How to make a patrol CAS attack targets within x nm?

[LostOblivion]

I've usually just used the CAS, CAP, SEAD enroute tasks alone in many cases, but sometimes I want to restrict the aircrafts from engaging hostiles outside their predefined route. The way I thought would work is to give it a CAS enroute task as well an Engage Targets within X nm enroute task. However, this doesn't change anything as they still engage hostiles outside their route, so I removed the CAS enroute task. The problem now, is that the unit actually doesn't engage anything. Last night I had a pair of AH-64Ds doing an orbit with an Engage Targets enroute task, and it flew right over a group of enemy artillery without engaging with any of its weapons. What gives?

 

I also noticed this does work for CAP flights with no CAP enroute task and an Engage Targets enroute task. However, SEAD needs a SEAD enroute task as well as the Engage Targets enroute task.

 

My question: I probably do not understand how to properly task a unit to go about it's role, limiting it to only engaging within X nm of its route. What is the proper way of doing this in DCS?

[WildFire]

Are you adjusting (of course) the max distance of your seach then engage waypoint? I think when it first starts the distance is like 8 miles, which of course is tiny. I did some testing in my mission and found they have to be a lot closer than what you define in that box. I still have to test some things tho, like turning on radar to do continuous search(could be way way important)

 

But yeah Im working on this right now as well. Ill get back here if I find anything promising.

[LostOblivion]

I made a mission trying out all of CAP, SEAD, and CAS, and none of them will attack anything if removing their role enroute task (CAP/SEAD/CAS) and setting Engage Targets. Is this normal? Iirc this did work prior to 1.1.0.9? New bug?

 

I mean, if their role enroute task is required to be set for them to do anything, and if it is let on with Engage Targets and they override their role enroute task ignoring any Engage Targets enroute task completely, and the Engage Targets enroute task doesn't work alone, then what is the point of a Engage Targets enroute task? This won't work any way you use it with the current state of the simulation.

 

Example 1:

 

1. CAS -a

2. Engage Targets (within X nm)

 

Here, 2. will never do anything, because the aircraft will start looking for any ground hostiles it can see anyway according to the CAS enroute task, overriding the maximum engagement range set by 2.

 

Example 2:

 

1. Engage Targets (within X nm)

 

Here, 1. will not do anything and the unit will simply follow its route. I am not sure why it does not do anything. Either it is a bug, or it is a design flaw in which any airborne unit is required to have a role enroute task to enable it to attack the hostiles suited for its role. If the latter is the case, it must be a design flaw by implementation because of what happens in example 1, which pretty much renders the Engage Targets and Engage Targets in Zone enroute tasks useless.

 

I've tried also with Engage Targets in Zone enroute task; same problems there.

Edited August 11, 2011 by LostOblivion

[WildFire]

You sir, are correct.

 

Tonight in a mission I had a hard time getting a flight of 10's to bomb some targets. I said to all h**l with it and put a...

 

ROE-weapons free

Enroute task - search and engage within 10nm

Enroute task - CAS (stop condition next waypoint)

Perform task - engage groups 1-3

Perform task - orbit 1/2 hour

 

So they did a couple circles, number 1 hit a mountain then 2 took the initiative, dropped two clusters and left. They were fully loaded. Indeed we may have a problem here. I also tried multiple combinations of the available options, this scenario had the only successful drop.

[LostOblivion]

ROE-weapons free

Enroute task - search and engage within 10nm

Enroute task - CAS (stop condition next waypoint)

Perform task - engage groups 1-3

Perform task - orbit 1/2 hour

I have also considered giving it a temporary enroute task of CAS combined with the Engage Targets etc enroute tasks. The problem persists, though, because seeing as how it does have the CAS enroute task, it will still ignore the max distance set by Engage Targets and attack anything it can see according to the CAS enroute task.

 

So something is borked here. :/

 

Perform task works though, so that is maybe why it did attack your targets with a CBU.

 

Maybe a moderator can move this to the tech support forum.

[LostOblivion]

Do any developers have any comments on this matter?

[S77th-ReOrdain]

Not a developer, but it looks to me like your problem is ROE. You need to select OPEN FIRE and not WEAPONS FREE. Open fire will restrict the attacker to the targets you select in the drop down menu of set options. They won't stray from their assignments this way, and will only deviate if circumstances regarding their own survival change. Check out latest GUI manual pg. 150.

[Ripcord]

It is probably having to do with the AI's willingness to put themselves in harms way and subject themselves to enemy AAA/SAM threats. That is not simply a function of changing your ROE.

 

Try your experiment again, this time change the EVADE FIRE setting to something more aggressive... like PASSIVE DEFENSE for NO REACTION. I tried this with some enemy CAS flights and had good luck, when previously they would not even get close to the battlefield.

 

Ripcord

[LostOblivion]

Engage Targets is is currently bugged. How to replicate: Create an apache far from the target (~8 nm), create a wp close to a ground target. Remove its CAS role. Add Engage Targets. Run the mission. You will see the apache following its route not engaging. Now open its Engage Targets task, deselect AIR, then select AIR again. Run the mission. The apache will now engage the target.

 

There is a bug having to with connecting the actual target selected in the mission editor to the simulator. It appears Engage Targets will not set these properties properly until you actually flick some of the radio buttons (like I did now, turn them off, then the same buttons on again). Same thing with Engage Targets in Zone. Same thing with SEAD. Same thing with CAP.

 

Another bug: They do not respect the maximum range. Well, "semi" bugged, rather an implementation error. As long as any distance between a target and any leg of the route is shorter than the set max engagement distance, they will fly straight to that target, ignoring the 50 waypoints between them. Intuetively, max engagement range should be a measure between the vehicle and a target, not between the route and a target, IMO. At least when the aircraft is in "following route mode". I understand how the vehicle-target distance method can lead to trouble, say, if it took a diversion to kill a target, it would suddenly come in range of other targets the mission designer didn't intentionally mean for it to kill. At least if doing the route-target distance, queue that kill task after reaching that waypoint of the part of the leg that is close enough to a target, instead of queuing it straight away at the start of its life, 50 waypoints away, like it is now.

 

But I am happy now, because I know there is a workaround. :)

 

And thanks a lot, ReOrdain! I really haven't used ROE before, but in fact it is quite useful! :)

 

Hope someone will find this useful...

Edited August 22, 2011 by LostOblivion

[Druid_]

Very nice find LO.

 

I had something similar with the advanced checkboxes for flags (even though you unchecked it for false, next time you opened the tab it was checked again but still meant false).

[S77th-ReOrdain]

No problem LO, glad to help. Ripcord points out something interesting as well. Combat behavior seems to be controlled by both of these factors.

 

Based upon your findings, it makes me wonder whether there's a situation with the "Default" combat behavior perameters. Ideally, if you neither told the attackers to OPEN FIRE as I suggested, or, EVADE FIRE as Ripcord suggested, AI behavior was supposed to do both of those things by default. However, the advantage of ROE is that you can limit the targeting to specific things.

 

Perhaps a test needs to be performed to compare behavior with and w/o ROE or Reaction to Threat. Then, the check on, check off, check on again radio button would need to be tested to confirm whether what you've identified also extends to these combat behaviors as well.

[Druid_]

I really would hope that either the testers or the Devs have a complete set of missions that they can run to test the ME's generated code & the various AI units behaviour.

[LostOblivion]

My guess is that they revised some GUI in .9 and that they forgot to transfer some states between the GUI and the underlying system. Old missions probably have these settings saved correctly.