4.11 - AI debugging

[SPAD-1949]

Thanks God I'm not the only one who is annoyed by this. A fix of that issue would be awesome!

Yeah, thats been bugging me since I got into this sim.
And all over the versions, carburator fed enemy planes can dip and dive like a boss, dont shred to pieces in long high speed dives and climb like a pro.

Dont mess with a Hurry or a Mosca when you only have a lousy Bf109E

Dont try to follow your filghtleader in an attack

[IceFire]

I don't know if this has been asked but do the AI black out? If so how come I will be going in a dive to follow an AI.. we are not closing.. in fact sometimes he is pulling away... he turns .. I turn.. I black out... he zooms up .. gets on my 6 and nails me.. Do they black out?

I'm not sure but I think they do... I convinced one to pull a tighter turn then me and suddenly he nosed downwards for several seconds before recovering. That was yesterday and I noted it as really interesting behaviour. But I think an AI programmer from TD would need to confirm.

I think the most common thing that happens both against the AI and against other humans is we get placed in a situation where we think we're pulling the same turn but, in an effort to lead the target, we're actually pulling a tighter turn and more G forces. In a high speed dive a few fractions tighter than your opponent and you could be in full blackout while he could be starting to blackout but still in control. It's just a matter of physics at that point :)

[Bearcat]

AI doesn't target player specifically but I see how it could happen that they "all" go after you. There will be some changes in 4.12.

In 4.11 if you want your AI to be aggressive you have to issue "Attack" command first. So when you see enemy order "Attack" to wingmen and follow it with "CoverMe", that way Wingman will behave same as enemy AI. Another possible "problem" is how your Wingman assess the danger. That depend on skill and Rookies will let the enemy in your tail while Aces will be lot more aggressive. Anyway, some changes have been made for 4.12 already and in addition there will be more Orders options in Comms menu.



Excellent news.. I missed this before my last post.. FC.. those were some interesting tidbits about how to control the AI better.. are there any more things like that that might be helpful in getting us to better control the AI?

I will say one thing that really makes controlling the AI an entirely different ball game... that is VAC (http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=369) (Voice Activated Command). For those that are not familiar with it it is a program created by a community member named Shift_E and it has been out for quite a while.. I discovered it 6 years ago and after fiddling with it for a while I went and bought it. It takes a little work to get it set up right initially .. just a little.. and some people use it to control things like mirrors etc.. or more complicated sims like A-10 but for me where it really really shined was in controlling the AI. It is not free.. you can DL the trial but the cost is small.. I think I paid $15 at the time to unlock it. Now it is $18 but it is a great program and worth the $$. You can use it for other stuff as well. Unlike Voice Buddy which costs $40 last time I checked VAC is a decent price and the support can't be beat. My comms are the RCTRL .. and on my X-52 I have that button programmed on my throttle so that when I need to talk in TS I just press a button on my throttle.. for VAC I used RALT and if you take the time to program it right you can really enhance this whole simming thing as far as AI control is concerned.. and since there are more options coming it may even be more practical. Initially with my profile I had it set just for opening comms and then saying numbers to get where I wanted to be but eventually I put phrases to keystrokes.. For instance.. I had "two cover me" set as TAB+1+1 .. TAB+7 (anyone help me) could be activated by saying "help, I need help, I need help dammit,somebody get this guy off of me and NOW" .. Attack enemy fighters was "go get em boys, attack fighters and bandits! nail em". I tried to set it up so that it was almost like talking to a person but keeping it simple (by just using one phrase to open comms and 0-9) was just as doable and less work.. Unfortunately I lost all that after committing the cardinal sim of the PC simmer.. not backing up .. in a crash. I recently got my access key back (like I said the support can't be beat.. I bought VAC about 5 years ago and he still supports it.. ;)) and now I am trying to rebuild my profile so I can use it to command the AI but VAC does for AI commands what TIR does for viewing.. it makes it much more intuitive and you can concentrate more on flying than typing or pressing buttons..

[Lagarto]

Could you possibly stop AI from engaging enemy aircraft with dead engine?
Last night I flew with five AI Zeros a scramble mission against a bunch of SBD's escorted by some P-40s. On the first pass I hit a P-40 and its engine froze. It was no longer a threat, so I looked for another target. A moment later I noticed that the remaining five Zeros were all busy taking pot shots at the P-40 with dead engine! Since they're no good at flying low and slow, two of them crashed. Anyway, they were supposed to defend their own base, engage the bombers, and not to waste ammunition on a plane which was about to ditch. In such situations they're useless (I was the lowest rank, so I couldn't give them any orders). Of course I got no credit for that P-40 because some AI vulture managed to put a bullet or two into it just before it crashed.

[IceFire]

Could you possibly stop AI from engaging enemy aircraft with dead engine?
Last night I flew with five AI Zeros a scramble mission against a bunch of SBD's escorted by some P-40s. On the first pass I hit a P-40 and its engine froze. It was no longer a threat, so I looked for another target. A moment later I noticed that the remaining five Zeros were all busy taking pot shots at the P-40 with dead engine! Since they're no good at flying low and slow, two of them crashed. Anyway, they were supposed to defend their own base, engage the bombers, and not to waste ammunition on a plane which was about to ditch. In such situations they're useless (I was the lowest rank, so I couldn't give them any orders). Of course I got no credit for that P-40 because some AI vulture managed to put a bullet or two into it just before it crashed.
One could argue that this is working as designed... human players online certainly do this and it's not impossible to imagine pilots, caught up in the heat of battle, would also do the very same thing and make the same mistakes.

It is a bit odd as the AI will sometimes break off from a stricken plane but if it's under control, even without an engine, they will continue to attack it anyways.

[K_Freddie]

I don't know if this has been asked but do the AI black out? If so how come I will be going in a dive to follow an AI.. we are not closing.. in fact sometimes he is pulling away... he turns .. I turn.. I black out... he zooms up .. gets on my 6 and nails me.. Do they black out?

It seems like they do. I've had countless AI fly into the ground (flying over a flat plain) , so much so it starts to get annoying.
BUT - the problem seems that the AI can really do these incredible acrobatic feats and not black out, yet on some gentle turns, go making big holes in the ground.

It seems the AI has been programmed in reverse where I actually see the AI a/c literally rotating along the wing axis at high speed (which is a recipe for instant black out, besides losing a wing).. yet all is OK ? ;)
It is possible that the AI are not programmed with the same FM as the player. From watching tracks, they really do some impossible physics which can only be explained by punching in numbers into the AI's so called FM.

Maybe a good test would be to place a G-Meter output on the screen for each aircraft - this would shake the hornets nest... :)

[Lagarto]

One could argue that this is working as designed... human players online certainly do this and it's not impossible to imagine pilots, caught up in the heat of battle, would also do the very same thing and make the same mistakes.


You and your 'explanations'... :rolleyes: Try to think in terms of real, wartime pilots defending their base, tearing through a formation of bombers just to scatter them and make them jettison bombs (that's what they should and would do), not a bunch of online jockeys desperately trying to score points.

[K_Freddie]

Well, think of it this way.

A fighter escort will give an attacker very little chance of a second bomber attack, and this seemed the case over England as well as France/Germany.
The attacking fighter is now faced with another fighter, which he has to destroy in order to carry on. If he lets the escorting fighter get away, it'll be back the next day... so destroy it (and pilot) now, by any means possible. with attrition the fighters, or pilot abilty next time will be lower, then one would be free to hammer the bombers - This I would say is the reality.

[IceFire]

You and your 'explanations'... :rolleyes: Try to think in terms of real, wartime pilots defending their base, tearing through a formation of bombers just to scatter them and make them jettison bombs (that's what they should and would do), not a bunch of online jockeys desperately trying to score points.

Me and my explanations? Ohhhkay. Not sure where I've offended but, sorry? I'm just asking to think about this and offer an alternative perspective.

Humans are humans no matter what. So online jockeys aren't really all that different from other humans. No fear of death but still the same propensity towards target fixation.

Rather than this being a bug it can be considerd a feature. You're not wrong in asking for some changes to this behavior. Certrainly some pilots would be more disciplined. So, instead of a grand change, how about building in some variability? Rookie pilots could have a higher chance of becoming target fixated and firing on aircraft that are already stricken. Ace pilots would have far less of a chance or no chance at all depending on the programming. Lots of options.

[Lagarto]

Rather than this being a bug it can be considerd a feature.

Now, that's classic :) I've been hearing it for some ten years, initially from Oleg himself, then from his devoted followers, for some reason called 'fan boys', as you might remember. Almost every bug can be 'considered a feature' with a bit of imagination. Why then fix them and make this sim better? Isn't it easier to imagine and 'explain'?

[IceFire]

Now, that's classic :) I've been hearing it for some ten years, initially from Oleg himself, then from his devoted followers, for some reason called 'fan boys', as you might remember. Almost every bug can be 'considered a feature' with a bit of imagination. Why then fix them and make this sim better? Isn't it easier to imagine and 'explain'?

Dude, I honestly have no idea where the angry attitude is coming from. Let me make it clear then. What you suggest doesn't automatically make for a better experice with the A.I. Perhaps one thing is gained but at the loss of another behavior which is not inherently wrong IMHO. Target fixation did happen.

So, no idea what the problem is here, but I think there's a great opportunity to create something interesting with something that the AI already does.

[Stig1207]

Dude, I honestly have no idea where the angry attitude is coming from. Let me make it clear then. What you suggest doesn't automatically make for a better experice with the A.I. Perhaps one thing is gained but at the loss of another behavior which is not inherently wrong IMHO. Target fixation did happen.

So, no idea what the problem is here, but I think there's a great opportunity to create something interesting with something that the AI already does.

Agree with Ice, no reason not to keep this discussion civil.

That being said, I also think that Lagarto has a good case in all calling this AI behavior a bug. After all, it's not one AI pilot becoming target fixated, it's the whole flight. While it's reasonable that the AI make mistakes, after all that 's only human:grin:, but if the silly byggers all make the same mistakes all the time they shouldn't be flying high-powered, heavily armed aircraft.

/Stig

[Lagarto]

Where the angry attitude is coming from? For years and years anyone reporting a bug was immediately attacked by a bunch of fans blindly infatuated with this game. Their 'noble' efforts to 'defend' the game were actually counterproductive because they slowed down its development. You can't fix or improve anything if you think everything is just perfect.

[IceFire]

Agree with Ice, no reason not to keep this discussion civil.

That being said, I also think that Lagarto has a good case in all calling this AI behavior a bug. After all, it's not one AI pilot becoming target fixated, it's the whole flight. While it's reasonable that the AI make mistakes, after all that 's only human:grin:, but if the silly byggers all make the same mistakes all the time they shouldn't be flying high-powered, heavily armed aircraft.

/Stig

Absolutely right Stig. I even suggested that some sort of update to how it works so that some AI do become fixated while others are smarter or more disciplined. The AI could roll some kind of percentage probability for being fixated depending on skill level.

It's insane that Ace AI would do the same as a rookie.

[FC99]

I don't know if this has been asked but do the AI black out? If so how come I will be going in a dive to follow an AI.. we are not closing.. in fact sometimes he is pulling away... he turns .. I turn.. I black out... he zooms up .. gets on my 6 and nails me.. Do they black out?
They don't have classic blackout, they have limited amount of G's they can pull instead. That works well enough in most situations. I logged their G's during fights on couple occasions and they were within reasonable margins. In general, I have lot more problems to make AI do the things I can do than to limit them in what they can do.


And all over the versions, carburator fed enemy planes can dip and dive like a boss, dont shred to pieces in long high speed dives and climb like a pro.

They are not exceeding dive limits so there is no reason for them to lose aircraft's parts.


I think the most common thing that happens both against the AI and against other humans is we get placed in a situation where we think we're pulling the same turn but, in an effort to lead the target, we're actually pulling a tighter turn and more G forces.True in most situations. Most players believe that they are good while in reality not more than 5% of the players knows what they are doing.

Excellent news.. I missed this before my last post.. FC.. those were some interesting tidbits about how to control the AI better.. are there any more things like that that might be helpful in getting us to better control the AI?
As a flight Leader you will be able to send commands to Wingman, Second Section and whole flight. Assigning target aircraft for them should work better than now. You will be able to Abort mission from any position in flight. You will be able to call contacts from any position in flight too, of course, you will not be able to order attacks if you are not the Leader.


I will say one thing that really makes controlling the AI an entirely different ball game... that is VAC (http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=369) (Voice Activated Command).
VAC type of control is the best solution but you still need solid and practical "silent" system because not everybody is in position to use voice during playing.

Could you possibly stop AI from engaging enemy aircraft with dead engine? In theory they should not attack planes that are not capable of combat but I guess that there is a loophole somewhere.


Anyway, they were supposed to defend their own base, engage the bombers, and not to waste ammunition on a plane which was about to ditch. In such situations they're useless (I was the lowest rank, so I couldn't give them any orders).
If they are supposed to attack specific target that have to be set in mission. Without that they will attack first target of appropriate type. I'll try to add target type preference to FMB in 4.13, it's to late to do it for 4.12.

[IceFire]

Where the angry attitude is coming from? For years and years anyone reporting a bug was immediately attacked by a bunch of fans blindly infatuated with this game. Their 'noble' efforts to 'defend' the game were actually counterproductive because they slowed down its development. You can't fix or improve anything if you think everything is just perfect.

This is entirely up to you then. I don't feel that I jumped on you but I did ask for you to think about the request. I even agreed with you that a change could be made but with a little more subtlety. Yet, you've continued to be hostile. I'll take it in stride.

I'm going to keep on challenging and making my own suggestions but please do not mistake it for any attitude on my part. This should and can be a civil discussion where an idea is formed, challenged, and forged into something constructive.

[IceFire]

They don't have classic blackout, they have limited amount of G's they can pull instead. That works well enough in most situations. I logged their G's during fights on couple occasions and they were within reasonable margins. In general, I have lot more problems to make AI do the things I can do than to limit them in what they can do.


They are not exceeding dive limits so there is no reason for them to lose aircraft's parts.

True in most situations. Most players believe that they are good while in reality not more than 5% of the players knows what they are doing.

As a flight Leader you will be able to send commands to Wingman, Second Section and whole flight. Assigning target aircraft for them should work better than now. You will be able to Abort mission from any position in flight. You will be able to call contacts from any position in flight too, of course, you will not be able to order attacks if you are not the Leader.


VAC type of control is the best solution but you still need solid and practical "silent" system because not everybody is in position to use voice during playing.

In theory they should not attack planes that are not capable of combat but I guess that there is a loophole somewhere.


If they are supposed to attack specific target that have to be set in mission. Without that they will attack first target of appropriate type. I'll try to add target type preference to FMB in 4.13, it's to late to do it for 4.12.

Type preference sounds interesting. Would they be waypoint controllable or hard coded? Both? Not a fully formed idea in my head but I'm curious.

[FC99]

Type preference sounds interesting. Would they be waypoint controllable or hard coded? Both? Not a fully formed idea in my head but I'm curious.
I was thinking about WP target preference.

[rollnloop]

What about second section, what should be default behavior of No 3 in flight(No 4 will provide cover for him)




I suggest by default, 2nd pair covers lead's pair from a few hundred meters away (higher alt better).

If lead's pair engaged by any forward firing aircraft (not by rear gunners), 2nd pair engages this aircraft and attacks it until it goes down or flees more than 5km from lead's pair, then goes back to "cover lead's pair" mode. Lead can recall 2nd pair back via "cover me" command any time.


If intruscted to attack, 2nd pair goes after own target.

[Bearcat]

Agree with Ice, no reason not to keep this discussion civil.
That being said, I also think that Lagarto has a good case in all calling this AI behavior a bug. After all, it's not one AI pilot becoming target fixated, it's the whole flight. While it's reasonable that the AI make mistakes, after all that 's only human:grin:, but if the silly byggers all make the same mistakes all the time they shouldn't be flying high-powered, heavily armed aircraft.
/Stig

Yes... and (I know I know.. I have beaten this drum nearly to death) when it is your flight that is abandoning you to chase down that wounded/dieing bandit it is particularly frustrating. I look forward to 4.12 ad whatever AI updates are coming..

[FC99]

Where the angry attitude is coming from? For years and years anyone reporting a bug was immediately attacked by a bunch of fans blindly infatuated with this game. Their 'noble' efforts to 'defend' the game were actually counterproductive because they slowed down its development. You can't fix or improve anything if you think everything is just perfect.
It's developers who are deciding what get fixed and what not. There is no reason to get angry just because somebody have different opinion than you. What you consider a bug might be a feature for someone else and I never saw AI in this game doing something that humans don't do too.

In case of chasing planes with dead engine that will be fixed to some extent in 4.12. I will not completely remove the possibility for AI to attack harmless planes.

[Lagarto]

FC99, it's not a different opinion but patronizing attitude of some here that angers me. When you say, this is a bug, that is a feature, I believe you, you know these things inside out. Some people don't. They just want to sound smart, as if they were some self-proclaimed mouthpiece of the DT. Anyway, thank you for looking into the 'dead engine issue'.

[IceFire]

FC99, it's not a different opinion but patronizing attitude of some here that angers me. When you say, this is a bug, that is a feature, I believe you, you know these things inside out. Some people don't. They just want to sound smart, as if they were some self-proclaimed mouthpiece of the DT. Anyway, thank you for looking into the 'dead engine issue'.

I'm sorry if you think I sound patronizing. That's not the idea. The idea is to discuss whatever ideas people come up with (mine included). No one is an island.

I'm glad that FC99 is looking into it. Some great work has already been done on the AI... I'm sure it'll be even better in 4.12.

[IceFire]

FC99: Have you looked into at all the behavior of aircraft that should either be falling into escort formation OR into flight formation?

I have no problem with bombers getting into a flight formation (using the select option on waypoints) but with fighters it seems hit and miss. Sometimes they will get into escort and fly above (and often fall behind) and sometimes they will line up in a flight formation and do what they should be doing.

The behavior has definitely changed over the years. Sometimes without rhyme or reason from my perspective. Any tips or thoughts?

[JtD]

Lagarto, I think you're barking up the wrong tree. And as FC99 points out, for no reason. One users statement is not going to be ignored just because another user adds a couple of cents.

[FC99]

FC99: Have you looked into at all the behavior of aircraft that should either be falling into escort formation OR into flight formation?

I have no problem with bombers getting into a flight formation (using the select option on waypoints) but with fighters it seems hit and miss. Sometimes they will get into escort and fly above (and often fall behind) and sometimes they will line up in a flight formation and do what they should be doing.

The behavior has definitely changed over the years. Sometimes without rhyme or reason from my perspective. Any tips or thoughts?
I'm not sure that you can get fighters into formation unless they carry bombs or rockets. If they are clean they will get into "Escort" mode.

AFAICS that part of the code was same in 4.02 too so if things were different in the past that must be long ago.

[IceFire]

I'm not sure that you can get fighters into formation unless they carry bombs or rockets. If they are clean they will get into "Escort" mode.

AFAICS that part of the code was same in 4.02 too so if things were different in the past that must be long ago.

I could have sworn that they would fall into formation sometimes instead of escort. But either that's my memory or it was very early on. Perhaps AEP version 2.0 days... Any chance we may be able to control that in the future? I realize that's just one more thing :)

[Lagarto]

Here's another example of odd behaviour by AI. I've just flown a DGen mission, in which my squadron was supposed to escort transport planes on a transfer flight to a new airfield. It was a fairly short hop, some 10 minutes flying time, all the escorts still full of fuel and ammo. As it happened, we got intercepted over the new airfield. All the friendly a/c were by that time in landing circuit - and they continued to circle and land, just as the interceptors kept on shooting them down. No defensive action whatsoever, just the usual, cool talking to the control tower. Fighting all alone, I tried to call for help. Nothing. I requested assistance from the ground, only to learn that friendly fighters were far away - while they were buzzing all around me.
The problem is - once the AI enter circuit, they won't fight any more.
I know that someone else may call it a feature. The AI dudes could have a bad day, temporary blindness, air sickness, suicidal thoughts, hangover or they were just plain dumb. But maybe, just maybe, it's a bug and need fixing?

[Mundschenk]

Here's another example of odd behaviour by AI. I've just flown a DGen mission, in which my squadron was supposed to escort transport planes on a transfer flight to a new airfield. It was a fairly short hop, some 10 minutes flying time, all the escorts still full of fuel and ammo. As it happened, we got intercepted over the new airfield. All the friendly a/c were by that time in landing circuit - and they continued to circle and land, just as the interceptors kept on shooting them down. No defensive action whatsoever, just the usual, cool talking to the control tower. Fighting all alone, I tried to call for help. Nothing. I requested assistance from the ground, only to learn that friendly fighters were far away - while they were buzzing all around me.

I can confirm this, same thing happened to me today in a DGen mission.

Another thing which upsets me: If your squad is sent on a ground-attack mission, maybe to an enemy airfield, AI will often take aim on some AA gun or whatever, then disengage before firing and fly away some 10km, leaving me the only one who is attacking the airfield and the AA guns having their fun with me alone...

[K_Freddie]

Awaiting badly need supplies at our advanced field, we had 4 JU52s arrived at the same time as the Russki's. We downed all attackers, and afterwards I thought I'd fly in formation with the transports to boost their morale. Sending the rest of the flight back to base, which was a few yards away - they promptly disappeared into the distance ????

Ignoring them I got into circuit behind the last transport. You could imagine my dismay as I watched each one of them follow the leader into a small hillock a kilometre down the landing path.

Fly the mission again - Not a F.. you must be nuts... Delete campaign. :)

[D-XXI]

I can confirm the observations from Lagarto and Mundschenk.

[JtD]

I hope you guys are aware that this is like v1.0 behavior, not a new bug with v4.11.

[Lagarto]

Yes, we are perfectly aware that it's an old bug. The 4.11 was released almost a year ago, so why don't we discuss AI debugging in general?

[IceFire]

Here's another example of odd behaviour by AI. I've just flown a DGen mission, in which my squadron was supposed to escort transport planes on a transfer flight to a new airfield. It was a fairly short hop, some 10 minutes flying time, all the escorts still full of fuel and ammo. As it happened, we got intercepted over the new airfield. All the friendly a/c were by that time in landing circuit - and they continued to circle and land, just as the interceptors kept on shooting them down. No defensive action whatsoever, just the usual, cool talking to the control tower. Fighting all alone, I tried to call for help. Nothing. I requested assistance from the ground, only to learn that friendly fighters were far away - while they were buzzing all around me.
The problem is - once the AI enter circuit, they won't fight any more.
I know that someone else may call it a feature. The AI dudes could have a bad day, temporary blindness, air sickness, suicidal thoughts, hangover or they were just plain dumb. But maybe, just maybe, it's a bug and need fixing?
Indeed. Once the AI enter into the landing circuit they stay there. I created a mission a while back where you attacked an airfield and the aircraft were landing... I fully expected them to break the landing pattern and go after me but it was a turkey shoot instead.

For whatever reason, they were programmed to ignore everything while on landing pattern. It could use improvement. No question about it...

[IceFire]

I hope you guys are aware that this is like v1.0 behavior, not a new bug with v4.11.

That is definitely true. This stretches waaaay back :)

[FC99]

The problem is - once the AI enter circuit, they won't fight any more.
I know that someone else may call it a feature. The AI dudes could have a bad day, temporary blindness, air sickness, suicidal thoughts, hangover or they were just plain dumb. But maybe, just maybe, it's a bug and need fixing?
I already addressed this so fix is ready for 4.12. But while we are at it what would be desired AI behavior in this situation. Currently, I have them stay in landing pattern unless they are directly attacked.

[Lagarto]

The escorts should defend their charges, not only themselves.

[IceFire]

I already addressed this so fix is ready for 4.12. But while we are at it what would be desired AI behavior in this situation. Currently, I have them stay in landing pattern unless they are directly attacked.

Very cool FC99. Raises a question: Does only the attacked plane take defensive action or does the wingman/pair begin to engage? Assuming already in the pattern for landing.

[Asheshouse]

In the context of carriers being the home airfield, an example from real life.

Battle of Midway, 6th June 1942. From the Action Report by the Commander of Yorktown.

At about 1359, while fueling the fighters which had turned on board, Radar detected and enemy attack group coming in from a bearing about 250° true, distance 46 miles. These planes had apparently come in at a low altitude and when first detected by Radar were observed to be climbing. Radio Electrician V.M. Bennett, USN, Radar Operator, estimated that there were between 30 and 40 planes in the attack group.
As soon as the enemy attack group was detected by Radar, the fueling of planes was discontinued and the sixteen VSB planes of Yorktown Attack Group, which were then in the landing circle, were directed to form a combat air patrol in order to clear the landing circle and the general area of own anti-aircraft gun fire. ----- All our fighters in the air were vectored out to intercept the enemy and did intercept at from 15 to 20 miles.

[Mundschenk]

I already addressed this so fix is ready for 4.12. But while we are at it what would be desired AI behavior in this situation. Currently, I have them stay in landing pattern unless they are directly attacked.

In my opinion, if one plane flying in the landing circuit is attacked, or even better shortly before it is attacked, all fighters in the circuit should stop circling and engage the attackers. Maybe except those who are already preparing to land.

Gives me another idea: could it be possible to issue a radio command to the own AA protection of the airfield to prevent them from firing? I can't count the times I was shot down by friendly AA guns while closely chasing a fighter over my own airfield... :evil:

[Pursuivant]

I already addressed this so fix is ready for 4.12. But while we are at it what would be desired AI behavior in this situation. Currently, I have them stay in landing pattern unless they are directly attacked.

It's probably too late for 4.12, but for future patches, AI planes shouldn't enter the landing pattern if there's an enemy plane within sight, unless they have no other option other than landing - low on fuel, badly damaged, have wounded crew aboard or dangerous weather conditions closing in.

Just leaving the landing pattern when directly attacked leaves planes at too much of a tactical disadvantage as enemies maneuver into attack position - dispersed formations, low altitude, low speeds and predictable behavior.

In the future:

Escorts should respond aggressively to drive enemies away from airfields, not just protect the planes they are escorting. They should immediately go into attack formations when enemy planes are sighted.

Veteran escorts should use intelligent tactics to engage the enemy - for example, not just attacking piecemeal from below but getting above the enemy and attacking as a unit.

In the presence of enemy planes, bombers should form (or reform) flight- or squadron-sized defensive formations and loosely orbit their airfield at altitude if there is no other place to land, or if there are escorts to drive the enemy away. Otherwise, they should divert to a suitable friendly airfield where there are no enemy planes present.

Transport and auxiliary planes should always flee - possibly orbiting well away from the airfield - or divert to another airfield if there are any enemy planes in the area.

Two exceptions to the above:

1) Mission builders should have the ability to control - or override - landing behavior. That allows for "ambush" scenarios or situations where a particular plane must land, or to allow planes to divert to a specific airfield. It could also set up situations where one section of planes lands while another section engages the enemy.

Mission builders should also be able to set distances at which landing planes begin to react to enemies - both height and ground distance. They should also be able to set triggers so that landing planes react in different ways to different types of planes.

That way planes might still land normally if there is just a single enemy recce plane at high-altitude over their base, but in another way if there is a formation of enemy bombers coming in.

2) If there is radar in the game, ground control/radar ops could give orders to formations to behave in a certain way. For example, even if a formation can't see incoming enemy, ground control could still have them divert/resume defensive formation/attack.

[SPAD-1949]

1) Mission builders should have the ability to control - or override - landing behavior. That allows for "ambush" scenarios or situations where a particular plane must land, or to allow planes to divert to a specific airfield. It could also set up situations where one section of planes lands while another section engages the enemy.

Planes set to low fuel (EG 2% or so) should show the "land under any circumstances" behaviour. So Pursuivants demands could be archieved and simultanuously they dont loiter around until crash when you wait near the runway to start your Mission. I tried this on several occasions at the start of a mission, but you need a large airfield to force land AI planes. Otherwise they crash when at least ran out fuel.

[KG26_Alpha]

Hmmm

Im sure Im amongst many mission builders that over the years have had missions ruined by changes made to ai behaviour.

would it not be possible to make the changes selectable rather than global to keep the mission builders intentions?

thanks :)

[maxim42]

I am not sure if it was mentioned, but when I create a quick mission (for example: two planes vs two) and when my group defeat the enemy group, my AI friend has got a strange behaviour. Instead of getting back home with me, the 'AI friend' seems to consider me as his enemy (AI is getting away from me doing some strange aerobatic maneuvers). But I have never noticed the friend AI shooting me, just getting away. Greetings

[Aviar]

I am not sure if it was mentioned, but when I create a quick mission (for example: two planes vs two) and when my group defeat the enemy group, my AI friend has got a strange behaviour. Instead of getting back home with me, the 'AI friend' seems to consider me as his enemy (AI is getting away from me doing some strange aerobatic maneuvers). But I have never noticed the friend AI shooting me, just getting away. Greetings

I'll take a guess as to what is happening to you. If YOU are the lead in a 2-plane flight and YOU try and follow your wingman, it will look like he wants to get away from you. In fact, he DOES want to get away from you so he can get behind you (as he was programmed).

I'm sure that is what you are experiencing. Otherwise, I have never seen what you have described.

Aviar

[maxim42]

I'll take a guess as to what is happening to you. If YOU are the lead in a 2-plane flight and YOU try and follow your wingman, it will look like he wants to get away from you. In fact, he DOES want to get away from you so he can get behind you (as he was programmed).

I'm sure that is what you are experiencing. Otherwise, I have never seen what you have described.

Aviar

Thank you for the answer. You might be right and thank's for the explanation!:grin:

[Treetop64]

In my opinion, if one plane flying in the landing circuit is attacked, or even better shortly before it is attacked, all fighters in the circuit should stop circling and engage the attackers. Maybe except those who are already preparing to land.

Gives me another idea: could it be possible to issue a radio command to the own AA protection of the airfield to prevent them from firing? I can't count the times I was shot down by friendly AA guns while closely chasing a fighter over my own airfield... :evil:

Sounds sensible, but don't count on it. Back then pilots didn't have comms with AA guns. For a fighter pilot to issue an order to ground AA guns batteries when and who they should fire at isn't terribly realistic, to say the least. However, it would be nice to see the AAA take things a bit easy when a friendly aircraft is within very close proximity to the guy they were shooting at.

Of course, like everything else, a lot depended on the individual gun crew's skill and experience levels, and they just might keep right on firing anyways, or even mistake you as an enemy aircraft and shoot at you until someone realizes the mistake and stops...

Happened a lot. :grin:

[X-Raptor]

Hi, 1st I congrats to all Daidalos Team for the work about 1946 they are offering to improve this game still.

just my observation: would be possible to stop A.I. behaviour that we can see many times A.I. climb almost vertically for a long time gaining altitude and JUST EXACTLY at the moment of stall they level the nose and then continue to fly orizontally ..as nothing happened :confused: .. THIS is really annoying and innatural .. and frustrating.. because A.I. using - I see OFTEN- this manevuer A.I. make a lot of cheat:
1) it use this quite innatural manover to evade from enemy (human or A.i.)
2) It use often this manover to jump from high to hit you or other A.I. planes.

Please can DAIDALOS TEAM LOOK to solve this?.

[SPAD-1949]

I am not sure if it was mentioned, but when I create a quick mission (for example: two planes vs two) and when my group defeat the enemy group, my AI friend has got a strange behaviour. Instead of getting back home with me, the 'AI friend' seems to consider me as his enemy (AI is getting away from me doing some strange aerobatic maneuvers). But I have never noticed the friend AI shooting me, just getting away. Greetings
What happens if you order him "TAB-1-8-2" to get back in formation and to follow you leading back home or "TAB-2-9-3" back to home base and follow him back to home base?

[SPAD-1949]

Hi, 1st I congrats to all Daidalos Team for the work about 1946 they are offering to improve this game still.

just my observation: would be possible to stop A.I. behaviour that we can see many times A.I. climb almost vertically for a long time gaining altitude and JUST EXACTLY at the moment of stall they level the nose and then continue to fly orizontally ..as nothing happened :confused: .. THIS is really annoying and innatural .. and frustrating.. because A.I. using - I see OFTEN- this manevuer A.I. make a lot of cheat:
1) it use this quite innatural manover to evade from enemy (human or A.i.)
2) It use often this manover to jump from high to hit you or other A.I. planes.

Please can DAIDALOS TEAM LOOK to solve this?.

Im an offliner and I've never seen this bahaviour.
Is this an online occurance?
AI cheats in other ways all through the enhancments of AI behaviour changes, but usually if they vert up until stall, they drop their noses and vert down until regain of controll.
Eventually it just looks alike, when you head onto them with intention for a kill lacking energy and starve in sight of them without proper situational awareness.
It sometimes looks líke that.
Eventually a energy superior AI opponent with good Situational awareness tricks you out, if he recognizes, that you are about to stall and breaks his vert up towards horizontal flight, because he has enough margin for that maneuver, but it must not look like a sharp hook.
Rather a mor or less slight curve.
Bf109s can do that if you sit in a mosca.

[X-Raptor]

..It occurred to me for example in a mission where there were il2 bombing p39 defending bombers vs 190 and 109 attacing (a kursk campaign extract). I see this behaviour in more than one 109 just like you said creating a "sharp hook" at the bottom of the vertical uber-dive of A.I.s planes.

[Pursuivant]

I just noticed this:

8 Average Ki-43 III vs. a "box" of 3 Veteran B-24J in QMB. 5000m over the Okinawa map. No advantage to either side.

The Ki-43 don't make head-on shots on the initial pass and don't make high-side attacks subsequently. Instead, they go for tail-chase attacks which are much more dangerous.

Even worse, the B-24 try to act like fighters! None of them stick together in formation and I actually saw one of them doing a barrel roll. All of them will try to turn to avoid much more nimble fighters, often pulling high-G turns that have the plane "standing on its wing."

Realistically, the bombers should tighten up their formation and possibly "jink" a bit when attacked. If one gets separated, it should "corkscrew" to try to spoil the attackers' aim while rejoining formation. Also, the rest of the formation should slow down to try to protect the damaged bomber as long as possible. As it is, by trying to maneuver like fighters, they seriously reduce the accuracy of their guns and give up the coordinated firepower of the "bomber box."

In real life, the sort of high-G turns I saw would also rip the bombs off their shackles and send them through the bomb bay doors.

It seems to me that, if it isn't already in the game, TD needs to have different AI for heavy bombers and similar planes (e.g., planes like the PBN or H8K) vs. smaller and faster attack bombers. Bombers also need different behavior routines for when they're loaded vs. unloaded.

Edit: Same behavior for B-17G and B-29. And, even when the U.S. heavies are loaded with bombs!

This is even more stupid behavior for a B-29 since they have the speed to outrun the Ki-43. They shouldn't be diving, turning and trying to dogfight. Instead, they should be keeping level, tightening formation and accelerating.

[X-Raptor]

Dear pursivant , sadly ME, YOU and BEARCAT are the few other here are writing here with nonsense, as you can easly notice from DT anticipations on 4.12 release that there isn't ANY mention about correct all these A.i. bad behavior we diligently are reporting to the Daidalos Team.
They are going to release 4.12 with just other things improved... ..but IMHO way less important compared to try to resolve all this A.I. "bugs" we still notice in 4.11 :(

[TheGrunch]

Daidalos Team have never reported bug fixes in development updates for the next patch. Wait for the readme before you complain.

[Tuco22]

Daidalos Team have never reported bug fixes in development updates for the next patch. Wait for the readme before you complain.

This.

[Pursuivant]

They are going to release 4.12 with just other things improved... ..but IMHO way less important compared to try to resolve all this A.I. "bugs" we still notice in 4.11 :(

Respectfully, I disagree. My experience is that TD listens to the fans and works hard to correct their mistakes. Over the course of the past 3 years TD has worked hard to fix things that 1C/Maddox couldn't be arsed to fix during the previous 7-8 years of the game's existence.

As an example, the vast improvement in fighter AI in the 4.11 was literally a game-changer for me. AI fighters are a real challenge to beat, unlike before when I was routinely winning fights against entire squadrons. Bomber gunner behavior has finally been fixed to deal with the dreaded "sniper" problem.

In the upcoming 4.12 patch, there are lots of little fixes fans have asked for for years, like customized sounds, aircraft which taxi in an intelligent fashion and the ability to padlock ships. In previous patches, we've seen small fixes to things like sky appearance and 3d fixes for some of the older aircraft.

But, AI programming is tricky work, there are lots of planes in the game, lots of different missions and many different tactics. Even worse, "fixing" one aspect of AI behavior might "break" another aspect. I accept that the 4.11 AI wasn't perfect, but I'm confident that TD will fix the problem.

Anyhow, dogfighting bombers is an easy problem to fix. There's less AI programming in making a plane keep station with the other planes in formation, fly straight and level or try to run away than there is in making them try to dogfight. Even if the AI were programed so isolated bombers try to "corkscrew" or hug the ground (if flying low and no ventral gunner) it would probably still be easier to program.

More challenging for AI would be for isolated bombers to try to turn to present the most number of guns against few attacking fighters to trying to "jink" or "break" in such a way as to spoil attacks (e.g., slipping or diving just as fighter making a high-side attack starts its attack run).

[X-Raptor]

Respectfully, I disagree. My experience is that TD listens to the fans and works hard to correct their mistakes. Over the course of the past 3 years TD has worked hard to fix things that 1C/Maddox couldn't be arsed to fix during the previous 7-8 years of the game's existence.

As an example, the vast improvement in fighter AI in the 4.11 was literally a game-changer for me. AI fighters are a real challenge to beat, unlike before when I was routinely winning fights against entire squadrons. Bomber gunner behavior has finally been fixed to deal with the dreaded "sniper" problem.

In the upcoming 4.12 patch, there are lots of little fixes fans have asked for for years, like customized sounds, aircraft which taxi in an intelligent fashion and the ability to padlock ships. In previous patches, we've seen small fixes to things like sky appearance and 3d fixes for some of the older aircraft.

But, AI programming is tricky work, there are lots of planes in the game, lots of different missions and many different tactics. Even worse, "fixing" one aspect of AI behavior might "break" another aspect. I accept that the 4.11 AI wasn't perfect, but I'm confident that TD will fix the problem.

Anyhow, dogfighting bombers is an easy problem to fix. There's less AI programming in making a plane keep station with the other planes in formation, fly straight and level or try to run away than there is in making them try to dogfight. Even if the AI were programed so isolated bombers try to "corkscrew" or hug the ground (if flying low and no ventral gunner) it would probably still be easier to program.

More challenging for AI would be for isolated bombers to try to turn to present the most number of guns against few attacking fighters to trying to "jink" or "break" in such a way as to spoil attacks (e.g., slipping or diving just as fighter making a high-side attack starts its attack run).

:rolleyes: Hmm.. Bomber gunner sniper behavior fixed you told?.. Respectfully I don't agree m8 , for me Is really equal as ever was in 4.10, moreover as you said we now have A.I. bombers acting like fighter "Bug" too now that was not present in 4.10 for example.. things are going back instead of forward I feel..

And I repeat: I thank all DT for their FREE work for all us here, but if A.I. code is so hard to modify as someone like to mention here that is a mere and sterile observation, then I think DT will better not even to try again to modify nothing about A.I. code as to prevent other bad evolution of the feature of A.I... is just too bad now.

[majorfailure]

I just noticed this:

8 Average Ki-43 III vs. a "box" of 3 Veteran B-24J in QMB. 5000m over the Okinawa map. No advantage to either side.
....

:rolleyes: Hmm.. Bomber gunner sniper behavior fixed you told?.. Respectfully I don't agree m8 , for me Is really equal as ever was in 4.10, moreover as you said we now have A.I. bombers acting like fighter "Bug" too now that was not present in 4.10 for example.. things are going back instead of forward I feel..
...

This is in QMB, right? I think this is a QMB related issue, if I try to shoot down bombers with at least a decent defensive armament in QMB from anything close to 6'o clock, even with significant altitude and speed advantage, I'm meat on a platter even for average AI. In "normal" missions, if I do anything else than parking behind a Bomber with average AI, I'm usually fine, even if I approach from 6'o clock. Coming from above and off-angle or head on versus normal AI I hardly get hit ever. And Bombers don't do some silly "dancing" as sometimes happens in QMB.
Maybe QMB somehow still uses 4.10 AI?

I think TD should continue developing AI. I really liked the improvement they did with 4.11. AI working as a team against you is really nice. Also I haven't encountered the AI doing inverted barrel rolls and accelerating at the same time in 4.11. Their evasion patterns have become more convincing to me -most of the time. And don't forget the ridicolus Bf109 behavior, spiral climb to xxxx meters, then dive, and climb again in 4.10. Haven't seen that in a while(Except in QMB). And even if some new bugs occur, no big problem - they will be ironed out with the next patch.

[Pursuivant]

This is in QMB, right?

Yes. And you might be right that it's a QMB vs. FMB issue. I'm a bit surprised if it is, though. I thought that AI was independent of FMB vs. QMB.

I think this is a QMB related issue, if I try to shoot down bombers with at least a decent defensive armament in QMB from anything close to 6'o clock, even with significant altitude and speed advantage, I'm meat on a platter even for average AI.

This is as it should be. For flexible guns shooting a plane attacking from the rear with no angle of deflection is the easiest shot to make. Even a rookie should be able to hit planes that attack like this.

In "normal" missions, if I do anything else than parking behind a Bomber with average AI, I'm usually fine, even if I approach from 6'o clock. Coming from above and off-angle or head on versus normal AI I hardly get hit ever.

That doesn't seem right. The second easiest shot to make is against a head-on attack with no angle of deflection.

Moving along two axes (e.g., diving and closing on the target) isn't that hard to track for a defensive gunner. Moving along all three axes (i.e., diving, slipping and closing - like with a high-side attack) is a challenge even for a good defensive gunner.

And Bombers don't do some silly "dancing" as sometimes happens in QMB. Maybe QMB somehow still uses 4.10 AI?

I'm not sure that they do, since they don't have that sniper-like accuracy anymore, especially not at long ranges (remember back before 4.11 where a B-17 tailgunner could devastate your Bf-109G or kill you at 600 meters range?). Part of my original complaint came from the fact that by trying to "dance around" the bombers defensive fire wasn't nearly as accurate as it should be.

Their evasion patterns have become more convincing to me -most of the time.

Yes. And if you replay the same mission (using AI on both sides) you'll notice that each side uses different techniques each time - enough that sometimes one plane will win, sometimes the other will win, based on who chose what tactics.

What I'd like to see is, in addition to team tactics is realistic high altitude/level bomber behavior - Ace or veteran crews will have tighter formations, lone bombers will corkscrew or "jink" while still keeping relatively low G to allow their gunners to shoot effectively, and high altitude bomber formations will randomly change course every 30 seconds over heavy flak concentrations to spoil the gunners aim.

[majorfailure]

-AI Rookie flying A6M in front of you evades by "riding" the snap stall until behind you -seen this often. Also seen twice with Rookie AI in Bf109E or F. They initiate the stall by pulling hard and getting one wing to stall, start circling mainly around the yaw axis while keeping an AoA of around 30 degree. Thus they slow down while presenting a somewhat difficult target. This is not an accidental and uncontrolable stall which happens when puling too hard, because they always start flying straight and level as soon as you overshoot them -of course nose pointing your direction.

-I think this has been adressed before but at a quick glance I couldn't find it: AI drops bombs as soon as command to attack is given.



This is as it should be. For flexible guns shooting a plane attacking from the rear with no angle of deflection is the easiest shot to make. Even a rookie should be able to hit planes that attack like this.

Yes, if you "park" on the bombers rear quarter, and if you do that against average AI, you will get shot to pieces regularly. But do it with some altitude & speed, maybe from 5'o clock, and stay outside ~300m -you will succeed most of the time-except in QMB. Maybe I'm wrong, but I do think AI in QMB does behave different than anywhere else in the game.


That doesn't seem right. The second easiest shot to make is against a head-on attack with no angle of deflection.
This rarely happens -at least to me. I try to set up my head-on passes from above or below, because its easier to avoid ramming the target. And most of the time I don't guess the bombers heading perfectly right. In the end, that presents the gunner with a ~2*3m sized target (frontal cross-section of a fighter) coming in at 230m/s slightly off-angle and out of plain. Average AI should miss this shot regularly IMHO. And even if they score a hit, most bombers have rather weak frontal armament -so if this isn't your unluckiest day, you should be able to pull it off.


What I'd like to see is, in addition to team tactics is realistic high altitude/level bomber behavior - Ace or veteran crews will have tighter formations, lone bombers will corkscrew or "jink" while still keeping relatively low G to allow their gunners to shoot effectively, and high altitude bomber formations will randomly change course every 30 seconds over heavy flak concentrations to spoil the gunners aim.
Hmm, I don't think that better AI should have tighter formations, they should have less trouble keeping in formation though. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't USAAF formations have set distances for their boxes? And considering large bomber formations of more than two flights they shouldn't maneuver to avoid FlaK, as I don't think this was done in WW2. I think most of the time keeping in formation was just enough of a task.

[Bearcat]

Dear pursivant , sadly ME, YOU and BEARCAT are the few other here are writing here with nonsense, as you can easly notice from DT anticipations on 4.12 release that there isn't ANY mention about correct all these A.i. bad behavior we diligently are reporting to the Daidalos Team.
They are going to release 4.12 with just other things improved... ..but IMHO way less important compared to try to resolve all this A.I. "bugs" we still notice in 4.11 :(

I can't speak for anyone else but while these AI issues that I mentioned are indeed quite annoying .. I understand that TD is doing this work for free and on their own time and I do greatly appreciate it. I hope that at some point sooner rather than later these issues can be addressed fully.. and the thing that kills me is.. sometimes they actually do work right, which was what prompted my question about resetting the AI in another post.. thinking that perhaps that was the issue.Just last night in an online mission I was attacking a two man flight and I told my wingman who was AI to attack fighters.. he promptly changed his attitude to pursue the wingman of the bandit I was chasing .. which really surprised me because usually they break off to attack the target I am in pursuit of ...

[IceFire]

Keep in mind folks that the QMB and FMB don't make a lick of difference in terms of the AI. It's the same algorithms no matter what. The QMB isn't anything more special than a bunch of mission templates with the ability to adjust the type of plane and altitude. Everything else is just a .mis file to correspond to that situation.

I haven't seen a sniper gunner since 4.11 came out but apparently some still are. Any good track files with examples? Apologies if some have been posted already. If there is a problem... document it to the n'th degree.

[Bearcat]

Track files are no longer valid.. I have tried to make a few tracks and when I play them back they are all out of synch.. The guns are firing when there are no planes. even though I know I was shooting at a plane.. Maybe it is just with mods. I haven't tried it with stock yet.

[Bolelas]

I gess it will be the same. That was allready explained somewhere in the forum. The tracks are not realy a record, but a new loaded game with all the initial parameters and all the movements/actions you made. But on the load the game uses random things for AI. So, this is like the butterfly efect, and at the beggining that AI plane took a little different manouver, in the end you are shooting nothing. When this happened to me i passed the same track several times until i got the wright one.

[Pursuivant]

Hmm, I don't think that better AI should have tighter formations, they should have less trouble keeping in formation though.

You're right. I'm stating it the wrong way. Ace and Veteran bombers should have an easier time keeping formation and flying at assigned distances. Average planes might straggle a bit, or very rarely accidentally collide. Rookies might straggle more and might accidentally collide with other planes in their formation if they panic.

For fighters and other single-engined planes, Situational Awareness should go down at virtually any level of skill if you're flying in tight formation. Station-keeping requires a certain amount of work. In particular, rookies often focused on keeping formation rather than looking out for danger. Looser formations should allow maximum situational awareness.

[Pursuivant]

I'm not sure if this is an AI, a GUI or a graphics problem.

Some planes with manually-controlled multi-stage superchargers (e.g., the La-7) start the game with the supercharger set to the wrong setting in high altitude Quick Combat scenarios, causing the plane to produce black smoke trails until the player fixes the problem.

If you set the plane to autopilot before fixing the supercharger setting, either the AI-controlled plane doesn't switch to the proper supercharger stage or the smoke trails associated with a too-rich fuel mixture don't go away after it does so.

As a test to see what I mean, try setting up a QMB scenario with an La-7 starting at 5000 meters, then immediately switch to autopilot and then external view.

[Pursuivant]

It appears that AI aircraft have no idea what to do about V-1s. Even if the whole point of the mission is shoot down V-1s, and there's nothing else in the sky to shoot, and the V-1 is right in front of them, AI aircraft will ignore them!

It seems like it would be a very simple bit of programming for Average, Veteran or Ace aircraft to either take sniper shots at a distance, or try to "run down" the V-1 and flip it using their wingtip. Rookies would take shots from within the blast radius.

[Jumoschwanz]

In case it has not been reported yet.

In a mission I built in the FMB I have some late 1943 IL2 aircraft attacking some German tanks. The Ace IL2 aircraft hit the tanks with their cannons right on the mark, but when they fire rockets the rockets always hit the ground pretty far behind the tanks.

The firing of the rockets, machine guns and rockets is all done in one second at the most so it looks like when the aircraft's sight is on for the guns and cannons, it is low for the rockets.

I have tried altering the flight path and position of the waypoints in relation to the tanks, thinking that maybe the angle of attack was too shallow and that did not help at all.

[Aviar]

In case it has not been reported yet.

In a mission I built in the FMB I have some late 1943 IL2 aircraft attacking some German tanks. The Ace IL2 aircraft hit the tanks with their cannons right on the mark, but when they fire rockets the rockets always hit the ground pretty far behind the tanks.

The firing of the rockets, machine guns and rockets is all done in one second at the most so it looks like when the aircraft's sight is on for the guns and cannons, it is low for the rockets.

I have tried altering the flight path and position of the waypoints in relation to the tanks, thinking that maybe the angle of attack was too shallow and that did not help at all.

This is a real problem...and since I make and test all of my own missions, I see it all the time. Without a doubt, the AI are aiming their rockets at a point too 'early' or 'below' their intended target. This applies to both moving and static targets.

If I remember correctly, this started a few patches back when rocket trajectories were given an overhaul to to act more 'realistically'. I have no problem with that, but it looks like the AI was not 'updated' to account for the new trajectories, and so appear to be aiming their rockets as if they were using the 'old' rocket trajectory.

As a result, the AI ends up 'walking' their rockets towards the target, with the hope of hitting the target with their last 2 rockets. Many times, none of the rockets come close to hitting the target.

I understand that in the early years of IL-2 the rocket trajectories were pretty much arcade-like in that they flew more like a laser beam. I like the way they behave now in a more realistic manner. However, I do think the AI needs to be reprogrammed to aim these rockets in a more efficient manner.

Check out the simple test mission I have uploaded. The AI is set to Ace.

*After viewing this test mission a number of times, I think I know why the AI is always initially hitting well 'below' the target.

First of all, you will notice that the AI is still firing it's guns and rockets at the same time. (I've never liked this but this has been present since day one.) Notice that the bullets are pretty much on target. This means that the AI is 'aiming' with his guns, not his rockets. (In the old days of IL-2, if you placed your gunsight on the target, you could hit the same spot with both your bullets and your rockets.

After the the rocket trajectory was adjusted, they now drop off in a more realistic manner. You have to aim 'above' the target if you want to hit it. Now back to the test mission. Since the AI is hitting the target with bullets, it is obviously placing it's gunsight on that spot. However, since it is also firing it's rockets at the same time, because of the new trajectories, the rockets are dropping off and hitting well below the target.

Here is my idea of how to resolve this issue. First of all, if the AI is attacking with rockets DO NOT program the AI to fire it's guns until all of it's rockets have been released. (Since the bullets and rockets now have drastically different trajectories, one of them will be off-target for sure...unless your target is a large one, like a ship.)

Secondly, the AI needs to be reprogrammed to 'aim' the rockets we have now (with the more realistic trajectory).


Aviar

[ckolonko]

Every time the AI use rockets for ground attacks, IL-2s that is, the rockets detonate in the air like the timed rockets do. So they rarely end up destroying their target.

[nevr44]

Every time the AI use rockets for ground attacks, IL-2s that is, the rockets detonate in the air like the timed rockets do. So they rarely end up destroying their target.


Check the timer rockets at his plane

[secretone]

Sorry if this has been mentioned earlier, but here goes just in case it's still news.
I observed the Cant z.506B seaplane landing smoothly on grass of Normandy QMB map. It seemed able to taxi as well; like a ski plane sliding over snow.

Incidentally, I think it would be interesting if seaplane AI were programmed to detect rivers so they can make landings if inland. I do not know if this would be easy to do though.

[secretone]

Here's a postscript to my Cant z.506B note above. I discovered that H8K Emily, Ju 52 seaplane and PBN Nomad also can land on grass without apparent damage. Perhaps this has to do with the game engine and goes beyond the models themselves. Cheers!

[sniperton]

I observed the Cant z.506B seaplane landing smoothly on grass of Normandy QMB map. It seemed able to taxi as well; like a ski plane sliding over snow.

Confirmed. Moreover, in 4.11, where Z506 was unable to take off with full load, such planes usually followed their flight path at zero altitude and ended up peacefully riding in the Lybian desert until they run into a hill or a British armed column...

[batistadk]

Hi.

I saw a post couple a weeks ago, about strange combat behaviour on the Ki-43. Couldn't check it yet, but looks like the Buffalo Mk. I got the same issues.

When using Autopilot, and for the rest of AI planes, the plane goes well on manouvers and dogfight. But, when the pilot is in position to fire the guns, he starts to fly as a dumb. It can't keep the aim, the pilot keeps raising the nose, loosing contact with the enemy, then starts to do strange stuff with the ailerons and rudder, as if the plane is "digging" in the air.

To test: try a default map on the QMB. Select at least 4 Buffalos against 4 fighters. Try to use the Autopilot, and check the other AI guys flying too.

What happens?

Thanks in advance.

batistadk

[batistadk]

Ok. More tests, and more intriguing questions.

Looks like the Hurricane Mk. IIc and Mk. II Field Mod. are suffering from the same problem as the Buffalo. Interesting data: all these planes are showing this AI issue when pitched against Bf. 109E models, including the Buffalo, earlier.

I'll continue with tests, trying to discover what's happening.

batistadk

[batistadk]

That's it.

Looks like FM, in general, have changed a bit. There's a lot of diferent situations where planes doesn't respond normally. I-153, I-16, LaGG, Ki-43 and others that I have already cited are suffering from this strange behaviour.

Looks like is something related to the planes maneuverability, and enemy's too. I have absent from IL-2 for at least two years, but can remember everything was normal until 4.10. With no doubt, something changed on 4.11.

Maybe a little late to 4.12, but TD could take a look at this on 4.13? Or this problem was already related?

Thanks for all the effort put on this, TD.

batistadk

[Pursuivant]

Five further quirks of AI.

When the player aircraft is set to AI settings the pilot/crew doesn't automatically bail out if the plane is fatally damaged. By contrast, crew in "native" AI planes bails out normally.

In some cases, even Ace AI is a bit too eager to bail out. For example, crew will often bail out of a plane with just ailerons or rudder out, or with just a missing vertical stabilizer rather than trying to get home, ditch or crash land. In other cases, AI fighter pilots will bail out of a plane which has severe damage but which isn't on fire and is still flyable - usually due to severe cockpit area damage.

In a few cases, Ace AI will briefly shoot when there is no target to hit. Typically, AI will shoot a very short (0.5-1 second) burst when they are passing high above an enemy in a 1-to-1 fight.

Ace AI will sometimes give up far too much positional advantage when engaging an enemy 1-to-1 starting head-to-head. That is, the plane will "corkscrew" out of the way of the enemy's guns, but then turn at least 60 degrees away from their original course, allowing the enemy to do a high-speed yo-yo/candelle turn right onto their tail.

Ace AI is very aggressive about making head-on shots against fighters. I've reported this before, but on closer inspection, it's really obvious that AI is ignoring factors which would make such a move a losing proposition - like going against a heavily-armed opponent or if flying a more fragile (e.g., inline vs. radial engine) plane. Furthermore, when Ace AI they do take head-on shots they shoot very long bursts and don't break off soon enough. This usually results in at least one mortally-wounded plane/pilot followed by a head-on collision.

While a head-on attack is valid if you've got a less maneuverable and slower plane, if you've got longer ranged guns (e.g., 0.50 caliber MG) it would make sense to make a quick (1-2 second at most) shot at extreme range (300-500 meters out) and then do a quick barrel roll or diving turn to get yourself out of your enemy's line of fire.

The exception might be if you're over home territory and are flying for an air force which was noted for "taran" style kills - VVS, IJN, IJA or some Luftwaffe.

[Jumoschwanz]

Anyone else notice that the Sherman tanks in IL2 make no noise when they shoot their main gun? Like they have a silence fitted or something....

[Volksfürsorge]

M4A2 (76) W Shermans have no sound. M4A2 Shermans have sound.

[Volksfürsorge]

...concerning the gun.

[Swo7pes]

I hope this can be fixed in the future.
http://www.creditgif.com/02.jpghttp://www.creditgif.com/28.jpghttp://www.creditgif.com/03.jpghttp://www.creditgif.com/05.jpg
http://www.creditgif.com/04.jpghttp://www.creditgif.com/29.jpg

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

When the player aircraft is set to AI settings the pilot/crew doesn't automatically bail out if the plane is fatally damaged. By contrast, crew in "native" AI planes bails out normally.

'Autopilot' is not the same as 'AI' - technically. Ok, it is more than a simple autopilot, its rather an autofighter. It lets you have just more control about your plane. If it was like AI, it would bail out, even if you don't want it to.

Just don't expect it to be a full AI. Its YOU, who shall play the game! :)

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

M4A2 (76) W Shermans have no sound. M4A2 Shermans have sound.

Good finding! It can be fixed for sure.

[Lagarto]

Talking about AI and autopilot - both drop flaps at speeds, which normally make the flaps jam. Do they really have to do that, or can it be fixed? Spitfires even use half flaps, which is completely unrealistic (there was no such thing in Spitfire as half-flaps, it was either up or down)
Sometimes I use autopilot + time compression to speed up things in a mission, but when I switch off the autopilot, it turns out that my aircraft has flaps jammed in down position. Very irritating.

[robday]

Recently I've been playing a USMC campaign at Iwo Jima and on a ground attack mission my flight were tasked with striking enemy bunkers at the foot of Mount Suribachi. The DGEN system routed us in from the opposite side of the mountain to the target, resulting in most bombs hitting the side and summit rather than the bunkers! I worked around that by opening the mission in FMB and altering the approach to target. (DGEN can be quite stupid at times. I've seen AI Stukas start their dive at as little as 1500 meters)
The main problem is that on subsequent passes my AI companions make attacks from angles that lead to them crashing into the side of the mountain!
Can anything be done to improve terrain avoidance?

[SPAD-1949]

Can anything be done to improve terrain avoidance?

Yes thats somhow annoying.
Leading an AI or Autopiloted plane throug a series of waypoints through a gorge (Mountains Map on stock or Grand Canyon Map with DBW) will mostly end up in crashes. AC-behaviour is completely messed up in comparision to the same set of Waypoints in a plains environment.

[shelby]

Also it happens when a plane tries to land in some airfields like Kara's

[Treetop64]

I've been playing Amagi's Disaster on the Frontiers eastern front campaign for a long time now. With the new AI behavior in the v4.11 patch, I now routinely get Veteran and Ace Bf109F pilots regularly getting owned by Rookie and Novice I-16s. The problem is that the AI 109 pilots are trying too hard to stay behind the I-16s when the latter makes violent evasive maneuvers. They end up getting into a slow turn fight against the I-16s, often at low altitudes, an area where the Russian aircraft holds a distinct advantage. Too many times now, experienced 109 pilots are getting themselves shot down by rookie I-16 pilots (Type 18s and 24s), and even by I-153s. The regularity at which this occurs is frustrating if you're playing the German side, and has been a definite immersion killer for an early eastern front scenario.

Previously, before the AI upgrade, German AI 109 pilots always made fast sweeping attacks on enemy fighters and was obviously avoiding getting into a slow, low turn fight situation. They routinely dominated Polikarpovs in early war scenarios, as was the case historically. Not anymore, as things turn into a bit of a mess now.

[sniperton]

Tank busting with MGs, particularly with LMGs, is a pathetic effort IMHO. Planes with a light onboard armament (like Cr-42s or R-10s) should waive their attack on hard targets once they've dropped their bombs. Similarly, JABO 109s should immediately disengage and switch to pure fighters once they've run out of cannon shells. Or am I wrong?

[Bearcat]

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y194/Bearcat99/AIBeefcopy_zpsa1735014.jpg

This is a 16 vs 16 fight with all my guys set as Aces and the enemy a mix of rooks & average.. Notice I have 5 out of 16 planes converging on me and not a friendly in range to do much ... I posted about this already .. but this was a classic example..

[Bearcat]

One thing I have noticed... If you mix up the commands between Attack Fighter, Target All and Cover Me (for wingman) and lastly Anyone Help.. the AI do better job of fighting as a team. Even with each other... They friendlies behave more like the gang banging bad guys do..

[302_Corsair]

Two most irritating me things in AI behaviour.
When I have enemy on my 6, he is shooting with some deflection, and thats ok. BUT why he is making correction in his aiming while I am under his windscreen? He shouldn't see me! This looks like AI is flying with cockpit view off.
Second thing is when I'm trying to shake him off with simple scissors he ramm into my plane instead break or go over me to repeat attack or whatever.

And maybe not important much thing, before 4.11 AI pilot followed his head with his target. After this patch he looks straight.

[Pursuivant]

This is a 16 vs 16 fight with all my guys set as Aces and the enemy a mix of rooks & average.. Notice I have 5 out of 16 planes converging on me and not a friendly in range to do much

Rereading this post, while it's wrong for an Ace level wingman to be nowhere to be seen (unless he got shot down), I think that it's appropriate for Average or Rookie pilots to "pile on" to a single target and get sucked into a tail chase.

Saburo Sakai describes a situation where there was briefly a situation where a Hellcat was chasing a Zero, with a Zero chasing the Hellcat, with a Hellcat chasing that Zero, and a Zero on the tail of that Hellcat - and every plane shot down the plane ahead of it, leaving behind just one Zero.

That sort of deadly target fixation was a very common problem. Even Veteran or Ace pilots could fall victim to it, setting themselves up for defeat when they lost Situational Awareness.

But, like I said, unless your wingie has run into problems, if he's Ace level AI, he SHOULD be clearing your tail. Preferably with a high side attack against the bandit closest to you.

[wolfhnd]

I have been having some problems with AI pilots engaging in very strange behavior in coops. In one mission the AI flew over their target and dropped their bombs a Kilometer beyond the assigned map coordinates. When the same mission is ran as a single player mission the same AI flight flew normally and hit their target.

I hosted the same mission again as a coop and the same strange behavior was noted with the AI completely missing their target.

Anyone else every experience this problem?

What is different between coop and single player missions?