Coming soon - more ground attack roles.

[PatrickAWlson]

This is preparation for Normandy but also useful right now.  I am adding three new squadron roles: maritime attack, train buster, and raider.  The maritime and train buster missions already exist, but adding a squadron role will allow specialization.  Probably want tank buster too.

 

The raider role is new and has a new mission.  It is a low altitude, generally deep penetration raid targeting an airfield, train station, or bridge.  It is flown at a lower altitude than the usual ground attack.  It does not have the preparatory waypoint and, instead, goes straight to the target.  The target will generally be deeper than the usual ground attack.  The target final is a popup WP - altitude is increased from the ingress.  Then you drop and exit at the lower altitude.  So it's not too much different from a ground attack but it is definitely a different flavor of it.

 

In a different thread the subject of "how do I create a spitfire campaign with lots of ground attack".  The answer is, at the moment, you can't.  You have to scrub missions until you get the one that you want.    It did create an idea though: I should be able to easily allow you to select the squadron role for  the mission instead of choosing it for you.    

 

How does this fit in with current PWCG?  Should be seamless.  Normal ground attack squadrons will still get a large variety of missions, but specialized units will be ... more specialized ... sometimes ... depending on the squadron configs.  

 

And I lied a little about coming soon. This might take awhile.  I did get the raider role and mission coded and tested through automation.  Need in game testing.  Train, maritime, and tank bust missions should be easier.  The missions already exist.  I just need to force the mission in the right direction and code a generic ground attack fallback if the environment is not right for the specific mission.

 

[No105_Swoose]

14 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

The raider role is new and has a new mission.  It is a low altitude, generally deep penetration raid targeting an airfield, train station, or bridge.  It is flown at a lower altitude than the usual ground attack.  It does not have the preparatory waypoint and, instead, goes straight to the target.  The target will generally be deeper than the usual ground attack.  The target final is a popup WP - altitude is increased from the ingress.  Then you drop and exit at the lower altitude.  So it's not too much different from a ground attack but it is definitely a different flavor of it.

 

 

 

Wow! This will take PWCG to a whole new level, especially for those of us who like SP ground attack missions.  The "Raider" designation seems like it will be particularly well-suited to the DeHavilland Mosquito Fighter Bomber Mark VI once the developers release that aircraft.  Queue the "633 Squadron" movie theme song music! ?

Edited September 13, 2021 by No105_Swoose
Correct typo and add 633 Squadron movie reference

[TheSNAFU]

Cool idea Pat. Should make for some fun missions! 

[Varibraun]

8 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

I am adding three new squadron roles: maritime attack, train buster, and raider.  The maritime and train buster missions already exist, but adding a squadron role will allow specialization.  Probably want tank buster too.

 

Pat - Will the AI fly these new types of missions too so that they can be intercepted?

[PatrickAWlson]

3 minutes ago, Varibraun said:

 

Pat - Will the AI fly these new types of missions too so that they can be intercepted?

 

Yes. 

 

The only real new mission type is raider, and even that is a variant of the usual ground attack.  The others are ground attacks with specific targets.  I'm honestly not sure that people will even notice the AI going about a tank buster mission as opposed to a ground attack on infantry.  It will be much more noticeable if you are actually flying with the unit.  Still, specialized units are more likely to do specializes things. 

 

To some degree PWCG already models this via target preferences (will probably remove those as they are redundant).  The new roles might not add much in terms of AI variety because the variety is already there.  However, combined with the ability to choose your role in a mission, it puts more of the decision making into the players hands.   

 

[PhilthyPlane]

Pat, this is a great initiative. It would also be a good time to implement the routing via visual nav fixes change that I mentioned in another thread, as this is exactly how the raider missions would have been planned and flown.

 

Also, in terms of vertical navigation, crossing the lines (coast) was usually done above 3,000 feet in order to avoid light flak. So, they might approach the lines (coast) at low level to avoid detection, pull up to avoid the flak belt, then drop down to low level again on the enemy side to make tracking - and therefore interception - more difficult. If you can work out a way to replicate that, it would greatly add to the realism of the profiles flown. Using cloud to hide in would also be good and surely should be possible to implement in suitable conditions?

 

Obviously the foregoing is a heavily generalised summary, but I think structuring the profiles in this way would really put the icing on your changes.

 

 

[PatrickAWlson]

@PhilthyPlane You might be a bit disappointed.  What you are asking for is conceptually simple but not necessarily easy to code.  It's not something I can doin 30 minutes while I am doing the other stuff.  in fact, the other stuff does not require that I go anywhere near the same code.

 

I got the same request from @PhilthySpud awhile back.  I have been thinking about it ever since.  it is a direction that I would like to go.  However, doing landmark based waypoints involves a lot of work.  First an evaluation of which waypoints should be landmark based and which should be interval based.  Some waypoints like search patterns and climb paths will tend to be more "fly on this heading at this speed for this long".  Those are fine as they are now.   

 

Others would benefit from landmarks.  PhilthySpud pointed out ingress and egress.  Those would probably be my first target.  Patrol routes would be much nicer as landmarks.  Bombing runs and raids would be better as landmarks.  Some offensive patrols already use landmarks and the results are honestly ugly.  

 

I am also not entirely dealing with real life.  The AI wants certain things and the routes are sometimes done to make the AI happy.   If I use landmark based waypoints I risk moving the WP too close or too far for proper Ai behavior.  I am thinking mostly of the attack sequence for bombing/dive bombing/ground attack.

 

So there is a lot to consider.  if/when I get to doing this it will almost certainly be it's own project.  it's too big to do half heartedly and, being honest, I always try to leave myself an escape hatch.  I need to be able to abandon a project that just isn't working out.

[PatrickAWlson]

Things are plugging along.  I have it all working in code.  Now I have to do some testing to make sure that it works in the game.  

[Sandmarken]

13 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

Things are plugging along.  I have it all working in code.  Now I have to do some testing to make sure that it works in the game.  

Just releas it in beta and il use the weekend to check ?? well done btw ??

Edited September 17, 2021 by Sandmarken

[Duce_de_Zoop]

On 9/13/2021 at 10:53 AM, PatrickAWlson said:

 I am adding three new squadron roles: maritime attack, train buster, and raider.  The maritime and train buster missions already exist, but adding a squadron role will allow specialization. 

 

 

 

Any update on this because I am a FIEND for maritime attack missions. Very excited for this.

[Wulfkai]

On 9/13/2021 at 4:53 PM, PatrickAWlson said:

This is preparation for Normandy but also useful right now.  I am adding three new squadron roles: maritime attack, train buster, and raider.  The maritime and train buster missions already exist, but adding a squadron role will allow specialization.  Probably want tank buster too.

 

The raider role is new and has a new mission.  It is a low altitude, generally deep penetration raid targeting an airfield, train station, or bridge.  It is flown at a lower altitude than the usual ground attack.  It does not have the preparatory waypoint and, instead, goes straight to the target.  The target will generally be deeper than the usual ground attack.  The target final is a popup WP - altitude is increased from the ingress.  Then you drop and exit at the lower altitude.  So it's not too much different from a ground attack but it is definitely a different flavor of it.

 

In a different thread the subject of "how do I create a spitfire campaign with lots of ground attack".  The answer is, at the moment, you can't.  You have to scrub missions until you get the one that you want.    It did create an idea though: I should be able to easily allow you to select the squadron role for  the mission instead of choosing it for you.    

 

How does this fit in with current PWCG?  Should be seamless.  Normal ground attack squadrons will still get a large variety of missions, but specialized units will be ... more specialized ... sometimes ... depending on the squadron configs.  

 

And I lied a little about coming soon. This might take awhile.  I did get the raider role and mission coded and tested through automation.  Need in game testing.  Train, maritime, and tank bust missions should be easier.  The missions already exist.  I just need to force the mission in the right direction and code a generic ground attack fallback if the environment is not right for the specific mission.

 

Any A20 squadrons available for raider missions?

On 11/3/2021 at 5:32 PM, Duce_de_Zoop said:

 

Any update on this because I am a FIEND for maritime attack missions. Very excited for this.

As Per 13.2

[PatrickAWlson]

@Duce_de_Zoop

@Wulfkai

 

I think every A20 unit has a  raider role.    A raider mission is not high probability but you can fly one by choosing Mission With Role instead of just Mission.  Choose raider role.  American and Russian bomber units fly the A20.

 

Maritime is limited to Kuban.  A20s and Ju88s have maritime attack roles.  You need to be on the Kuban map.  For A20 missions choose 277th Bomber Regiment flying A20s.  As above, choose mission with role and select Maritime Attack as the role.  If it can, PWCG will generate a maritime attack mission.

[Columbar]

Raider role could be ideal for Me 262. Fast in - drop bombs - fast out.

 

I´d like to see this approach in game.

[PatrickAWlson]

2 minutes ago, Columbar said:

Raider role could be ideal for Me 262. Fast in - drop bombs - fast out.

 

I´d like to see this approach in game.

 

I think I made KG51 100% raider.  Don't want them to have an escort.  Does more harm than good.

 

Me262 AI is still lacking.  Should be "go fast, do job, run away fast".  That's not too hard to do for raiders and attackers, but attackers still fly too slow.  Harder for fighter 262s, but it amounts to preferring to staying alive vs killing.  It's the ultimate expression of using speed instead of turning.  The 1C team has done a nice job of improving the AI for fast planes but there is still a bit more to do.