TAB lock issue ...

[dm 9]

Also imagine how cool (and realistic) it would be using the pip-feature for target identification, like in reality.

As I say every time this is brought up, this is ONLY realistic for TV/IR guided missiles.

For radar guided missiles, the tab-lock system is actually pretty close to what they have in real life.

[Die neunte Seele 10]

Its still up to the dev, If they don't want to change a jack shit it doesn't matter what we said, isn't it?

Anyways, having the game automatically identify and sort out friend and foe is not the problem, simply locking and cycle through them with tab key and tab key only is the porblem, even forcing everyone to have a crosshair on the target to lock would be better. With that said, remove cycle target function will be a start, with that set it would only left the problem of correctly modeling different behavior for different weapon/system when hitting Tab.

Exactly. This crosshair on the target is the way to confirm, that you have intel about the target - that you know about it's existance and position. If you press tab or right click to submit your locking wish doesn't matter then. This way a hidden enemy is hidden and the need about getting intel about the enemy before attacking him is given. When you then forbid to lock not existing enemies, like those outside your object view distance, you also remove the posibility to abuse this system by trying to lock things in random directions to find the enemy.

I've never used tab but the way he responded to someone who thought there were bigger priorities like the TOH FM, was really childish.

Opinions on what is important are subjective depending on how you play the game. The dramatic significance of one single problem over all other small ones is special for PVP types here, most drastic for Warfare CTI. I, for my part, see all those very time consuming new features and superficial improvements in A3 and get mad about the question when the important things will be done.

It's not random that Wasteland and other tab-free missions are that successfull, while PVP / Warfare with tab have problems. People get this game because they want to play a military simulator. They end up in Wasteland and Life mode because the military simulation is unplayable.

[.kju 3244]

Made an overview, analysis and very specific suggestions for BI a while back.

You can check it here now: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/A3_Locking_Review

Sadly there were not interested/did not want to allocate resources to it. Who cares about gameplay (and realism) anyway ..

[twistking 204]

As I say every time this is brought up, this is ONLY realistic for TV/IR guided missiles.

For radar guided missiles, the tab-lock system is actually pretty close to what they have in real life.

You are right, but at the moment the helicopters in arma are not fitted with radar missiles. For example the DAGR of the commanche is laser homing in reality.

But let us just assume in 2035 there would exist a radar homing high-tech variant of the DAGR, there would still be much room for improving the fire control system.

Just some ideas:

Make the "HUD" (head up display) consistent. At the moment, you have the green "real" helmet-HUD (yellow for opfor when i remember correctly) and additionaly you have the white "arma" hud. The arma hud is ugly and the nice helmet hud doesn't really work at the moment. It is completely broken in free-look or alt-look and still shows not enough information to be useful. In the comment-section of my ticket the user "Anachoretes" suggested having the HUD tied to the Pilot-Helmet. I like the idea, although it would be a bit of a gimmick.

Simulate some sort of locking delay. Simulate the Computer/radar locking the target. Even if it would take under a second it would change the speed of engaging multiple targets. GIVE AUDIO FEEDBACK! For example audio signal when archiving lock.

Consider that locking targets is only possible within a certain degree in front of the helicopter. Could someone clarify, if this would be realistic? I would assume, that even if on board radar could detect enemies in 360°, the missile seeker would have to be somewhat pointed at the enemy to lock and of course fire.

This would also reduce the speed at which a heli could spam missiles, because it would always need to point in the direction of the target, then wait a very short moment to archive lock and then fire. As mentioned before - i could not find much info about fcs of radar missiles. If someone could clarify how my suggestion compare to real life, would be great!

Also as mentioned before most heli-based atgms are "only" semi-active. The devs should simulate semi-active guidance, because it would be realistic even in arma's future scenario and has great gameplay opportunities!

---------- Post added at 18:33 ---------- Previous post was at 18:29 ----------

;2427332']Made an overview' date=' analysis and very specific suggestions for BI a while back.

You can check it here now: [url']http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/A3_Locking_Review[/url]

wow. looks good. i will have a more detailed look later. perhaps i could mention it in the ticket, i've created here!

Edited June 28, 2013 by twistking

[nodunit 397]

Yes target locks must be in the 90 degree cone in FRONT of the aircraft for various reasons, seeker limitations, seekers intervening with one another, calculations required for the projectile to maneuver to the target before fuel runs out, etc.

Radars also generally use 360 only for air, since there is not nearly as much clutter as on the ground, that is a lot of information to sift through.

The delay depends mostly on the platform and missile type..for example the AH-64 FCR detects and archives the targets before engagement, marking the first two targets to elminate and then it adds the next after the next and so on.

I don't know if DAGR fired in succession would wind up essentially jamming eachother.

Edited June 28, 2013 by NodUnit

[yasotay 198]

The AH-64E (Guardian) has the ability to import data from other sensors and systems through the Link 16 software. So if there are other sensor systems providing common data the attack helicopter ought to be able to see it, or at least know where a target is. They also now have the ability to see UAV sensor data as well. The Longbow radar has had a number of upgrades but still is usually not used in 360 mode except for the occasional air-to-air mode. I cannot say if the radar has the sensitivity to acquire dismounted troops, especially in complex terrain. Of course LOS plays a significant part of what the radar can see. Also the range of the radar is usually not much more (for valid ID) than the range of the primary missile the aircraft carries.

On the RAH-66 one of the less known capabilities was to be that the targeting sensor would constantly sweep in something like a 120 degree arc, and provide the co-pilot/gunner with snapshoots of potential targets. This would have worked better at slower speeds than higher of course because the gunner had to decided on the validity of the target and input or delete the data.

Finally if I can tell what type of car is in my driveway by easily accessable internet data today, why would it be so hard to believe that in the near future militaries won't be able to see dismounted squads moving in a combat zone by overhead assets.

[Mattar_Tharkari 10]

Link16 will be available to ground troops as well as all vehicles?:

http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articles/2013/05/Link-16-handheld.html

How link 16 works / will work in future, all vehicles and ground troops exchange targetting/threat data:

Finally if I can tell what type of car is in my driveway by easily accessable internet data today, why would it be so hard to believe that in the near future militaries won't be able to see dismounted squads moving in a combat zone by overhead assets.

They can already - Lockheed Martin TRACER radar pod for moving infantry is already being tested on drones and helicopters and has entered limited operational deployment, it can see where the IR camera can't, through foliage / camoflage netting:

http://www.lockheedmartin.co.uk/us/news/features/2012/ready-to-fly.html

Has data link:

http://www.lockheedmartin.co.uk/us/products/tracer.html

Edited June 29, 2013 by Mattar_Tharkari

[b00ce 160]

Because,you spend the whole day,raping AI tanks with your 24 missiles HELI ... TAB lock is one of the main reasons why the PVP scene on this game is dead,and people migrate to non military game mods ! the fights on warfare missions (for example) are just TAB wars on every server,and it's just not funny at all !

Like if,TAB lock was a matter of two scripting lines ... not even an onTargetLOcked event -.-

I place ACE. There ARE alternatives for Tab-lock. There are NOT alternatives for broken flight models.

[On_Sabbatical 11]

I place ACE. There ARE alternatives for Tab-lock. There are NOT alternatives for broken flight models.

Not everyone uses mods ... ACE is good but few people play with it... why not fixing them both ? FM and TAB lock -.-

Even the l16 system ,it 's not a matter of pressing one button ... it's a whole team work behind it !

Edited June 30, 2013 by On_Sabbatical

[dm 9]

why not fixing them both ? FM and TAB lock -.-

Because, as we've seen elsewhere, BI is flat out fixing things already.

And the flight model would be a higher priority fix than the tab-lock system.

[Zorg_DK 10]

I don't like the tab lock either. I would be better if the gunner had to manually use his sights to put the vehicle in the targeting box before he can lock on.

[On_Sabbatical 11]

Because, as we've seen elsewhere, BI is flat out fixing things already.

And the flight model would be a higher priority fix than the tab-lock system.

Man, why are you insisting on prioritizing fixing bugs and issues -.-

Edited June 30, 2013 by On_Sabbatical

[twistking 204]

yes, we should not argue about which feature is more important and should be prioritized. the guys at bis are professional game-developers and they will will make the priorities for themselves.

as a community we should make clear, what is important to us and we should make suggestions on how to improve certain things, but i think it is foolish to assume, the devs would ship arma with a bugged flight model just because the ticket for proper FCS has more votes than the ticket for better flight model.

Personally i'm not very vocal about improving the flight model, because i'm certain that it will be further improved, even if we don't get the toh-FM.

just one word to the current FM: i fly with keyboard and use mouse for free-look, because i don't like switching from keyboard to flightstick everytime i enter/exit a vehicle and i find the feeling of flying with keyboard already improved over arma 2. but yes, there are still features missing and some things seem to be "wrong". also i haven't really compared handling with proper flightstick. but i'm confident, that we get a decent FM when arma is shipping.

but let us get back to topic please!

Edited June 30, 2013 by twistking

[-=seany=- 5]

Here is a ticket about FCS that apparently the Devs are looking at. I added suggestion about using the ACE system and the example video.

Give some votes if you like.

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=4834

Edited June 30, 2013 by -=seany=-
Forgot bug link, ty twistking ;)

[spanishsurfer 58]

Twistking, just got your PM. I'll keep my explanation as simple as possible.

Basically from an aviators POV, all we see in the aircraft are radar returns. Green blocks that the radar shows as targets. It takes a trained eye to understand what you're looking at but after a while you start to notice patterns and you can guess if the returns are buildings, ships, vehicles, etc. It also takes a bit of practice adjusting your gain on the radar to filter out the noise (terrain, trees, light poles, etc). Then we have another system that talks with our radar returns and places them on a map for us to better determine where they are (similar to pushing M on arma and seeing where friendlies are). Based on information from other sources, we can determine which are friendlies on the ground. The problem lies in the AMOUNT of radar returns we typically have. We have hundreds and a lot of time is spent going through each one (via FLIR pod) and identifying each one. There are no red blocks that light up the bad guys.

Many times an aircraft is called in there is a FAC nearby directing the pilots where the target is, this makes it very easy (usually the FAC is a prior aviator). With an approximate LAT/LONG all we have to do in the plane is punch in the coordinates and find the closest radar return. We lock the system onto the radar return and then identify it via FLIR and drop the payload. If the FAC is carrying a laser acquisition marker it makes it even easier, since all we have to do is lock the system onto the laser.

Sometimes there may be a UAV, P8, or other type of aircraft orbiting at 20,000 feet and using their "eye in the sky" to find targets and then give the coordinates to the aircraft w/the required capabilities for the mission, but these sort of drops are not decided by a mere pilot, usually there is a senior officer watching the feed and making the decision to pull the trigger.

The biggest obstacle for all aviators who have to drop munitions on targets is determining where they are. There is just so much information to pilots now that its very hard to sort it all out and it requires a team to get it right.

Arma 3 cannot replicate the weapons systems that these aircraft have, the military spends $12 million per simulator to train pilots and a lot of times those sims can never get it right either. The best arma can do is come up with something that has a "feel' for this type of warfare and put it out there. Since we can't have things like thousandths of civilians driving buses/cars/etc, accurate radar returns, gain interference due to weather....I propose this system.

Keep the tab lock system but require there to be a "firing solution." (If you've ever played mando you know what I'm talking about). Show all targets on the radar just like it does now but do not allow the pilot to see green/red squares, they should all be grey (Yes, IFF is out there but if you know what's good in Arma, everything else can be bombed w/no hesitation, so I propose to leave it all grey). The only red squares should be painted targets via laser. Force the pilots to identify what they're dropping their payload onto via visual means (if no laser marker is available) via fly by or a picture of the target in their cockpit (which is very true to life, the FLIR pods can do this easily in the plane).

Simple fix, not exactly "realistic" but the frustrations you will endure as a pilot will be very true to life....being...."What the hell am I targeting and is it safe to drop my payload?"

[Kieran 11]

It would be far better if the current missiles in the helicopter worked alot how the titan launcher works.

No lock would be necessary and it would stop pilots rambo flying destroying every tank with just spamming tab

they would need the gunner to effectively take out the hard targets as it would be in RL

[rory_pamphilon 16]

Twistking, just got your PM. I'll keep my explanation as simple as possible.

Basically from an aviators POV, all we see in the aircraft are radar returns. Green blocks that the radar shows as targets. It takes a trained eye to understand what you're looking at but after a while you start to notice patterns and you can guess if the returns are buildings, ships, vehicles, etc. It also takes a bit of practice adjusting your gain on the radar to filter out the noise (terrain, trees, light poles, etc). Then we have another system that talks with our radar returns and places them on a map for us to better determine where they are (similar to pushing M on arma and seeing where friendlies are). Based on information from other sources, we can determine which are friendlies on the ground. The problem lies in the AMOUNT of radar returns we typically have. We have hundreds and a lot of time is spent going through each one (via FLIR pod) and identifying each one. There are no red blocks that light up the bad guys.

Many times an aircraft is called in there is a FAC nearby directing the pilots where the target is, this makes it very easy (usually the FAC is a prior aviator). With an approximate LAT/LONG all we have to do in the plane is punch in the coordinates and find the closest radar return. We lock the system onto the radar return and then identify it via FLIR and drop the payload. If the FAC is carrying a laser acquisition marker it makes it even easier, since all we have to do is lock the system onto the laser.

Sometimes there may be a UAV, P8, or other type of aircraft orbiting at 20,000 feet and using their "eye in the sky" to find targets and then give the coordinates to the aircraft w/the required capabilities for the mission, but these sort of drops are not decided by a mere pilot, usually there is a senior officer watching the feed and making the decision to pull the trigger.

The biggest obstacle for all aviators who have to drop munitions on targets is determining where they are. There is just so much information to pilots now that its very hard to sort it all out and it requires a team to get it right.

Arma 3 cannot replicate the weapons systems that these aircraft have, the military spends $12 million per simulator to train pilots and a lot of times those sims can never get it right either. The best arma can do is come up with something that has a "feel' for this type of warfare and put it out there. Since we can't have things like thousandths of civilians driving buses/cars/etc, accurate radar returns, gain interference due to weather....I propose this system.

Keep the tab lock system but require there to be a "firing solution." (If you've ever played mando you know what I'm talking about). Show all targets on the radar just like it does now but do not allow the pilot to see green/red squares, they should all be grey (Yes, IFF is out there but if you know what's good in Arma, everything else can be bombed w/no hesitation, so I propose to leave it all grey). The only red squares should be painted targets via laser. Force the pilots to identify what they're dropping their payload onto via visual means (if no laser marker is available) via fly by or a picture of the target in their cockpit (which is very true to life, the FLIR pods can do this easily in the plane).

Simple fix, not exactly "realistic" but the frustrations you will endure as a pilot will be very true to life....being...."What the hell am I targeting and is it safe to drop my payload?"

This is the best solution yet. Make it possible to lock onto either teams vehicles and therefor visual identification necessary.

[On_Sabbatical 11]

We will then have to deal with the 2-list selection of targets ... my suggestion concerning this is to make the 2 list only show the parent class of a vehicle (tank,air,soldier and so on) and also to clear that list as soon as direct visual is lost !

[twistking 204]

Twistking, just got your PM. I'll keep my explanation as simple as possible.

Basically from an aviators POV, all we see in the aircraft are radar returns. Green blocks that the radar shows as targets. It takes a trained eye to understand what you're looking at but after a while you start to notice patterns and you can guess if the returns are buildings, ships, vehicles, etc. It also takes a bit of practice adjusting your gain on the radar to filter out the noise (terrain, trees, light poles, etc). Then we have another system that talks with our radar returns and places them on a map for us to better determine where they are (similar to pushing M on arma and seeing where friendlies are). Based on information from other sources, we can determine which are friendlies on the ground. The problem lies in the AMOUNT of radar returns we typically have. We have hundreds and a lot of time is spent going through each one (via FLIR pod) and identifying each one. There are no red blocks that light up the bad guys.

Many times an aircraft is called in there is a FAC nearby directing the pilots where the target is, this makes it very easy (usually the FAC is a prior aviator). With an approximate LAT/LONG all we have to do in the plane is punch in the coordinates and find the closest radar return. We lock the system onto the radar return and then identify it via FLIR and drop the payload. If the FAC is carrying a laser acquisition marker it makes it even easier, since all we have to do is lock the system onto the laser.

Sometimes there may be a UAV, P8, or other type of aircraft orbiting at 20,000 feet and using their "eye in the sky" to find targets and then give the coordinates to the aircraft w/the required capabilities for the mission, but these sort of drops are not decided by a mere pilot, usually there is a senior officer watching the feed and making the decision to pull the trigger.

The biggest obstacle for all aviators who have to drop munitions on targets is determining where they are. There is just so much information to pilots now that its very hard to sort it all out and it requires a team to get it right.

Arma 3 cannot replicate the weapons systems that these aircraft have, the military spends $12 million per simulator to train pilots and a lot of times those sims can never get it right either. The best arma can do is come up with something that has a "feel' for this type of warfare and put it out there. Since we can't have things like thousandths of civilians driving buses/cars/etc, accurate radar returns, gain interference due to weather....I propose this system.

Keep the tab lock system but require there to be a "firing solution." (If you've ever played mando you know what I'm talking about). Show all targets on the radar just like it does now but do not allow the pilot to see green/red squares, they should all be grey (Yes, IFF is out there but if you know what's good in Arma, everything else can be bombed w/no hesitation, so I propose to leave it all grey). The only red squares should be painted targets via laser. Force the pilots to identify what they're dropping their payload onto via visual means (if no laser marker is available) via fly by or a picture of the target in their cockpit (which is very true to life, the FLIR pods can do this easily in the plane).

Simple fix, not exactly "realistic" but the frustrations you will endure as a pilot will be very true to life....being...."What the hell am I targeting and is it safe to drop my payload?"

Thank you very much for this very informative post!

This is very useful for improving the current fcs implementation. :)

[rory_pamphilon 16]

We will then have to deal with the 2-list selection of targets ... my suggestion concerning this is to make the 2 list only show the parent class of a vehicle (tank,air,soldier and so on) and also to clear that list as soon as direct visual is lost !

Yeah good suggestion. Just show basic unit type in 2 list without specifying friendly/enemy.

Then visual I'd is required, either by flying over/near or having a nice PIP screen available which shows the target selected when hitting tab.

This should only work within a typical flir/laser cone of movement, eg 120deg . Once outside that lock is broken.

[chortles 263]

Then how does it work with all-aspect missiles?

[Kieran 11]

by using what we already have with the titan launcher! :)

[fraczek 4]

The problem as I see it (and I myself would like to play without TAB lock), and voiced previously, how would that work with AI? Your AI gunner in the typical Longbow? He is doing exactly that, IFF'ing targets via FLIR, which than show on the aproximation of intercrew communications and communications with HQ/JTAC on the ground which we call "radar".

We can't have everything in a game that tries to have everything from infantry to vehicles to rotary to fixedwing to underwater...There is always an aproximation how all the systems, which rely on many many people in the air, on the ground, back at the HQ, etc work. Because if there weren't, there would be no need for BIS to develop VBS, they could just market Arma 3 to militaries worldwide. Of course, then it wouldn't be affordable to yours truly.

And you can't remove one feature from a sandbox game, that is played in all sorts of ways, to satisfy just one part of the gaming crowd. Please see the earlier Arma 2 Community Configuration Project for all sorts of issues removing just one part of the complex game brought.

Sure, we could remove the radar altogether. But I guess SP players wouldn't be too happy that their AI gunned 50M$ choppers are now little more than a Sopwith Camel. Giving AI gunner fire commands from the 2 target menu? That would be a joke. Right-clicking targets you can't even visualy see as a pilot to "show" them to the FLIR 50x zoom equipped AI gunner?

Some posters in this thread can't see the broader picture it seems to me. This game is not about PvP CTI (I always felt funny about those Warfare players talking about realism and then solo playing, "buying" units - just give them a set of deployed units, limited reinforcements and that should be all), it's not about pure PvP, it's not about COOP, it's not about SP, it's about all of them! So it's pretty hard to satisfy them all when removing something would limit the other players.

Of course there are ways this could be partly resolved. Give mission/mod makers more tools, like those config values proposed by Kju: (btw, I took the time to read through your Biki post Kju, and it's got excellent ideas).

[twistking 204]

even i and many others refer to the problem of easy target acquisition as "tab lock issue" i want to make clear again, that pressing tab to toggle through targets is not the problem!

tab to toggle targets and some form of target overview a.k.a. "radar" a.k.a. "link16" is a good way of calling targets for your human or AI gunner. the main problem of current implementation is, that "calling" a target and locking the target is more or less the same thing, because there is nor real "locking". it is just choosing the target and firing away. in reality and even in every other flightsim - be it hardcore sim or arcade sim - you would need some sort of firing solution, requiring the sighting devices of the craft and/or the missile being aimed a the target and waiting for the computer fcs-systems to give some sort of confirmation for lock.

and that is only for autonomous missiles. manual or semi active missiles would require the gunner to manually direct the misisile to target in some way. of course before firing a semi-active missile the pilot could use tab to "call" the target for ai or human gunner.

i'm planning to write a very detailed suggestion on how fcs could work in arma, considering all the feedback from you guys including the explanations from arma palyer and real-life aviator "spanishsurfer".

stay tuned. in the meantime have a look at my tickets concerning the issue over at the feedback tracker.

(fcs) http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=10323

(gui & hud) http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=10884

Edited July 1, 2013 by twistking

[.kju 3244]

The CCP introduced an option and its optional. However even that was not acceptable to extremists. So that side is the problem, not the AI.