Manual Artillery Aiming

[noubernou 77]

I know it adds a bit of difficulty in using it, but under heavy cordinated multiplayer situations the current system is really hard to use effectivly.

I would suggest instead of using a clock like rotation and distance use a more traditional grid/matrix based system with you at 0,0 and extrapolating out from there where your aim point is by the virtual grid that your mouse is at.

[Apocal 10]

So instead of controlling deflection and elevation, you want to be able to control the point of impact? I personally think it's easy enough as is, I'm able to put rounds on a 6 digit within 30 seconds and a 4 digit within 10-15 seconds.

EDIT: Let me step back a bit though and ask what you had problems with?

Edited August 15, 2009 by Apocal

[shwat 10]

Yeah, it's pretty simple to use as-is. I don't see why it should be oversimplified.

[noubernou 77]

Its more so that the mouse control feels awkward to me, I mean I def have a handle on it, its just a really inaccurate way to aim it seems, especially to do round dispersion or anything more complex

---------- Post added at 12:38 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:29 AM ----------

So instead of controlling deflection and elevation, you want to be able to control the point of impact? I personally think it's easy enough as is, I'm able to put rounds on a 6 digit within 30 seconds and a 4 digit within 10-15 seconds.

EDIT: Let me step back a bit though and ask what you had problems with?

yea, sorry, i misread your post too...

I like the elevation and deflection thats fine, I just wish there was a better way of moving the aiming point around less awkwardly.

I am not for putting a map point down and it going, I just wish there was like maybe accurate keyboard controls for example to move the aimpoints center fall point mil by mil.

[.kju 3243]

you can mod it now with the FSM editor :)

[noubernou 77]

you can mod it now with the FSM editor :)

FSM Editor?

---------- Post added at 02:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:50 AM ----------

I do not see how a FSM would help with this...

[.kju 3243]

The ARTY module is written in FSM.

You can modify it yourself now.

Add keyboard use in addition to mouse control.

[Apocal 10]

The ARTY module is written in FSM.

You can modify it yourself now.

Add keyboard use in addition to mouse control.

He is requesting some kind of fine control in addition to the current coarse control. Anyone who used Jones' real artillery back in ArmA wanted the same after the pain of trying to get a 50m adjustment dialled in on a target 11km away.

[frederf 0]

I know it adds a bit of difficulty in using it, but under heavy cordinated multiplayer situations the current system is really hard to use effectivly.

I would suggest instead of using a clock like rotation and distance use a more traditional grid/matrix based system with you at 0,0 and extrapolating out from there where your aim point is by the virtual grid that your mouse is at.

How is that traditional? Real artillery takes the gun coordinates and target coordinates into a fire direction computer (FDC) and spits out.... elevation and azimuth. You then fire based on those el/az numbers.

[noubernou 77]

He is requesting some kind of fine control in addition to the current coarse control. Anyone who used Jones' real artillery back in ArmA wanted the same after the pain of trying to get a 50m adjustment dialled in on a target 11km away.

Exactly. I am not saying take out the elevation and azimuth at all, just give us a better way of dialing them in.

Also, Frederf, is there a FDC in ArmA 2 by default? No. If there was and we could get the numbers out of that via the person running the mortar team and dial them in somehow it would be awesome, but instead we have an awkward mouse control system that leaves little room for minute adjustments. Calling in mortar fire danger close is almost a guaranteed suicide for the person calling it in.

[Apocal 10]

Playing around with it a bit, the sight view gives some degree of fine control. Not as much as you're probably looking for though.

[frederf 0]

Exactly. I am not saying take out the elevation and azimuth at all, just give us a better way of dialing them in.

Also, Frederf, is there a FDC in ArmA 2 by default? No. If there was and we could get the numbers out of that via the person running the mortar team and dial them in somehow it would be awesome, but instead we have an awkward mouse control system that leaves little room for minute adjustments. Calling in mortar fire danger close is almost a guaranteed suicide for the person calling it in.

I've heard of people using a joystick for aiming so they can control the gun even when the mouse is disposed on the map screen. I would believe this makes for MUCH better control.

I'm not saying the ArmA2 default method is good but what you seem to be suggesting is a map-click artillery which is even easier and that's bad.

As for "danger close artillery being suicide to the FO" 1. There's a reason they call it danger close and 2. I can put 90% of first rounds from the M252 inside of a 5m radius. If you pay attention to elevation change, do some simply math, and double check before firing using the big map you can get safe and accurate rounds flying down range in 30 seconds from the call.

If you're complaining that the default ArmA2 artillery aiming is too easy, unrealistic, and awkward... yes I agree.

If you're complaining that the default ArmA2 artillery aiming is too difficulty and you can't hit what you want to hit... then you suck.

[noubernou 77]

Actually just ran a 2 hour training course with my section (I am in the 7th Cav tactical realism unit, performing as MOS 11C) and we had a dedicated person run as FDC (Fire Direction Center, not computer) and mark targets on the map, aiming was much quicker and more accurate and a lot less hectic with them running the coms back up the chain of command to the commanders calling in fire.

I can aim, its fine, its just making sure when you are working in conjunction with 2 or 3 other people also on the tubes that your dispersion of fire is not so huge. Someones eyes might see 058067 slightly different than someone else and thats where the danger comes in to the FO.

Of course the FO or whoever is requesting a fire mission needs to also make sure to describe where they want or DO NOT WANT rounds close to, like a tree line, road, or building as well as the cords because 100x100 meters is still a huge area to hit.

So yea, my complaint is about the awkwardness of moving azimuth and elevation, not with actually aiming, its far easier than anything in real life. I tried Jones mortar script and I do not even know where to start with that. :P

[frederf 0]

I don't really consider map markers "realism." We use 8-figure grid coordinates which is 10x10m. The sheaf should be bigger than a single explosion too. I'm really not a fan of the default system.

[noubernou 77]

yea if i knew how to use Jones script it seems like it could be really accurate, but I do not even know where to even start with that. :/

---------- Post added at 03:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:10 AM ----------

sorry for all the evens, its very late here...

[NoRailgunner 0]

Aiming and firing in Arma2 should be with a computer-based fire control system (or sth. similar-simulated) like its in use for real artillery. At least one monitor where the gunner/section chief can adjust the settings. Something like CoC UA and for the FOs something small+handy like the Sanla (FDF Mod).

Btw. What about the missing features/scripts for Artillery-Radar warfare building? Bit senseless to place them without any use - only for eyecandy.

[Apocal 10]

I don't really consider map markers "realism." We use 8-figure grid coordinates which is 10x10m. The sheaf should be bigger than a single explosion too. I'm really not a fan of the default system.

The BCS I worked with actually lays out it's own "map markers", in fact the same markers are already in ArmA2; the red "+" symbol. Although it was a monochrome display with nothing but grid refs, when a mission was being processed it'd go from one + marker to however many active guns we had, in whatever sheaf we were shooting, generally a 100m or 200m circle. You'd verify the sheaf and dispersion was correct, then send the data to the gun line.

Standard call-for-fire was a six digit grid ref, if you wanted to hit a point target it was fire and adjust. We used ten digit grids for registration, but that wasn't the kind of thing you'd do at the level of combat ArmA focuses on.

A player acting as FDC marking up the map with aimpoints for his pieces to aim at isn't terribly far off from reality. An FO marking the map on the other hand... yeah that's somewhat arcade.

SIDENOTE: WHY THE HELL DO PEOPLE ALWAYS USE THAT BIG-ASS CIRCLE X MARKER TO CALL FOR FIRE?! DO THEY REALIZE ITS HARDER TO AIM WHEN IT'S A HUGE-ASS MARKER INSTEAD OF A DISCRETE DOT OR PLUS SYMBOL?

[Mike84 1]

Around 9 months ago I made a WGL-like mortar dialog which worked ok, but the only mortar available in arma1 (the lw16a5 or something) was totally unworkable. After that fiasco I also made a grid2pos function which converted 6,8 and 10 grid coordinates to a 2d pos array, and was used in beita's arty dialog for ace.

So if people are interested in a combination of both, I could try to make something like that again, but I'd need some help on the realism side since I've never been around mortars in the army.

[Apocal 10]

So if people are interested in a combination of both, I could try to make something like that again, but I'd need some help on the realism side since I've never been around mortars in the army.

People are interested. The realism side you covered rather well, adjustments are made by mils, deflection and elevation.

[sleet01 10]

Would this be something best implemented as a dedicated FDC vehicle - I think the M106 has this capacity as well as being a mortar carrier - or some kind of hand-held computer?

By the way, I just popped in here looking for information on how to use the Arma2 fire plotter function, if there is one, from something like the M119.

[noubernou 77]

Would this be something best implemented as a dedicated FDC vehicle - I think the M106 has this capacity as well as being a mortar carrier - or some kind of hand-held computer?

By the way, I just popped in here looking for information on how to use the Arma2 fire plotter function, if there is one, from something like the M119.

For mortars: http://raceriv.com/arma2/M23.jpg

Will be in ACE2 at some point. We are working on an M224 system that pretty much replicates real life setup, aiming, and firing of mortars... :D Including laying aiming stakes, adjusting the sight unit, and adjusting the gun to level elevation, cross level, and deflection. :)

The plan is to go from there and do the full extent of the US mortar systems (redo the M252, and do the M120) and then move into field artillery pieces (redo the M119, do the M198, M777, and the M109A6 as well as, at least I really want to, the M110 8" SP howitzer).

Eventually we will introduce the XM32 MBC as well, but man I just love the M23's looks and 1980s functionality! :D