AI ignores enemy aircraft

[Exorcet]

I was doing some tests and had a MiG-31 charge a F-14. They flew past each other. I added AWACS and got the same result. Finally I put them on as close as a crash course as I could, they never found each other.

 

See track

 

Latest version of DCSW (1.2.5)

Failed Intercept Bug.trk

[Grimes]

More or less there is no bug as the AI don't have any waypoint task assigned. The intercept role has fairly limited default tasks to choose from and no enroute task to govern intercept behavior. Fighter Sweep and CAP are the two "engage all air threats" tasks are best suited for attacking enemy aircraft as needed.

 

You can also change the ROE to go to Open Fire, Weapon Free or just to Open fire and it allows AI to go "off task" to attack potential threats. If you do that both aircraft will engage each other an the AWACS. Typically the F-14 will win.

[Exorcet]

Oh. I thought I had read somewhere that Intercept was supposed to make the AI go after everything (though as you said, Fighter Sweep and CAP do this and I typically have to delete the default advanced tasks to get reasonable behavior).

 

Though it might not be a bug, perhaps the roles need a bit of tweaking? Sweep and CAP seem too aggressive. Intercept a bit (or a lot) too passive without tweaking.

[Grimes]

I think the roles are more left over from the older task system wherein they define which aircraft can fill said role and which payloads for the aircraft are best suited for the role. With the newish task system the roles also limit the available tasks which make the most sense with the role. There is actually no limitation of an aircraft to perform a given role aside from the aircrafts own capabilities, and we can even bypass the default roles with the scripting engine. Personally I'd wish more of the tasks were available to each type of role, but that isn't be decision to make. I think the intercept role is setup so that a mission builder specifies exactly which group or unit they want the interceptor to attack, otherwise it would just be on a standard CAP type of role.