Mission Planner - Being Prepared or Cheating?

I recently moved from doing training to standalone missions in the Su-25T, and this means I have access to the mission planner for the first time. This makes it possible to access more information about the mission before flying it, including the location of the targets.

From the conversations I've seen on this forum, I surmised that in real life, the pilot programs the flight plan himself. Since the flight plan would be based on information that the pilot, i.e. me, would know, it would be right for me to prep by taking a look at the mission planner for information like the targets' location. I didn't stop to consider whether the point of these missions was visually acquiring targets with only vague information on where the target would be (eg at waypoint 3).

This makes a big difference in some missions. One example is "guns and rockets practice", where the subtitle directs the pilot to the targets by providing only the waypoint number, meaning the pilot might have to scan all the shores of the lake to find the targets, possibly having to do multiple passes just to locate them. However, the mission planner

Can anyone speak to whether the pilot is intended to take the targets' locations from the mission planner, or just look for them within a broader area? In real life, when the pilot is forming his flight plan, would the pilot usually be given precise target locations (eg coordinates or imagery), or information that suggests a broader area?

IRL, CAS means you'll take-off without knowing the exact location of your targets and if there will be any targets at all. In DCS mission planner you see every enemy's waypoints and exact vehicle type... I don't know why DCS is like that...

IRL, CAS means you'll take-off without knowing the exact location of your targets and if there will be any targets at all. In DCS mission planner you see every enemy's waypoints and exact vehicle type... I don't know why DCS is like that...

Ah ok, so you'd already be in the air when you're assigned the target. When you are given a target, is it usually communicated in a fairly precise way (eg coordinates or designation) or do you have to visually search an area to locate them?

Hi guys.

This is an option that can be set in the mission editor. If the mission designer doesn't want players to be able to see ground units in the mission planner, they simply check the "hidden on map" box beneath the units' names.

Hi guys.

 

This is an option that can be set in the mission editor. If the mission designer doesn't want players to be able to see ground units in the mission planner, they simply check the "hidden on map" box beneath the units' names.

Awesome, so whether the player can see the targets is a mission creator's choice, so when we can see our targets we can presume we're supposed to. Thank you, that's a definitive answer that gives info I was unaware of, +rep incoming!

DCS doesn't have a setting between exact and completely hidden. I guess a smart mission maker could have the vehicles drive a short distance after start as well as hide/delete some units so the numbers are approximate. The extra work is probably why no one has done it. This way the precise ME-MP data would be a clue without being exact.

It would be nice if DCS added map markers like a NATO platoon of enemy tanks with a settable range dashed ring to indicate approximate locations.

CAS can be pre-planned to the extent it's "next Thursday at 16:01:30, bomb this bridge." This may fulfill the requirement for coordination with ground forces. Contemporaneous target assignment or communications isn't a strict requirement.

The precision of targeting data might be a 10-digit BOC target grid with a JDAM through clouds that the pilot never sees. It also might be a non-JTAC private shouting into a radio "I hear enemy artillery over the eastern ridge line." The range is vast with strong efforts for least workload, most accurate data.

DCS doesn't have a setting between exact and completely hidden. I guess a smart mission maker could have the vehicles drive a short distance after start as well as hide/delete some units so the numbers are approximate. The extra work is probably why no one has done it. This way the precise ME-MP data would be a clue without being exact.

 

It would be nice if DCS added map markers like a NATO platoon of enemy tanks with a settable range dashed ring to indicate approximate locations.

 

CAS can be pre-planned to the extent it's "next Thursday at 16:01:30, bomb this bridge." This may fulfill the requirement for coordination with ground forces. Contemporaneous target assignment or communications isn't a strict requirement.

 

The precision of targeting data might be a 10-digit BOC target grid with a JDAM through clouds that the pilot never sees. It also might be a non-JTAC private shouting into a radio "I hear enemy artillery over the eastern ridge line." The range is vast with strong efforts for least workload, most accurate data.

I understand. Since DCS goes all-or-nothing for info, I guess people might think it was disingenuous if the mission designer gave partial information? Although I suppose they could indicate they have done so in the mission text...

When you get less than precise info for a CAS hit, can you go back to the requesting unit and ask for supplementary information? To take your example, can you (or an operator on your behalf) get back to the requesting unit and say "I don't see your target. Do they sound like they're right behind that ridgeline, or further to the East?"

I personally view the F10 map and the mission planner as kind of acknowledgement that there is no one really running C3I; if I haven't been actively restricted from seeing units on the map (again, an option the mission designer can enforce in the editor for in-game as well as the planner) I consider it perfectly reasonable to use the tools available to build situational awareness.

A great compromise is the "Fog of War" view setting. This will only show enemy units that have been detected by friendly RADARS/ground forces. Gives you the information you'd get if you were actually on the radio with command elements.

IRL, CAS means you'll take-off without knowing the exact location of your targets and if there will be any targets at all. In DCS mission planner you see every enemy's waypoints and exact vehicle type... I don't know why DCS is like that...

First of all, there are different types of CAS and if it is a planned mission, where your job is to support a ground assault with CAS you likely get a lot of Intel about enemy situation and location.

Though it often seems like the mission planner reveals all the threats, it does not necessarily do so. In some missions you may see the primary target locations, but no MANPAD, AAA or other surprises, as in real life.

If the mission is set to anything else than "All" in the F10 map options in the Editor AND your settings, you may not even see anything on the F10 map, and need to memorize from the briefing/mission planner.

As well, there are moving convoys and enemy forces depending on the mission type, and that means they are somewhere else after a while. ;)

I personally view the F10 map and the mission planner as kind of acknowledgement that there is no one really running C3I; if I haven't been actively restricted from seeing units on the map (again, an option the mission designer can enforce in the editor for in-game as well as the planner) I consider it perfectly reasonable to use the tools available to build situational awareness.

 

A great compromise is the "Fog of War" view setting. This will only show enemy units that have been detected by friendly RADARS/ground forces. Gives you the information you'd get if you were actually on the radio with command elements.

First of all, there are different types of CAS and if it is a planned mission, where your job is to support a ground assault with CAS you likely get a lot of Intel about enemy situation and location.

 

Though it often seems like the mission planner reveals all the threats, it does not necessarily do so. In some missions you may see the primary target locations, but no MANPAD, AAA or other surprises, as in real life.

If the mission is set to anything else than "All" in the F10 map options in the Editor AND your settings, you may not even see anything on the F10 map, and need to memorize from the briefing/mission planner.

 

As well, there are moving convoys and enemy forces depending on the mission type, and that means they are somewhere else after a while. ;)

Thanks feefifofum, I forgot the "Fog of War" setting was even there! It does make sense to say friendlies need to gather the intelligence before they can pass it on.

Thanks to you too shagrat, it's good to know that there might be unknown threats. The practice missions throw so little fire at the pilot that I hadn't even thought about whether there might be hostiles looking to attack me or disrupt my mission. I clearly need to think about these missions from more of a real life perspective if I'm going to get the most out of them.

When you are given a target, is it usually communicated in a fairly precise way (eg coordinates or designation) or do you have to visually search an area to locate them?

In the Su-25 (not the Su-25T) campaign, I was given bullseye coordinates. In the Su-25T campaign (cool campaign BTW), I don't remember being assigned targets while airborne, you'll just see their location and waypoints in the mission planner.

I haven't flown the A-10C in combat yet, but I suspect you can receive target coordinates on data-link and have it shown in your MFD map and HUD, but I guess you'll still have to do some search around it with the pod or visually...

It would be nice if DCS added map markers like a NATO platoon of enemy tanks with a settable range dashed ring to indicate approximate locations.

Exactly!

CAS can be pre-planned to the extent it's "next Thursday at 16:01:30, bomb this bridge." This may fulfill the requirement for coordination with ground forces. Contemporaneous target assignment or communications isn't a strict requirement.

But wouldn't that be Interdiction instead?

First of all, there are different types of CAS and if it is a planned mission, where your job is to support a ground assault with CAS you likely get a lot of Intel about enemy situation and location.

But not the enemies' waypoints complete with timings, speeds, altitude and enemies' loadouts!

Though it often seems like the mission planner reveals all the threats, it does not necessarily do so. In some missions you may see the primary target locations, but no MANPAD, AAA or other surprises, as in real life.

If the mission is set to anything else than "All" in the F10 map options in the Editor AND your settings, you may not even see anything on the F10 map, and need to memorize from the briefing/mission planner.

The cool thing about the F10 map is that you can disable the enemies' locations in DCS options, if you're more into the 'sim' style than 'game' style. But there's no option like that for the mission planner...

As well, there are moving convoys and enemy forces depending on the mission type, and that means they are somewhere else after a while. ;)

Unless you can see their waypoints in the mission planner...

Problem with FoW is that reveal is reveal at 100% precision. A false but approximate pre-flight narrative is the best I can think of. If the user wants to be offended that the planning intel wasn't 100% it can't be helped. The more missions use approx intel the sooner it becomes normal. Surely enemy forces can move since the brief.

Yes, back and forth talk on developing the situation is normal.

Exactly!

 

 

 

But wouldn't that be Interdiction instead?

Not necessarily. There is no time limit to close coordination with ground troops. Say a company was going to assault a place at exactly 10:00:00 tomorrow and didn't want the vehicles to escape out the back as the company attacked the front.

A-10 gets tasked with a TOT CAS bombing of the only escape route well before hand and does it exactly on time in sync with the ground operation. It's CAS because it requires coordination with ground forces.

Problem with FoW is that reveal is reveal at 100% precision. A false but approximate pre-flight narrative is the best I can think of. If the user wants to be offended that the planning intel wasn't 100% it can't be helped. The more missions use approx intel the sooner it becomes normal. Surely enemy forces can move since the brief.

 

Yes, back and forth talk on developing the situation is normal.

+1

And even if your side knows the position of every enemy, you don't have a map that simply appears in front of you out of nowhere and shows you them. You're informed by calls, or, depending on your aircraft, by datalink on your MFD. No need for the F10 fog of war (assuming you want to play in sim mode, of course).

But not the enemies' waypoints complete with timings, speeds, altitude and enemies' loadouts!

 

 

 

The cool thing about the F10 map is that you can disable the enemies' locations in DCS options, if you're more into the 'sim' style than 'game' style. But there's no option like that for the mission planner...

 

 

 

Unless you can see their waypoints in the mission planner...

You can make any object in the Mission Editor invisible on the map. ("Hidden on Map")

The Object list has the complete overview.

Hidden objects won't appear on the Mission planner, the F10 Map, even in the mission editor you have to "cheat" your way through the Object list and unhide them.

It is something the Mission Designer needs to address!

For Single player, your settings can "use these settings" in all missions. That may override some preset things from the mission, depending on how much the Mission Designer locked it down or didn't.

In the Su-25 (not the Su-25T) campaign, I was given bullseye coordinates. In the Su-25T campaign (cool campaign BTW), I don't remember being assigned targets while airborne, you'll just see their location and waypoints in the mission planner.

 

I haven't flown the A-10C in combat yet, but I suspect you can receive target coordinates on data-link and have it shown in your MFD map and HUD, but I guess you'll still have to do some search around it with the pod or visually...

Great, so I do know the intel resources will be available through the campaign, that answers the practical side of the question.

Great to be able to read the back and forth on the accuracy of mission target information on the map. I'd be fine with shaded search areas, if and when the LOD issues are fixed by 2.5. As things stand in 1.5 I find it necessary to have precise coordinates so I know that I am searching the right spot, even if I don't see anything.

This is about the time where randomisation makes an entry to a player in the ME. Start putting a 50/50 in the conditions and enjoy it all the more.

It is something the Mission Designer needs to address!

Why not make it 'enemy hidden by default' instead of 'enemy visible by default' and have the mission maker intentionally turn them visible only if he wants it? I say this because even in the A-10C campaign and in all other ED campaigns I've seen so far, enemies are visible with their waypoints, etc. in the mission planner...

Why not make it 'enemy hidden by default' instead of 'enemy visible by default' and have the mission maker intentionally turn them visible only if he wants it? I say this because even in the A-10C campaign and in all other ED campaigns I've seen so far, enemies are visible with their waypoints, etc. in the mission planner...

You obviously never built a mission, did you?

You simply set the F10 option to anything but "All".

No, I never did... It simply strikes me as odd that the campaigns for the 'study sim' modules show you that kind of info on the mission planner...

Well, in the end, if you would set the "Study Sim", to arcade mode it will be even more unrealistic.

In most of the A-10C Campaign mission I flew there was at least some nasty stuff, that didn't show in briefing and Mission planner.

If you do not check the "use in all missions" box in your individual settings, it should be as the mission builder had planned.

Though there are some missions that show everything, which does not mean it is easy.

Many operations had pretty good Intel about enemy forces, location etc. and still where horribly daunting. :)

This is about the time where randomisation makes an entry to a player in the ME. Start putting a 50/50 in the conditions and enjoy it all the more.

It's not equivalent. 10 tanks at 50/50 odds means:

1 tank 1%

2 tank 4%

3 tank 12%

4 tank 21%

5 tank 25%

6-10 decreasing same symmetrically

And you see every unit on the MP regardless of presence condition. And presence condition only applies to groups, not units.

Conditional presence is a great feature but it's not the answer to have a middle ground between 100 and 0 intel.

Though there are some missions that show everything, which does not mean it is easy.

 

Many operations had pretty good Intel about enemy forces, location etc. and still where horribly daunting. :)

But...

... it's about realism, not difficulty...