWACS to go chasing after enemies 100 miles away attacking some random troops and leaving AWACS unprotected). The call for help option can also be made available to players. If a player requests help AWACS could direct them to friendlies, or send friendlies to the player. Slower or immobile units like SAM or ships could report their positions and tell the player to come to them for cover.

I did not notice the pilot dead part, but everything else sounds the same as my situation. The B-1 decides it needs to descend rapidly, but points the nose too far down and makes it impossible to recover. The AI needs to be more proactive in handling terrain, and needs to account for obstacles beyond just the next hill.

Good idea, some kind of comment system for triggers would be useful.

One thing to keep in mind, maps and airbases aren't always exactly 1:1 by design, so even with coords, there may be some issues. Still, should be close enough that a minor adjustment works.

Unfortunately I can still get it to crash. I think this is less a FM issue and more an AI issue. They don't account for the terrain far enough ahead and pull maneuvers that are too dangerous. B1crash2.trk

Have not updated yet, will do so and see if it works.

You can, at a waypoint, set a command to do a script and paste this as the script: env.setErrorMessageBoxEnabled(false) -- Prevent error popup trigger.action.setUserFlag(1, true) To set flag 1 to true for example. To fix the issue mentioned by Wrecking Crew about finding the flag later, you can use a trigger condition with a text field in your trigger list to make a note of where the flag is triggered. I like to do this by using the message to unit trigger action. The message is set up to be sent to an AI and the text is a note detailing how the trigger is supposed to work.

This is really long overdue and one of the most important changes that can be made to the game. The kneeboard is so unnecessarily hard to work with, yet very important for mission planning and realism. Especially when issues like the game pausing when bringing up the briefing screen still isn't fixed.

When it comes to this kind of thing, sometimes the advantage simply is all your training and documentation is based on the old thing and it would be a change to update to a new thing. I don't know if that is actually the case here, but it's not an uncommon occurrence.

The planes were flying over 20,000 ft minimum (about 36,000 ft in the screenshot above if you look at the background), and everything (planes and SAM's) were firing missiles.

I can see why you want this, but it's the opposite for me unfortunately. If the F10 map is saved based on the ME, that means it can be zoomed into to very specific area, and if I wanted to see the map general, I'd need to zoom out every time. There is a button to center the map on you, it doesn't solve the zoom issue, but I think it would help in giving you what you want?

Oh I see. I was actually doing some testing on my own and I don't see this issue, but I am using the prebuilt SA-10 template for Russia. I'm also seeing the SA-10 shooting at HARMS, it's just that it doesn't have a very good hit rate against them.

You may want to disable dispersion under fire, which is set to true by default for ground units. It doesn't make much sense for a long range system like SA-10 to do this. I disable dispersion for nearly all SAM's except maybe SHORAD.

Are your radios set correctly? Are you using simple or realistic radio?

Some units in the game have options that change how they look, for example some aircraft have removable parts, ground vehicles can have covered or uncovered cargo areas, etc. There are a few of these that I think would be nice to have including: -Slumped pilot/crew members for mission involving intercept of an unresponsive aircraft -Fogged/ice covered windows for mission involving intercept of an unresponsive aircraft -Visual damage for mission where you may be escorting friendlies under attack or trying to return to base/safety -Open panels/maintenance bays for static aircraft at airbases -Add [possibly animated] maintenance crew around a model -Camouflage netting -Warning signs/barriers/cones

You'll want to post the mission so people can look at it.

Syria map issue is known and is a problem with that map, you'd want to bring it up in the correct forum (which already has a thread).

Oh yes and this is not limited to C-RAM:

Testing the new AI B-1 in 2.9 OB, it seems to have trouble flying near the ground. If it deviates from the intended height too much, it will nosedive and then be unable to recover. I don't know yet if this is B-1 specific, but it's a problem for the B-1 since it's a low altitude plane. Track attached B1crash.trk

Basically a subset of this.

Yes. Even just looking at things practically, having an "any" option for the missile in zone trigger would be helpful at times. Fallibility is definitely something the AI needs more of though. Without that, even reasonable limitations like FoV, or realistic sensors can break down. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has seen AI turn 180 degrees and instantly fire a missile on a target that a human would need to visually search for, or at least hesitate to shoot on because of the possibility of friendly fire.

100% necessary. Ideally we should also have easy ways of accessing what a specific unit or group has detected. Options for sorting by detected type (plane, missile, etc) would also be nice.

Strongly disagree here, and in fact I've requested the opposite: Perhaps the answer is a rework of the task system, although backwards compatibility may limit options there.

The AI cannot spot me from behind and below unless I STT lock it. I made the mission above to test AI spotting ability, and they are not all seeing. They do have sensors and spot enemies using them, but those sensors are very simple. Of course, my situation is best case and can be hard to replicate in a real fight against the AI. This is because of the factors I mentioned (reaction time, etc) and other things like blind spots having no effect once an AI spots you. In the second image since my radar is on, it is fair that the AI knows I am there, but it shouldn't know where I am - yet it has my position exactly.