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
Fixes https://github.com/Khopa/dcs_liberation/issues/375
This also fixes a problem where we're spawning non-cold start planes in
an uncontrolled state. The ME won't let us do this, so we probably
shouldn't be doing that.
Fixes https://github.com/Khopa/dcs_liberation/issues/375
This also fixes a problem where we're spawning non-cold start planes in
an uncontrolled state. The ME won't let us do this, so we probably
shouldn't be doing that.
BAI is used for attacking ground vehicles as opposed to buildings like
strike does, and not air defenses like DEAD does. Unlike strike, BAI is
tolerant of moving targets.
Fixes https://github.com/Khopa/dcs_liberation/issues/216
Fighter sweeps arrive at the target ahead of the rest of the package
(currently a fixed 5 minute lead) to clear out enemy fighters and then
RTB.
Fixes https://github.com/Khopa/dcs_liberation/issues/348
Only one target waypoint created when flight is Viggen client flight.
M Waypoints not explicitly set anymore
(they don't need to be when waypoint has a TOT)
- B52, A-20, and Tu-22 will level bomb targets
- When there is an unit group as target, all the units are now engaged instead of only the first unit of the group
first pass briefing refactor
briefing fixes
briefing fixes
Stop briefing generate being called twice
Stop frontline advantage string being appended
when there are no units.
jinja template
always return enum instance in Strategy Selector
For some reason on DEFENSE, enum is appended to control point stance,
but on all other the enum.value is added instead.
I don't see any case where the value is used, but there are many
cases that the enum instance is evaluated against.
type issue
junja's not a thing
swap mapping with dict
jinja template
always return enum instance in Strategy Selector
For some reason on DEFENSE, enum is appended to control point stance,
but on all other the enum.value is added instead.
I don't see any case where the value is used, but there are many
cases that the enum instance is evaluated against.
type issue
Update build.yml
junja's not a thing
swap mapping with dict
Restore build job
Previously we were trying to make every potential flight plan look
just like a strike mission's flight plan. This led to a lot of special
case behavior in several places that was causing us to misplan TOTs.
I've reorganized this such that there's now an explicit `FlightPlan`
class, and any specialized behavior is handled by the subclasses.
I've also taken the opportunity to alter the behavior of CAS and
front-line CAP missions. These no longer involve the usual formation
waypoints. Instead the CAP will aim to be on station at the time that
the CAS mission reaches its ingress point, and leave at its egress
time. Both flights fly directly to the point with a start time
configured for a rendezvous.
It might be worth adding hold points back to every flight plan just to
ensure that non-formation flights don't end up with a very low speed
enroute to the target if they perform ground ops quicker than
expected.
We were only getting BARCAP results right in BARCAP packages. This
fixes calculations of TOTs and start times for BARCAPs in strike
packages.
The probably needs some refactoring. BARCAP is just the symptomatic
example at the moment, but the real problem is that different mission
profiles exist and we currently only handle one. Making profiles
explicit in mission planning will clean this up, will be needed for
other future mission types, and makes it easier for us to alter
behavior for waypoint and timing decisions based on the aircraft or
mission type.
