Allow AI to be assigned any Task

[Exorcet]

I know that long term AI is being revamped, but I think a good short term improvement would be to remove restrictions on AI tasking.

 

By this I mean remove the restrictions that are set in the ME when you choose an AI group's role. For example if you set a group to "CAS" it prevents you from giving them "Attack Map Object" or "Fighter Sweep" tasks. The restrictions might seem logical at first glance but they are far too rigid and cause silly problems.

 

One example, I have some AH-64 set to attack a base defended by AAA. Since I want the Apaches to attack buildings I need to set them to "Ground Attack" and not "CAS". However by doing this I can't tell them to destroy enemy AAA before they attack buildings, Ground Attack is forbidden from using Search then Engage. The result is that the Apaches nonsensically ignore air defense and die while focusing on buildings:

 

 

 

There is a very similar problem with multirole fighters. Set them to ground attack and you can't tell them to attack airborne targets. They do have some very basic self defense behavior, but it basically relies on them being shot at first. So F-15E's with 30 nmi range AMRAAM's will let MiG-21's come after them with AA-2's before retaliating, even if an AWACS is in the air. If I could assign Search and Engage air targets to the F-15E's as bombers, this would be a non issue.

[Tank50us]

One way to fix this would be simply add a 'multi role' in the role setting, this would solve the issue, since now aircraft can do what they are required to do in a mission, rather than just one specific task. That being said, I'd make this an option only for aircraft that can perform a multi-role mission (such as an F-15E or F-18). Something like an A10, which is built for CAS, wouldn't get such a setting. Although the existing settings can also be modified a bit. After all, irl, A-10s have had to strafe buildings while performing CAS operations.

[Gronank]

+1 to the idea of the multi-role role

-1 to the notion that it should be limited. Nothing is gained by imposing limitations based on someone's imagination of how a system might be used and a great deal is potentially lost.

[Tank50us]

17 minutes ago, Gronank said:

+1 to the idea of the multi-role role

-1 to the notion that it should be limited. Nothing is gained by imposing limitations based on someone's imagination of how a system might be used and a great deal is potentially lost.

Well, let me put it this way: The F-15 right now can only do air to air. Ergo, it can only intercept or CAP... kinda hard to assign it to multiple roles when it can't really do them at all, wouldn't you agree?

[Gronank]

4 minutes ago, Tank50us said:

Well, let me put it this way: The F-15 right now can only do air to air. Ergo, it can only intercept or CAP... kinda hard to assign it to multiple roles when it can't really do them at all, wouldn't you agree?

Well, that's the point: we don't know what it can and can't do, we only know what tasks it has available. A F-15 could concievably strafe a truck, but it can't due to the missing AI task. It could be that the logic for F-15 attacking ground targets is absent from the game, but it is equally plausible that the basic strafing logic is shared between all aircraft and the only reason F-15 can't attack ground is because someone decided that a F-15 isn't supposed to do that.

[Tank50us]

7 minutes ago, Gronank said:

Well, that's the point: we don't know what it can and can't do, we only know what tasks it has available. A F-15 could concievably strafe a truck, but it can't due to the missing AI task. It could be that the logic for F-15 attacking ground targets is absent from the game, but it is equally plausible that the basic strafing logic is shared between all aircraft and the only reason F-15 can't attack ground is because someone decided that a F-15 isn't supposed to do that.

GR has done tests on this, and while the F-15 can indeed strafe a ground target, it can't kill them. There's a lot of things that should be possible in the game, that aren't because strange reasons. And in this instance, it's not likely to ever be resolved since ED has made it clear that barring balance issues, they do not intend to do much more with FC3 aircraft.

[Tippis]

Funnily enough, an important part of this would be to remove a couple of the role-specific tasks. CAP and CAS, perhaps most notably, simply do not work in any way for creating their respective behaviours and other tasks (search and engage in zone in particular) already do everything required of those two only with vastly more control and usefulness in the AI's behaviour.

 

There's so much antiquated cruft and half-finished, uneven, and half-applied behaviours in the task list that it could use a thorough spring cleaning.

[Exorcet]

5 hours ago, Tank50us said:

Something like an A10, which is built for CAS, wouldn't get such a setting.

I disagree here, while an A-10 would only be assigned ground attack, it is not prevented from attacking air targets. The same problem that I pointed out with the F-15E exists for the A-10 anyway. I can't assign it any kind of a defensive AA action because it will usually have a ground attack role. It would be pretty silly to give it a CAP task with 50 mile radius, but if that's what the mission designer wants, whatever. If AA tasks are prohibited, then I can't give the A-10 something like a 5-10 mile air to air attack radius for self defense against helicopters or something, which is perfectly reasonable.

 

I agree with Tippis, the role selection doesn't actually accomplish much. I delete the default tasks about 99% of the time anyway. Search then Engage, Search then Engage in Zone, etc, these are the actual tasks that are important and drive AI behavior, at least in my missions. As far as I'm concerned, Fighter Sweep and CAP are the exact same thing and so are Pinpoint Strike and Ground Attack, etc.

[upyr1]

On 4/19/2021 at 9:35 PM, Exorcet said:

I know that long term AI is being revamped, but I think a good short term improvement would be to remove restrictions on AI tasking.

 

By this I mean remove the restrictions that are set in the ME when you choose an AI group's role. For example if you set a group to "CAS" it prevents you from giving them "Attack Map Object" or "Fighter Sweep" tasks. The restrictions might seem logical at first glance but they are far too rigid and cause silly problems.

 

One example, I have some AH-64 set to attack a base defended by AAA. Since I want the Apaches to attack buildings I need to set them to "Ground Attack" and not "CAS". However by doing this I can't tell them to destroy enemy AAA before they attack buildings, Ground Attack is forbidden from using Search then Engage. The result is that the Apaches nonsensically ignore air defense and die while focusing on buildings:

 

 

 

There is a very similar problem with multirole fighters. Set them to ground attack and you can't tell them to attack airborne targets. They do have some very basic self defense behavior, but it basically relies on them being shot at first. So F-15E's with 30 nmi range AMRAAM's will let MiG-21's come after them with AA-2's before retaliating, even if an AWACS is in the air. If I could assign Search and Engage air targets to the F-15E's as bombers, this would be a non issue.

This is some AI that needs to be fixed, the AI should at least try to make a flak suppression run when attacking

[Callsign112]

@Exorcet, you raise a really good point. Tasking is way too rigid in the ME. Maybe they could make available tasks for any given plane somehow linked to its load out. If a unit is carrying weapons that would allow it to play a multi-role, the user should be able to reassign as the mission progresses. Not sure if this would work in your mission, but as a simple work around could you have two groups of Apaches. One group set for ground attack, and the other for CAS? 

[Exorcet]

2 hours ago, Callsign112 said:

@Exorcet, you raise a really good point. Tasking is way too rigid in the ME. Maybe they could make available tasks for any given plane somehow linked to its load out. If a unit is carrying weapons that would allow it to play a multi-role, the user should be able to reassign as the mission progresses. Not sure if this would work in your mission, but as a simple work around could you have two groups of Apaches. One group set for ground attack, and the other for CAS? 

This is sort of what I had to do. I made it so when the original Apaches got close to the airbase another Apache flight would spawn in the air and start doing CAS. Then when the threats were gone the CAS flight would just despawn.

[FlankerKiller]

On 4/20/2021 at 7:49 AM, Exorcet said:

I disagree here, while an A-10 would only be assigned ground attack, it is not prevented from attacking air targets. The same problem that I pointed out with the F-15E exists for the A-10 anyway. I can't assign it any kind of a defensive AA action because it will usually have a ground attack role. It would be pretty silly to give it a CAP task with 50 mile radius, but if that's what the mission designer wants, whatever. If AA tasks are prohibited, then I can't give the A-10 something like a 5-10 mile air to air attack radius for self defense against helicopters or something, which is perfectly reasonable.

 

I agree with Tippis, the role selection doesn't actually accomplish much. I delete the default tasks about 99% of the time anyway. Search then Engage, Search then Engage in Zone, etc, these are the actual tasks that are important and drive AI behavior, at least in my missions. As far as I'm concerned, Fighter Sweep and CAP are the exact same thing and so are Pinpoint Strike and Ground Attack, etc.

Same here 

[FlankerKiller]

I cannot agree  more with most points made here. The AI is the #1 limiting factor to my enjoyment  of DCS. The whole dame thing needs an overhaul  to be honest.  But there is a lot of low hanging  fruit  to be had. 

[WirtsLegs]

Definitely support this one