guanotwozero
Posts: 651
Joined: 12/27/2013
Status: offline
|
There's been a bit of talk about enhancing mission management, but so far nothing concrete. I feel missions could be substantially enhanced by adding more control over paths and timings, so here's a few ideas that might work.
I've included a number of objectives:
1) Multiple Areas of Operation (AOs)
2) Waypoints to and from AOs.
3) Group Control at waypoints & AOs
4) Multiple Mission Synchronisation
5) Fuel Planning
1) Multiple AOs:
At present, missions allow one AO or target group, and this could be enhanced by allowing multiples thereof. Thus a tanker could have several tracks, a strike mission could have a sequence of targets, and a patrol mission could have several patrol areas.
In terms of UI, the existing method of adding to a listbox could be used; either by having a larger fixed number of listboxes (say, 3) or by 'nesting' such listboxes inside a parent. This latter could take the form of listed numbered links, each of which refers to a specific AO. They would be managed by Add/Delete/Edit controls. Adding the RPs could be similar to now, using those currently selected on the map.
2) Waypoints:
Map waypoints would define the path taken from takeoff, to/between the AOs and home again. Specific RPs on the map could define the waypoints, and these could be added to the mission manager via a right-click menu on the RP. This would mean the mission manager has to be modeless, i.e. the map can be accessed while it's open. Similarly the list can be editable to enable add/delete and ordering.
In the mission manager, each added WP actually becomes an "Action at Waypoint" (AWP), as multiple missions may use the same waypoints. Indeed, the same waypoint may be used several times in one mission, such as inbound and outbound. Thus each AWP is an "instance" (unique entry), with the associated map WP as one of its attributes. Hence they will also be numbered, defining the sequence. As the mission progresses, the flight flies from waypoint to waypoint defined by this sequence.
3) Group Control at Waypoints & AOs:
At each waypoint, the group's attributes like speed, alt and EMCON status can be set. Thus each AWP must be editable, such as by right-click/dialogs, so as to set its values & status. Furthermore, an action can be defined, such as refuel, allow refuel, or "enact AO" which begins the activity in the AO.
To enable multiple AOs, each activity there can be given a duration, e.g. patrol AO_2 for 90 minutes. When completed, the group then sequences the following AWPs until the next AO is reached. Fine weapon control could allow a group to expend limited munitions on a target, so as to allow any subsequent targets to be attacked.
The other possibility is to set times at AWPs & AOs so that missions can be planned as precisely as possible, such as TOT. This is especially useful if multiple missions are to by synchronised.
However, the duration of certain actions may not be predictable, so each non-instantaneous action would auto-generate a 'tail-end' AWP, representing wherever and whenever the group is situated at the completion of the action. While its time/location is not editable, the other attributes are, e.g. speed, alt & EMCON. To allow for mission timings to be as precise as possible, enough time should be allocated to allow the action to complete and the group to reach the next WP.
4) Multiple Mission Synchronisation:
So as to allow multiple missions to work together, frequently they will use many of the same waypoints in common. Also, they will want to arrive simultaneously or at certain time differences. Thus it would be good to share common data.
To facilitate this, the mission manager should allow creation of a "Mission Basis". This will be similar to a mission, defined by adding AWPs, but won't refer to any actual group. The AWPs will refer only to locations and base times, not actions, and there will be no AOs (as those are mission-specific).
After such a "Mission Basis" is created, individual missions may be created/edited to use these "Basis" AWPs, but adding mission-specific attributes such as posture and actions. Also, times & alts can be modified as 'deltas', e.g. +15 mins.
This will allow sequences of missions to follow the same paths, e.g. an air sweep preceding a strike by 15 mins, or an escort mission flying 10,000ft higher than its escorted group. Thus there would have to be some sort of definable association between certain missions, such as escorting or refuelling.
In terms of UI, the Mission Editor would need to allow importation of the "Basis" AWPs, and to easily set deltas to some or all. Likely these should be highlighted in some way.
5) Fuel planning:
To facilitate this, the Mission Manager can allow the player to specify a plane that will fly the mission. If alts and speed/timings are defined at the AWPs, then the fuel cost of each stage can be calculated. The payload would likely also have to be defined, as well as any significant expected change, e.g. bombs away. Thus, a plane could be expected to use, say 90% of its fuel by AWP_8, which could have a refuel action instructed. Ideally partial refuelling would be possible, so as to fine-tune the requirement.
Thus the fuel cost for the whole mission could be estimated, and refuelling tasked accordingly.
It should be expected that such fuel calculation will be not be precise, especially if events & weather have any bearing. Patrol missions may be hectic and fuel-guzzling, or might be uneventful and sparing. Hence good player judgement is required when planning. Also, care should be taken when mixing different types of planes in a group. An SR-71 spy mission won't pan out too well if teamed with a Cessna Bird Dog. 
Where now?
This is far from a complete solution, and many issues and details would need to be figured out. What happens if dependencies fail, e.g. a tanker is downed or a runway destroyed? How best to define attack profiles and postures? How to respond to events such as a threat appearing en route?
My intention is to start a ball rolling whereby a useful, complete design may eventually result. I'm fully aware that any such implemention would be a lot of work for the devs, so I'm hoping it's possible to refine this half-baked idea into something maybe worth doing.
Thoughts? Opinions? Ideas?
< Message edited by guanotwozero -- 1/27/2014 8:11:08 PM >
|
Printable Version
[Suggestion] A half-baked idea for mission management - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread