Level of details. Сameras (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series



Message


Filitch -> Level of details. Сameras (2/20/2018 2:52:50 PM)

Many aircraft for tactical reconnaissance carry cameras. IRL these cameras have a altitude and speed limit on which to shoot. In the database, these restrictions are not specified. So the aircraft can perform reconnaissance from an altitude of 5000-7000 m, whereas in reality it would have to descent to 1000 meters or even lower and become vulnerable to air defense or increase fuel consumption.

Question to the community and developers: whether such restrictions should to be added or their lack is an assumption, simplification of the game model?




Primarchx -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/20/2018 2:55:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Filitch

Many aircraft for tactical reconnaissance carry cameras. IRL these cameras have a altitude and speed limit on which to shoot. In the database, these restrictions are not specified. So the aircraft can perform reconnaissance from an altitude of 5000-7000 m, whereas in reality it would have to descent to 1000 meters or even lower and become vulnerable to air defense or increase fuel consumption.

Question to the community and developers: whether such restrictions should to be added or their lack is an assumption, simplification of the game model?


Are you sure? I've found more acuity at low altitudes with optical sensors than at high, depending on the type.




Filitch -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/20/2018 3:01:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Primarchx

Are you sure? I've found more acuity at low altitudes with optical sensors than at high, depending on the type.

Ok. May be I mistake. I base on only database data.




Sensei.Tokugawa -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/20/2018 3:13:14 PM)

I had such an experience while playing "Good Morning Malvinas" a few days ago - I sent a Sea Harrier with EO equipment on a recon mission over Goose Green and form about 5000 m it couldn't see a thing so I manually ordered that to descend lower. Immediately it spotted and identified a lot of details, some of them having been AAA fire which downed that in a matter of seconds. Howevere, that was also a case of breakng the thick cloud layer barrier so I am not sure if that fully qualifies as an argument here.




apache85 -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/20/2018 5:00:46 PM)

Altitude definitely is taken into account, as for speed I think it’s not directly evaluated but longer ‘time over target’ often results in a more accurate contact ID.




Filitch -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/20/2018 7:07:37 PM)

Colleagues, I just test generic visual camera and have to say that I was wrong. Cameras at altitude 7000 m didn't detect armored vehicles , but at altitude 1000m detect them at distance up to 2,4 nm.
My apologies to the developers.




DrRansom -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/20/2018 9:20:19 PM)

I'd be interested in a "Mobile Missile Launcher" or "Strategic Re-Locatable Target" expansion pack which expands the fidelity of reconnaissance and ground search modeling. It'd be nice for reconnaissance pods to have much better capture of assets along a path, but come with the cost that you only get the results some time after the aircraft has landed. This can then change for aircraft with high-resolution datalinks and modern targeting pods.

As of right now, camera pods work better than eyeballs but are modeled very generally.




thewood1 -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/20/2018 11:03:11 PM)

You can already set up delay in information through changing sides I have played around with quite a bit and it works really well.




BDukes -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/21/2018 12:08:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

You can already set up delay in information through changing sides I have played around with quite a bit and it works really well.


Could you please post file? Would like to see how you do this.

Thank you





thewood1 -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/21/2018 12:35:27 AM)

I'll see if I can find it. I did back when lua was first introduced. Oh wait...I don't want to be accused of stalking you. I'll find it and if anyone else wants it PM me.

edit: Thinking about this...I can't believe you have the stones to ask me for something. After the posts you dropped, posting a private message in the public, and supposedly siccing your ISP on me, etc., you can come in and just casually ask for something? I would normally have sent this as a PM. But since you have a tendency to post private messages, I figured I'd save you some effort and just cut the middle process right out.




stilesw -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/21/2018 1:31:00 AM)

"Keeping her face in a jar by the door..."

[image]local://upfiles/49187/C17A8DAE9A384CF390E573A24D08F897.jpg[/image]




thewood1 -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/21/2018 1:55:08 AM)

I wish they were snarky. At least there might be some entertainment value.




HalfLifeExpert -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/21/2018 2:16:06 AM)

There is also on thing in CMANO about some recon cameras. The game system does sometimes kind of cheat with them, albeit for very understandable reasons.

As far as I can tell, if something is picked up, it is immediately made available to the player. However, several systems, such as the famous U-2 for much of it's service life, actually require the aircraft to get back to base and get the film developed and THEN manually get the photos to the decision makers, by then the photos could be outdated.

Of course there are good gameplay reasons why this is not the case, but It could be interesting to implement as an optional realism option down the line...




thewood1 -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/21/2018 3:21:46 AM)

That is exactly what I am talking about. Here is an old scenario I was using to test this out. So it doesn't go all the way.

An RF-101 on neutral side recon flies over a hostile red side radar site. The currently neutral blue side sees nothing. I created an event that when the Voodoo gets to the airbase, it changes posture to friendly to blue. Blue now can see what the 101 saw.

I never had the 101 land, but could have. I could have changed the 101's base to the blue base and then ordered it to RTB. There are all kinds of things you can do with this process, including running timers on a RTB to not change sides or postures until a designated delay after landing.

The scenario is a few years old and has an old db, but seems to still run.




Randomizer -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/21/2018 3:35:36 AM)

Nobody has yet factored in cloud cover. If your camera suite is operating in visible light they will be useless if you're above the lowest cloud layer.

-C




thewood1 -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/21/2018 10:40:30 AM)

It was kind of mentioned above...sic

"Howevere, that was also a case of breakng the thick cloud layer barrier so I am not sure if that fully qualifies as an argument here."




rmunie0613 -> RE: Level of details. Сameras (2/21/2018 2:42:46 PM)

Yes cloud cover is definitely factored in the game... run the same recon mission cloudy, then clear, and there is a tremendous difference what your cameras will see...satellites I at first thought were rather poor in comparison to real life, but then the weather changed and on their 3rd pass they were picking up great detail.




DrRansom -> RE: Level of details. Ñameras (2/22/2018 12:09:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HalfLifeExpert
As far as I can tell, if something is picked up, it is immediately made available to the player. However, several systems, such as the famous U-2 for much of it's service life, actually require the aircraft to get back to base and get the film developed and THEN manually get the photos to the decision makers, by then the photos could be outdated.

Of course there are good gameplay reasons why this is not the case, but It could be interesting to implement as an optional realism option down the line...


That's kind of my desire too. I'd like to see reconnaissance get a realism overhaul in tandem with better modeling of ground vehicles in clutter and vehicle movement patterns, a fancy phrase for roads. Certain systems, like high-speed side-view cameras, can give a very detailed description of the target area, but only after some lag. Also, IR systems working better at night and, if one wants to be most accurate, IR systems working best on units that have moved recently.

I understand that LUA can accommodate this, but like shoot-and-scoot tactics, it'd be nice for this to be regularized in game mechanics.





thewood1 -> RE: Level of details. Ñameras (2/22/2018 12:55:58 AM)

As far as lua goes, this is one of the simpler ones that can be incorporated into a scenario by a designer. I hope it goes down low on the priority list.




thewood1 -> RE: Level of details. Ñameras (2/22/2018 1:03:29 AM)

btw, that realistic recon feature would only be one put in by a designer, whether lua or not. So if that type of feature is important, put it in scenarios you build or only play scenarios that use it. If it important enough to the broader audience, it will start showing up in community and DLC scenarios.

One pther thing to point out is the isolated comms function being available to handle a lot of what I did in my sandbox scenario. I think it might end up being a more elegant approach.




thewood1 -> RE: Level of details. Ñameras (2/22/2018 3:33:10 AM)

I used the outofcomms function in an event...its about as simple as you can get. In fact I just copied and pasted it from the warfaresims description.

ScenEdit_SetUnit({Name='Recon #1', OutOfComms='False'}) embedded in an event action that executes on the recon plane entering an area.

It actually ends up very neat. The outofcomms wasn't available when I was playing with this before. It is just a very clean solution.

The 101 takes off, goes off line halfway to the recon target. Finds the target, but doesn't communicate it to the base. It then heads home and when it hits the airport, comms comes back on and now the recon target is part of the contact database for blue. And the contact has aged just as if it was in the contact network the whole time. So there can be uncertainty zones on mobile units.

This is a fairly simple example. But can set up to coordinate with a preset recon mission. As the mission activates, set outofcomms. As the plane lands, set a timer running that turns on comms on and at the end of the timer, the contacts show up. You might have to fudge with the timer because I am not sure how outofcomms works with landed planes.

The other cool thing is that if you set up your messages the right way, you can see that the recon flight finds something, you just don't know where until it gets back. This might represent the pilot breaking emcom to radio a rough contact report. As a commander, that means you'll be sitting on the edge of your seat waiting for that full contact report.

btw, outofcomms is under-appreciated and under-utilized. Its a game changer in how this simulation can operate. But it can be very frustrating to have units dropping out of the network. Its one of those things where players better know what they are asking for.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.0234375