Current radar system and the inherent broken gameplay.

[Kerel1 10]

First of, I know there have been numerous posts concerning Arma 3's radar system with a broad range of requests on how to fix this. This post is a summary of my findings and thoughts about how to fix this in an as simple manner as possible for BIS.

I have been a fan of this game since the days of Operation Flashpoint and have seen the game grow and grow while all sorts of features were being added. The platforms capability of uniting all sorts of gameplay from infantry to fixed-wing aircraft in a realistic yet balanced way in a grand environment has Always been the backbone of the franchise I believe. As such I'm happy to see the game being expanded with features. Unfortunatly though the game at the moment has alot of bugs/issues/inconsistencies that hamper the realistic but balanced gameplay, or make it impossible all together.

The most prominent one is the radar system. Any aircraft with guided weapons combined with a radar has an enourmous and unrealistic advantage over ground vehicles. Not only against BIS' standard AA vehicles, but it is currently impossible for addon makes to make decent anti air vehicles due to engine restrictions. There have been numerous threads and bugtracker reports on this but it has so far been ignored (as far as publicly known). When the helicopter DLC was announced I expected it would deal with this Obvious issues and therefor I bought it immediatly, only to be disappointed later on (don't misunderstand me here, the sling loading is cool). However the fact remains that the gameplay is crippled in relation to any vehicle using radar and modders are unable to adress it. This issue has been destroying gameplay in both SP and MP for to long now and has actually been chasing away players from MP missions on a regular basis. With this thread I hope to identify the issues around this problem, keep BIS aware we need a fix for this major issue, and think of potential fixes (preferably simple to do as I'm sure BIS is already quite busy).

The problem broken down:

a.) Current A/G radar automatically targets enemy (and ONLY) vehicles when the next target key is used, even if the radar/ai has not IFF'ed yet. This should be fixed ASAP!

b.) Current A/A and G/A radar have a vastly reduced range compared to the A/G radar range. Giving A/G radar equiped always a range benefit. In addition the AI in AAA vehicles will not IFF and engage vehicles until much closer (around 1km is seems)

Current radar presets are flawed and simply destroy the possibility for any remotely realistic combat between radar equiped vehicles. Their hardcoding denies modders and addon makers the possibility to fix this, making sure this part of the game will stay broken until BIS takes a look at this and fix it one way or another.

Most basic fix proposition:

1.) "Next target" key will only work on vehicles/infantry already detected AND IFF'ed. No more selecting a target and shooting it because you know it is enemy because the next target command has revealed it for you.

2.) AI should engage enemy targets when they are inrange and have been identified, not wait until they are much closer.

3.) All radar and IFF ranges should be equal. No more aircraft spotting ground units long before radar equiped ground units spot aircraft.

4.) If easier than request 6 (in-case you really want minimal effort to improve this aspect), please make some range presets for short, medium and long ranges. Example: 2000m, 4000m, 6000m

extra: Extent the Cheetah and Tigris Titan missile range to equal A/G missile range of helicopters.

5.) Minimize the "Next target" command use all together.

More thorough fix for this issue, requiring BIS to make small changes in the engine and already released content. But enabling the community with vastly more possibilities.

6.) Config improvements (Basic):

Add following vehicle/equipement/weapon config settings:

Set RadarRangeAirtargets: #m (Sets the range at which air targets are detected)

Set RadarRangegroundtargets: #m (Sets the range at which ground targets are detected)

Even more thorough, basically extending of improvement #5.

7.) Extra config settings (For more advanced simulation):

Set RadarRangeAirtargets IFF (friendly/enemy/empty): #m (Sets the range at which air targets are identified)

Set RadarRangegroundtargets IFF (friendly/enemy/empty): #m (Sets the range at which ground targets are identified)

set RadarPower: 1-10 (multiplier for the likeliness of a radar to spot something.)

set VehicleRCS: 0.1-1 (multiplier for a vehicle giving their likeliness to be detected.)

radar detection then is achieved at: RadarPower*VehicleRCS*RadarRange=Detection range. (With a cutoff at Radar max range if Radarpower*VehicleRCS = >1)

Personally I believe the fixes proposed in point 1, 2 and 3 are absolutely necessary as soon as possible. With proposal 4 or 6 being an very very welcome addition for the modding and mission making community. Proposal 7 would be a great addition, but it's mostly dreaming for now I'm afraid. Feel free to post your own experiences and ideas on how to solve the current radar issues in this thread. Also I would love to see BIS join in the discussion or fix this issue tomorrow of course ;). Anyway, keep playing and working on this great game all!

Edited November 4, 2014 by Kerel1
Changed title and some spelling ;). Could a mod change the thread titl to: Current radar system and possible simple fix ideas

[the_demongod 31]

I too have been thinking about radar fixes. I think they're going in the right direction with removing it altogether from some vehicles, but another possible fix I imagined was to turn the radar into a radar warning receiver instead, effectively eliminating the radar as a way to find non-radiating targets (like pickup trucks). Scroll down to "Part two" in my thread here for more info.

[Onno 22]

Notes before reading:

This post doesn't concern how AI operate, it's about the user interface in arma.

Some of it is deduced from how the UI behaves when engaging long range targets and might not be correct.

Target acquisition and firing of guided weapons

Well for starters, there's no real sensor systems in the game, save for the laser locking system. And that one is a bit of an exception as well.

Arma has a very simple way of doing things: everything known to friendly units (in the player's group?) is known to the player. All known targets can be selected and the selection methods are really straightforward.

The player is presented with an overview of target information, provided that the B-scope in the game (which most people interpret as being the "radar" is) is turned on in the difficulty settings. There's no middle of the road option. It's either on or it's off. There are no alternatives to this B-scope either. (not that I know of, at least)

Now, with all that target data available, the next step in getting that weapon fired is that you can select one of the targets which are presented to you through the B-scope. Currently, this is done through next/previous target (easy lock), as long as the currently selected weapon can potentially lock on to it or the 'hard lock', which lock on to something which is in the centre of the screen (regardless of weapon capabilities I believe?). To aid gameplay, the cursor could have a snap function if it's close enough to a potential target so it's easier to use. You could even define the snap range in the difficulty settings, making it available to all player types as the only means of vehicle target selection.

Currently, the instant lock target selection which easy lock provides enables some types of units in Arma, most notably aircraft, to be very effective on the battlefield. Sometimes seemingly beyond what we think that their capabilities should be. These immense capabilities certainly pose a problem for gameplay at times.

On the other hand, some other platforms suffer from a lack of effective data and can't be as effective as they should be. In this regard the AA vehicles stand out in their lack of targeting capabilities, seemingly because of their lacking sensor and/or data sharing/weapon guidance abilities.

Lets try to see how these platforms would handle attacks:

1. A tank or APC with (a) and without (b) a battle management interface / data link (firing some kind of guided weapon)
   
2. An attack helicopter (a) and without (b) a battle management interface / data link
   

1a: The tank uses it's own sensors to acquire targets. It's limited by the sensitivity and field of view of it's own sensors. The inability of the platform to use the 3rd dimension make it impossible to engage at very long ranges unless no obstructions exist. (hardly ever the case) Because the sensors are line of sight based, the unit needs to expose itself to fire at its target. LOAL (Lock On After Launch) is possible as long as the missile has it's own means of acquiring the targets after flying to a designated point in space first, but impractical due to sensor and engagement range limitations typically encountered.

1b: The tank can get information about targets through the interface and can fire from hidden positions, provided that the missile has some kind of pop-up attack mode. It will use it's own sensors if the weapon doesn't use pop-up or LOAL modes. because the battle picture is updated and no predetermined fly-to point is necessary, LOAL is feasible in some situations. The tank can engage at longer ranges as well because of the data sharing.

2a: The helicopter uses it's own sensors to acquire targets. Unguided munitions are dependent on the sensor capabilities of the firing platform. It's limited by the sensitivity and field of view of it's own sensors, but the availability of the 3rd dimension greatly enhances the possible engagement range.

LOAL is possible as long as the missile has it's own means of acquiring the targets after flying to a fly-to point in space first. Because of the speed a chopper can move at, a type of LOAL can be successful if the elapsed time isn't too great. There's a chance this will fail because the situation has changed so much that the missile can't acquire its target after reaching its fly-to point.

2b: A chopper will have pretty much the same capabilities as the data link equipped tank with the added benefit of increased speed and engagement ranges.

None of these systems have acquisition times which are comparable to the easy lock arma has. The tank might have a hard lock-type solution in direct fire situations. The attack helicopter will probably not.

So, what does it show us?

• In most cases, unguided munitions are dependent on the sensor capabilities of the firing platform.
  
• LOAL is a thing in real life, and a data links make it much more deadly and way more effective. However, a LOAL capability depending on operation with a fly-to point / not assisted by a data link is very likely to be much too advanced to implement in Arma's style of play because of interface needs. It's probably also very likely to be perceived as 'unfair' in many cases.
  
• Data links are very useful in enhancing SA, but it might be an idea to be able to turn them off in the difficulty settings. The B-scope operation should be dependent on this setting.
  
• Sensors define a platform's capabilities to execute attacks using guided weapons if no data link is present
  

My solution would be to introduce different sensor and target selection overviews for vehicle types or specific vehicles, and to make it possible to disable easy lock in the difficulty settings. use hard lock for direct fire and sensor overview with a slewing cursor on a sensor display for indirect and long range fire. The targeting display should be mode dependent. The RWR/Threat indicator could also be made more country/side specific this way. (Reverting into the old B-scope display with the h symbol in easy mode difficulty selection as well)

For more realism, a sensor mode of some kind should be introduced for every applicable seat, with the option of having its the next/previous target automatically select targets when using more relaxed difficulty settings, as well as having some scripting capabilities to add or remove capabilities or some kind of dll interface which would make it possible to customize the targeting abilities of vehicles to a higher degree without affecting performance too much.

I think the suggestion of adding a RCS value is nice to aid radar type target acquisition, as it adds a variable detection range that is dependent on factors which balance the game a lot if a real radar would be implemented and the functioning of sensors would be made mode dependent. For IR and NVG, a contrast algorithm contrast could be used for minimum lock threshold.

Besides this, weapon guidance need to be changed a bit. Certain weapons lack the ability to make use of the very same data sharing which is available to the player, while they need that ability in order to function as they should. There's no non-terminal phase weapon guidance to speak of. Currently all guided weapons are terminally guided autonomously from the moment they leave the firing platform.

Long range AA missiles are a very, very poignant example here. The LR AAMs should have the ability to use available tracking data sent by the firing platform until terminal guidance is possible. I think this is exactly why the LRAAMs don't work.

I have the strong impression that the game was released with a crucial redesign left out because it didn't make it, while leaving in some systems which more or less still depended on them. I still wonder what the forward scanning display in the ghosthawk was meant to do. It seems that the data input for that display was never finished?

Basically, if you have the equivalent of a maverick in this game, you should also have the equivalent of a tor :) (they have about the same lethal range, at least in DCS)

Instant IFF

The instant IFF should be something that we can turn off in the difficulty settings so it becomes more like a helper, just like IRL.

If data-links are off, then IFF should take a couple of seconds.

If data-links are on, then it should depend on the status of the target as communicated over the data link. So if someone else has had it locked and ID'ed and it hasn't left the sensor range of any other vehicle of that side's forces, it is known to all of them. Also, IFF should be some kind of ability only certain types of vehicle can perform.

Summary

• Sensors need to be defined more narrowly/clearly for each vehicle in order to define the capabilities of a platform. The usage of these sensors for target acquisition should also be more time intensive in order to prevent missile spam. In lieu of this, We need the ability to disable easy lock, but not without getting a targeting cursor based option to replace it, perhaps with a snap function which would largely emulate easy lock on lower difficulty settings. The B-scope (overhead radar display) could be replaced with weapon specific targeting displays.
  
• We need to have the ability to enable or disable data linking between vehicles.
  
• We need to change the IFF system to a more sensor and data link minded mode of operations.
  

The reason this should be in the game, and not in a mod or mission file? Because there needs to be a bridge between the Battlefield style KotH crowd and the rest. Arma sucks at the way it deals with mods and this is just not something which should be part of a mission file in my mind. it would slow things down to a crawl because the scripts are so much slower than real code. Only a very small minority plays with mods. PW6 is not the solution and neither is the workshop integration, although that's already a step in the right direction.

Edited November 4, 2014 by Onno

[Kerel1 10]

Thanks for the constructive replies guys! Think you both gave very valid insight and ideas! Just to keep things organized and clear for everybody reading this stuff (as most people will probably not read the entire posts here given their lengths).

The current issues and ideas resolve around the following topics:

-Vehicle active sensors sensors (Radar only ingame)

-Vehicle passive sensors sensors (RWR)

-IFF (Sensors classing targets as friendly or enemy)

-Data linking (multiple units sharing sensor information and revealing targets for each other)

-LOAL (Lock on after launch, currently not ingame)

Active sensors: Radar

See opening post.

Passive sensors: RWR (Radar Warning Receiver and LWR (Laser Warning Receiver).

We currently have only the RWR ingame and only as part of a radar. In real life alot of ground and air vehicles that do are not equipped with a radar do have RWR and LWR. It would be great to have these systems ingame seperated from radar. In real life some MBT's equipped with these systems automatically turn their turrets into the incoming weapon in order to make it hit its thick frontal armor. In addition they can trigger the vehicles smoke dispensers, reducing laser and infrared guided weapons accuracy.

IFF:

Usual radar IFF systems in real life only tell if a target is friendly or not. They are not able to tell if a vehicle is enemy or empty, although this can be checked by noting if the vehicle is moving or by visual confirmation.

Currently the ingame radar IFF system knows the target identity at all times, making AI deploy weapons almost immediatly after target acquisition. The players PPI radar screen though hides this information for a short while, though this seeming lack of information can be bypassed by the easy lock system (pressing tab) as this will only lock enemy manned vehicles.

Data linking and LOAL:

See post above by Onno.

Summary:

-Radar should be customizable for vehicles, or at least have more presets than the current 4 (radarType = [0,1,2,4];) for detection ranges with air and ground detection having seperate values. Even a simple preset which is identical to the Vehicle radar (radarType = 2; ) but with the same range as the A/G radar of radarType 4 has would be great. (You could name it radarType 3, as it seems to be missing anyway ;) )

Easy lock should be removed ASAP (or at least we must be able to turn it off in the difficulty settings). Every contact should then be selected manually, either by looking at it and selecting it or via the target menu.

-Seperate RWR from radar. (LWR would be a nice extra addition as well). Could simply use the current 360 overview template but only show the direction where the radar or laser is coming from.

-Radar IFF should NOT be instantaneous and will only happen when a contact is locked (IFF information will be remembered though as long as the target remains on the radar, even after locking another target).

-Data linking could make an exception for the IFF. If two vehicles on one side spot a target, and one has IFF'ed it, the other vehicle could receive this information and not need further IFF'ing.

-LOAL, while a real thing in modern combat, would probably be to much for Arma at this point, it would need alot of complex work and would be very complicated ingame.

Everybody who has ideas on how to improve or add to this issue feel free to share any constructive ideas! Hope we can think of something BIS is capable of putting ingame without much trouble :).

PS. Could a mod please rename this topic to: Current radar system and simple fix ideas. (Was a bit frustrated while making the first post, which is not the best time for a good productive thread title ;) )

Edited November 6, 2014 by Kerel1

[Onno 22]

That pretty much sums it up. I do get the idea that you're seeing some of these things as new game features while I had them up as thing which are already in the game in some indirect or implicit manner, but in a for which is not controllable in the difficulty settings.

Edited November 7, 2014 by Onno