Doesn't allow helos or harriers to do it either even though they should
be able to because we don't currently support ground spawns, which would
be needed to prevent those aircraft from using the runway. Even then, I
don't know if they can be forced to *land* vertically.
Fixes https://github.com/Khopa/dcs_liberation/issues/432
Repairing a damaged runway costs $100M and takes 4 turns (one day). The
AI will always repair runways if they can afford it. if a runway is
damaged again during the repair the process must begin again.
Runways are still operational despite what the UI says. Preventing the
player and AI from using damaged runways (except for with helicopters
and harriers) is next.
Generated units are added to this during mission generation so we can
map destroyed units back to the data that generated them. Currently only
implemented for aircraft as a proof of concept.
Breaks save compat, but we need to have this knowledge outside the UI so
we can know whether or not we can ferry aircraft to the airfield without
overflowing parking.
Breaks save compat because it adds new fields to `Flight` that have no
constant default. Removing all of our other save compat at the same
time.
Note that player flights with a divert point will have a nav point for
their actual landing point. This is because we place the divert point
last, and DCS won't let us have a land point anywhere but the final
waypoint. It would allow a LandingReFuAr point, but they're only
generated for player flights anyway so it doesn't really matter.
Fixes https://github.com/Khopa/dcs_liberation/issues/342
The AI isn't making use of these yet, but it's not smart enough to do so
anyway.
Would benefit from an icon to differentiate it on the map.
I'm stretching the definition of "control point" quite a bit. We might
want to put a class above `ControlPoint` for `AirSpawnLocation` to
represent types of spawn locations that can't be captured and don't have
ground objectives.
Fixes https://github.com/Khopa/dcs_liberation/issues/274
Defining a campaign using a miz file instead of as JSON has a number of
advantages:
* Much easier for players to mod their campaigns.
* Easier to see the big picture of how objective locations will be laid
out, since every control point can be seen at once.
* No need to associate objective locations to control points explicitly;
the campaign generator can claim objectives for control points based
on distance.
* Easier to create an IADS that performs well.
* Non-random campaigns are easier to make.
The downside is duplication across campaigns, and a less structured data
format for complex objects. The former is annoying if we have to fix a
bug that appears in a dozen campaigns. It's less an annoyance for
needing to start from scratch since the easiest way to create a campaign
will be to copy the "full" campaign for the given theater and prune it.
So far I've implemented control points, base defenses, and front lines.
Still need to add support for non-base defense TGOs.
This currently doesn't do anything for the `radials` property of the
`ControlPoint` because I'm not sure what those are.
Like with deleting waypoints, these will degrade the flight plan to the
2.1 behavior.
Ascend/descend points aren't in use any more, so I removed those.
Like with deleting waypoints, these will degrade the flight plan to the
2.1 behavior.
Ascend/descend points aren't in use any more, so I removed those.
In almost every case this leaves us with a flight plan we can't reason
about, so it gets degraded to `CustomFlightPlan`. The exception is when
deleting a target point when there are other target points remaining.
This probably gets people using this feature back to what they want
though, which is essentially the 2.1 behavior.
Fixes https://github.com/Khopa/dcs_liberation/issues/393
In almost every case this leaves us with a flight plan we can't reason
about, so it gets degraded to `CustomFlightPlan`. The exception is when
deleting a target point when there are other target points remaining.
This probably gets people using this feature back to what they want
though, which is essentially the 2.1 behavior.
Fixes https://github.com/Khopa/dcs_liberation/issues/393
This was also needed in other parts of the UI and is easier to implement
in the target class anyway.
Note that DEAD is now properly restricted to air defense targets.
Also added error boxes to the UI for when planning fails on an invalid
target.
Previously the only difference between these was the objective type:
TARCAP was for front lines and BARCAP was for everything else.
Now BARCAP is for friendly areas and TARCAP is for enemy areas. The
practical difference between the two is that a TARCAP package is like
the old front line CAP in that it will adjust its patrol time to match
the package if it can, and it will also arrive two minutes ahead of the
rest of the package to clear the area if needed.
This still leaves a bit to be desired, namely that selling aircraft
happens immediately but buying aircraft takes a turn. However, that's
how this behaved before, so this restores the 2.1 behavior. Worth
investigating further in the future.
(cherry picked from commit 75769df8e2e149504ff5abe2889e315fa95f4f57)
This still leaves a bit to be desired, namely that selling aircraft
happens immediately but buying aircraft takes a turn. However, that's
how this behaved before, so this restores the 2.1 behavior. Worth
investigating further in the future.
* Move the UI code out of the plugin logic.
* Add types where needed.
* Move into game package.
* Improve error handling.
* Simplify settings behavior.
* Don't load disabled plugins.
* Remove knowledge of non-base plugins from game generation.
Fixes https://github.com/Khopa/dcs_liberation/issues/311
