4.11 - AI debugging

[daidalos.team]

@moderator: please make it a sticky

We will continue to develop and release further AI improvements in future patches. Please help us to identify any 4.11 AI related issues and post them here with detailed description, screenshots, videos, etc. Thank you.

Daidalos Team

[dl-3b]

Dear Team,
First, thank you so much for patch 4.11!!
Flew a couple of QMB missions. (Crimea Map)
AI BF109F2: crashes into the mountains (very often)
AI BF109F4: same (often)
AI YAK9D : same (now and then)
AI LA5FN : same (now and then)

Best regards,

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Dear Team,
First, thank you so much for patch 4.11!!
Flew a couple of QMB missions. (Crimea Map)
AI BF109F2: crashes in the mountains (very often)
AI BF109F4: same (often)
AI YAK9D : same (now and then)
AI LA5FN : same (now and then)

Best regards,

Pls give more specifications and maybe a mission file?

[T}{OR]

This is a question, not a bug (please delete if it shouldn't be posted here):

What is the AI skill level on Dedicated servers? Is this by any chance editable?

Thanks.

[JtD]

Do you mean gunners on human flown planes?

Other planes (purely AI) have the skill level set in the mission.

[T}{OR]

Yes. Human flown planes.

Does each gunner have individual skill or are all gunners the same and what setting is it (average or veteran)?

In case of individual, does it range from novice to ace or also averages on veteran / average skill settings or even all gunners can be ace / novice?

[Uzin]

Successfully installed 4.11 over vanilla 4.101.
Anyway, a lot of work was done. Thanks to DT.
Tried some QMB and single missions.
Some obsevations:
- former *.trk files not accepted by the new version.
- longer than 10 minutes *.trk files recored differ essentially from that what was observed in the flight.
- CTD at Quick mission without any known reason.
- the possibilities of waypoints - take offs aside (=pair) - do not work in QMB , weird places occupied by AI planes.
Surely these and other bugs will be repaired by DT, I hope.
Ik-3 has roundels on one wing upper surface only, second wing lower surface only. Is it correct ?

[Juri_JS]

I've noticed that an old problem wasn't fixed by the new AI. When doing rocket attacks on ships planes pull up very late and will often hit the ships superstructure. I hope this can be fixed in the future.

[JM2]

Pls give more specifications and maybe a mission file?

FW190 often crashes into the terrain also. (I have not tested all FW versions)

FMB, Kuban map (near Novorossijsk), airstart at 500m, 1x La5FN/P-47/P-51/spit etc vs 2x various FW190 version

[Juri_JS]

When I tried to create a ship attack mission for the Mosquito XVIII it showed a strange AI behaviour. It looks as if the planes can't find the correct attack approach to the target and they will just circle around it.

I have uploaded a test mission that shows the problem:
http://www.axis-and-allies-paintworks.com/Skins/Juri_JS/Mosquito_test.zip

Replace the Mosquito with another large caliber aircraft (B-25 or Hs129) and the planes will do the attack correctly. There are also problems when flying the mission with a rocket equipped Mosquito VI but not when I use Beaufighters with rockets, so I guess there is an AI issue with the ship attack behaviour of all Mosquitos.

[Fall_Pink?]

@moderator: please make it a sticky

We will continue to develop and release further AI improvements in future patches. Please help us to identify any 4.11 AI related issues and post them here with detailed description, screenshots, videos, etc. Thank you.

Daidalos Team

AI bug:

Jet fighters, e.g. me262, have trouble handling engine overheating. Took off with 8 me262's (career center, 1945) with auto pilot on and the engine got overheated. It reduced power after the message appeared, but it was too late and got me a smoking engine.

Rgs,
FP

[pupo162]

this is not a bug. its just something TD should look at AI.

ATM AI is so much interesting than in previous releases. its more creative, has more maneuvers etc but it lacks the 101 of every fighter pilot: they dont know how to combat turn!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a58FYTtUYn4&feature=youtu.be
im replacing this video soon for one withou typos. i apologize

every new pilot is thought how to turn, and thats the number 1 defensive maneuver, a hard horizontal turn. specially when you are in such a good turner ( zero ) fighting a lousy turner ( f6f).

i hope this answers previews questions answered by a TD member of why i considered the AI still easy. The AI is very good, hard and realistic if you are on the slower plane, but if you are in the fast plane, its still a piece of cake.

[F19_Klunk]

was that an ACE AI? Veteran? or Rookie?

[pupo162]

was that an ACE AI? Veteran? or Rookie?

ACE! forgot to put on the title, very important info!

in fact if you start with a regular AI, you will see the beginning is very similar, but midway trow th emerge, the AI will just do a lot of mistakes. like a noob would do :grin:

[Bolelas]

I was testing the new gunner in Pe2-110 series, QMB, crimea, scramble, and of course i was stupid enough to shoot the ground (scramble), got the gunner killed, and plane went on autopilot and no way i could turn it of. I could switch through every member crew alive (pilot included), but no answer from the autopilot key or other input. Tryed it again and the same efect. The problem its if the enemy shoots the bottom gunner and plane goes all the way on autopilot. Dont know if this happens in flight, must be tested.
The game is super, thanks team Daidalos! :)

[Guggy]

I was testing the new gunner in Pe2-110 series, QMB, crimea, scramble, and of course i was stupid enough to shoot the ground (scramble), got the gunner killed, and plane went on autopilot and no way i could turn it of. I could switch through every member crew alive (pilot included), but no answer from the autopilot key or other input. Tryed it again and the same efect. The problem its if the enemy shoots the bottom gunner and plane goes all the way on autopilot. Dont know if this happens in flight, must be tested.
The game is super, thanks team Daidalos! :)

Had similar happen in a PE8 on Crimea while trying a scramble against no AI (just wanted to see how it handled on takeoff). Was unable to use the hatswitch on my stick either, so had to refly.

[slm]

I was testing the new 4.11 release in Quick Mission Builder.
I attacked 3 enemy planes, TBD-1. I got some hits to a plane that was probably the leader of the group. Smoke was coming out of the damaged plane and it started slowly losing altitude.

the bug: its wingman kept following the damaged plane towards the ground and both AI planes crashed.

[ZaltysZ]

In fast vs slow, but good turner scenario (i.e. BF109 vs I16), fast planes try to do same stuff like in the video posted earlier, that results in damage or destruction of fast plane pretty quickly, as AI doesn't waste ammo anymore. It would be good if AI could choose to dive aggressively and extend, instead of all these half turns and rolls.

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Thanks for telling your impressions. AI is not considered as final - its just a first step done now and further tweaking is planed, where necessary. Your oppinions help much to this. But please consider also more various situations than just 1vs1, so as big furballs, different plane types (energy fighter/T&B fighter) or disadvantages in numbers. Its also important, how AI work together.

As for the video above, it seems to be an ace- (read minus ... a poor skilled ace), you know, the general skill sublevels may vary randomly.

[pupo162]

Thanks for telling your impressions. AI is not considered as final - its just a first step done now and further tweaking is planed, where necessary. Your oppinions help much to this. But please consider also more various situations than just 1vs1, so as big furballs, different plane types (energy fighter/T&B fighter) or disadvantages in numbers. Its also important, how AI work together.

As for the video above, it seems to be an ace- (read minus ... a poor skilled ace), you know, the general skill sublevels may vary randomly.

regarding the ACE- thats a very good implementation. its not seen in this video, but in my previous attempts at something like this, i had a f4f ( slower than the zero) and about 2 out of 3 times, the zero would just extend and play safe, clearly a ace+ choice :grin:

[Dash 8]

I like the new AI much better. It seems there is a chance that they panic and freeze at the controls. I was killing a lot of AI average level in the QMB, but some were puting up a good fight. So, I switched them to Veteran and the first one I fought froze up after the initial pass and I shredded him. He never moved from straight and level when I was on his 6. So I tried the same senario again. This time he was very difficult to bring down. Even hit me a few times too. I like the chance that they can panic and freeze up. That, and they don't see you coming in from 6 o'clock low too.

[Fall_Pink?]

AI problem - overheating related:

Taking off in Ta183 with 4 missiles is very hard for AI. At the end of the runway the engine is already overheated and AI throttles back a bit (20 or 30% power), but loses too much altitude and crashes. Others barely escape and fly only a few meter above ground.

Rgs,
FP

[bwp2bwp]

Hi

First thanks again to DT for all their hard work!!

I have not played a lot so I am not sure if this is new or not but the AI is having a hard time keeping He-111 planes in the air.

pilot carrer -> He-111 -> Stalingrad -> first mission

If start in air the AI crashes at least He-111 at beginning and the players plane crashes if set to AI. If take off from ground the AI makes the planes hug the earth and is having trouble clawing to higher altitudes and is nearly crashing for most of the early part of the flight.

Prob not a big issue but perhaps a clue to an underlying problem with ai flight or engine management or aircraft performance.

Thanks again for all your hard work in making this a greater sim.

Barry

[dpeters95]

Hello,
First of all thanks again to DT for all their hard work and quick response with the hotfix!!!

This problem actually has to do with the autopilot, which is sort of temporary AI ;-) This has occured in every mission I have tried so far. When you have a long distance between waypoints and you activate the autopilot I have noticed that about every 20-30 seconds the plane will full rudder right and sometimes turn 90 degrees then quickly back to level and climb to regain the altitude that it just lost. At first I thought it was actually trying to avoid flying through clouds but it still does it in a clear blue sky even when it is right on the line for the next waypoint. You can really see the regularity if you speed up to 8X. It occurs about every 4 seconds.

It's certainly not a game stopper but it looks really odd.

[Fall_Pink?]

AI 'bug':

Me163 sometimes switches targets and engages enemy fighters instead of bomber stream (tested with pre-set single mission with me163). Me163 should be mainly a bomber attacker and not engage any fighters. Maybe some defensive manouvres when it encounters fighters, but its focus should be bombers.

It's also prone to miscalculate attacks, likely due the large speed difference with bombers.

Furthermore, it does not disengage itself quickly from the fight to glide back home. Maybe it should disengage, fly back to home base and distance itself as much as it can when only 10% rocket fuel is left.

Rgs,
FP

[MicroWave]

Hello,
First of all thanks again to DT for all their hard work and quick response with the hotfix!!!

This problem actually has to do with the autopilot, which is sort of temporary AI ;-) This has occured in every mission I have tried so far. When you have a long distance between waypoints and you activate the autopilot I have noticed that about every 20-30 seconds the plane will full rudder right and sometimes turn 90 degrees then quickly back to level and climb to regain the altitude that it just lost. At first I thought it was actually trying to avoid flying through clouds but it still does it in a clear blue sky even when it is right on the line for the next waypoint. You can really see the regularity if you speed up to 8X. It occurs about every 4 seconds.

It's certainly not a game stopper but it looks really odd.

This is possibly a 'fishtail' maneuver. That's how AI checks if there is a threat on his six. I guess it applies to autopilot, too.

[dpeters95]

This is possibly a 'fishtail' maneuver. That's how AI checks if there is a threat on his six. I guess it applies to autopilot, too.

If you want to see it, a good example is in IJN/A6M2-21/Pearl Harbor Attack Wave 2. As soon as it starts press the autopilot key (mine is "A") and then speed up the game to 8X. You can see what I mean. You may be correct about the fishtail move but it sure got my attention.

[Fall_Pink?]

@moderator: please make it a sticky

We will continue to develop and release further AI improvements in future patches. Please help us to identify any 4.11 AI related issues and post them here with detailed description, screenshots, videos, etc. Thank you.

Daidalos Team

Not so much a bug as such, but more a request for 4.11.1 or 4.12. Is it possible to add a command like ´disengage´? I now usually use something like get ´rejoin´ or ´cover me´, but that does not seem to work in case of a ground attack in progress. I´d like my wingmen to rejoin immediately.

Secondly, when the command `back to base´ is given, all wingmen follow a route that takes them back to base except the leader which seems to follow the normal waypoints.

Rgs,
FP

By the way. Saw a very nice feature of the new AI with some escorts. My escorts at first prepared themselves to engage enemy fighters, but then backed down and rejoined when they saw the enemy turned away from them followed by other friendlies ;-)

At other occasions some enemy fighters simply passed overhead and failed to notice my flight. AI indeed no longer has the all-seeing 360 degrees view of the world. Very nice ;-)

Ps. I also see all of my real cpu cores are now involved some how. Is this one of the effects of moving AI code to the DT.dll?

[Fall_Pink?]

Bug: single missions, Hungary, dogfight P51's with Me109G14:

4th wingman of each flight of P51's crashes into the lake because they're too low to the ground. Stacking order of a flight that flies "Reihe" (sorry, only know the German word for it right now...), causes problems for the 3rd and 4th wingman. I'd suggest to use a formation with less vertical spacing when lead plane flies at very low altitude. It would lead to fewer crashes of these wingmen.

Regards,
FP

[Treetop64]

Really diggin' the new patch, but one persistent problem with the AI continues:

I'm still getting hammered by the AA fire over my own airfield when defending it.

EDIT - Sorry, one more thing later observed. AI formation keeping is much worse now than in previous versions:

Flying Amagi's "Disaster on the Frontiers", Sturmovik campaign, first couple of days in the L'vov map at the beginning of Barbarossa, in the I-153 as a Mladshiy Leitenant. In a 9-ship formation I'm the tail guy in the third fight. In previous versions of the game it was not difficult at all to keep a good formation with the AI. There was only a little bit of "formation wobble" and I only had to occasionally modulate the throttle in small amounts to maintain position.

In v4.11 however, every minute or so the AI (in the third flight, don't know about the first two...) seems to suddenly cut way back on the throttle, drop back for a moment or two, then suddenly apply full power for another few seconds, forcing me to make similarly drastic changes in throttle just to keep up. Also, every few minutes the whole formation will suddenly descend a few tens of meters, then come back up to the assigned cruise altitude again.

As a result, at least as a tail-end junior pilot, it has now become very difficult - in fact, nearly impossible - to keep any kind of good formation with the AI. They're all over the place now.

As a qualifier, I have flown formations as a junior pilot with the AI over several campaigns, and can humbly and reliably state that I have gotten quite good at it.

Thanks!

[ZaltysZ]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cdw0YGBhd6g&feature=youtu.be

Pe-8 in question lacks the rudder, however I still think it is just showing off, because it eventually returns to level flight and continues its flight nicely. Shouldn't AI be more conservative with maneuvers in such heavies?

[MadCat242]

Hello gentlemen,
I have been a forum lurker for quite some time now but now I want to help improve that fantastic patch.

I experienced an odd ai behaviour:
QMB 2 bf109 against 4 ai novice il-4. Crimea map.
- 1st pass head-on: damaged no.4. (lost one of his engines -> crew bailed)
- 2nd attack from 6 o clock :rolleyes: : I hit the wingleader. Several hits on one wing, damaged his tailplane, smoking engine -> bomber rolls over, going into a steep dive, slowly recovers (guess due to increased speed) and crew bails.
-> entire AI flight (no. 2 and 3) flipped over as well and followed their leader...
The moment No1 started bailing the other 2 went back to level flight and headed north.

Is that on purpose? Did the ai "thought" their leader is leading them into that dive? Blindly following orders? Or did the ai just didn't switch to "hes going down, no need to follow. No.2 is the new boss"?

PS: I installed that hotfix aswell

[FC99]

- former *.trk files not accepted by the new version.
- longer than 10 minutes *.trk files recored differ essentially from that what was observed in the flight.
- the possibilities of waypoints - take offs aside (=pair) - do not work in QMB , weird places occupied by AI planes.

AFAIK TRK files works only on the version they were made on.
TRK are inherently unreliable, they are basically mission played again and minor input from the player like changing the view or things like that can get random numbers out of the synchronization and with completely different result of the mission. NTRK's are much better in that regard.

Is Pair Take Off very important to you in QMB? QMB engine reads the template file and than create new mission file according to the QMB setting, obviously it doesn't take into account some of the new features. We can probably enable that but I'd rather work on things that are more important IMO. But if you want it really bad and I find a time anything is possible.

I've noticed that an old problem wasn't fixed by the new AI. When doing rocket attacks on ships planes pull up very late and will often hit the ships superstructure. I hope this can be fixed in the future.Can you tell me which planes gives you most of the problems?
When I tried to create a ship attack mission for the Mosquito XVIII it showed a strange AI behaviour. It looks as if the planes can't find the correct attack approach to the target and they will just circle around it.
Rgr, will investigate, thanks for sending the problematic mission, that will help us a lot to correct the problem as fast as possible.


Jet fighters, e.g. me262, have trouble handling engine overheating. Took off with 8 me262's (career center, 1945) with auto pilot on and the engine got overheated. It reduced power after the message appeared, but it was too late and got me a smoking engine.

Taking off in Ta183 with 4 missiles is very hard for AI. At the end of the runway the engine is already overheated and AI throttles back a bit (20 or 30% power), but loses too much altitude and crashes. Others barely escape and fly only a few meter above ground.
Rgr, we will check is this a problem of AI or it is the general problem with jets.

Me163 sometimes switches targets and engages enemy fighters instead of bomber stream (tested with pre-set single mission with me163). Me163 should be mainly a bomber attacker and not engage any fighters. Maybe some defensive manouvres when it encounters fighters, but its focus should be bombers.

It's also prone to miscalculate attacks, likely due the large speed difference with bombers.

Furthermore, it does not disengage itself quickly from the fight to glide back home. Maybe it should disengage, fly back to home base and distance itself as much as it can when only 10% rocket fuel is left.

Are bombers set as target in that mission, AFAIK if bombers are target than plane should attack them first, it could switch the target eventually if it is endangered by fighters.

Miscalculated attacks can look weird but I'd say that it was not easy to do it right in RL too, maybe we can get them better but makeing errors from time to time sounds realistic to me.

AI planes should disengage from combat when fuel is low even now.

Is it possible to add a command like ´disengage´? I now usually use something like get ´rejoin´ or ´cover me´, but that does not seem to work in case of a ground attack in progress. I´d like my wingmen to rejoin immediately.

Secondly, when the command `back to base´ is given, all wingmen follow a route that takes them back to base except the leader which seems to follow the normal waypoints.

Ps. I also see all of my real cpu cores are now involved some how. Is this one of the effects of moving AI code to the DT.dll?
Do we really need new "Disengage" command or it would be enough to enforce rejoining under any circumstances with the current "Rejoin" command?

I'll check RTB command but I need more info, are you talking about your flight or it is about other flights under your command?

Better distribution of the CPU load is not the primary reason for DT.dll but it might help in that regard. In some of our tests performance was approximately the same or even better with 4.11 than same missions in 4.10 despite the lot of new code in 4.11.

Bug: single missions, Hungary, dogfight P51's with Me109G14:

4th wingman of each flight of P51's crashes into the lake because they're too low to the ground. Stacking order of a flight that flies "Reihe" (sorry, only know the German word for it right now...), causes problems for the 3rd and 4th wingman. I'd suggest to use a formation with less vertical spacing when lead plane flies at very low altitude. It would lead to fewer crashes of these wingmen.

Can you give me more details, was that during the cruise or it was some sort of ground attack, I'm not sure what "Reihe" is but from your description this could be "Line" formation which is not standard for P-51.


ATM AI is so much interesting than in previous releases. its more creative, has more maneuvers etc but it lacks the 101 of every fighter pilot: they dont know how to combat turn!

We are aware of that and some other issues with AI ACM. You have to understand that we are doing this in our free time and there is only so many hours in a day. We know that current AI is far from perfect but we thought that it is better to release "improved" AI than to wait another year for a "perfect" one.

Anyway, thanks for input, it's appreciated and we will do our best to improve AI turning ( I hate what they do too so chances are good that this will be better in next patch.:) )


I attacked 3 enemy planes, TBD-1. I got some hits to a plane that was probably the leader of the group. Smoke was coming out of the damaged plane and it started slowly losing altitude.

the bug: its wingman kept following the damaged plane towards the ground and both AI planes crashed.
Another old problem, we are aware of that and it's high on priority list.

Really diggin' the new patch, but one persistent problem with the AI continues:

I'm still getting hammered by the AA fire over my own airfield when defending it.

EDIT - Sorry, one more thing later observed. AI formation keeping is much worse now than in previous versions:

AFAIK we didn't change anything regarding AAA, they should not shoot at enemy when friendly planes are close but it is possible that something is not working right. Still, we need to give them a chance to be as stupid as humans, people have been killed by friendly AAA(G.Preddy for example)

AI is making "check six" maneuvers from time to time maybe this can be the reason for some of the problems with keeping the formation.


I experienced an odd ai behaviour:
QMB 2 bf109 against 4 ai novice il-4. Crimea map.
- 1st pass head-on: damaged no.4. (lost one of his engines -> crew bailed)
- 2nd attack from 6 o clock :rolleyes: : I hit the wingleader. Several hits on one wing, damaged his tailplane, smoking engine -> bomber rolls over, going into a steep dive, slowly recovers (guess due to increased speed) and crew bails.
-> entire AI flight (no. 2 and 3) flipped over as well and followed their leader...
The moment No1 started bailing the other 2 went back to level flight and headed north.

Is that on purpose? Did the ai "thought" their leader is leading them into that dive? Blindly following orders? Or did the ai just didn't switch to "hes going down, no need to follow. No.2 is the new boss"?

This is same problem reported by slm too. It is the old one and we are working on it, hard part is to decide when to declare the Leader plane as not combat capable and assign the lead to someone else.

Thanks everybody for your input, keep them coming, this can only help us to get the game even better.

FC

[Juri_JS]

I've noticed that an old problem wasn't fixed by the new AI. When doing rocket attacks on ships planes pull up very late and will often hit the ships superstructure. I hope this can be fixed in the future.
Can you tell me which planes gives you most of the problems?


All aircraft types with air-to-ground rockets are affected by the late pull up issue during ship attacks and also all large caliber aircraft that are able to do strafing attacks on ships. I have uploaded a mission to demonstrate the problem and to make the testing easier for you.

http://www.axis-and-allies-paintworks.com/Skins/Juri_JS/shipattacktest.zip



When I tried to create a ship attack mission for the Mosquito XVIII it showed a strange AI behaviour. It looks as if the planes can't find the correct attack approach to the target and they will just circle around it.
Rgr, will investigate, thanks for sending the problematic mission, that will help us a lot to correct the problem as fast as possible.

There seems to be a problem with the ship attack routine of both the Mosquito XVIII and the rocket equipped Mosquito VI. When bombs are used to attack ships everything is working fine. My guess is that it has something to do with the fact, that the Mosquito VI only had bomb loadouts when it was initially released and a correct rocket attack routine for ship attacks was never added, which also affects the Mosquito XVIII because it uses the same routine - but that is just a hypothesis, let's see what your investigation will find.

[slm]

This is same problem reported by slm too. It is the old one and we are working on it, hard part is to decide when to declare the Leader plane as not combat capable and assign the lead to someone else.
FC

From what I've read, when their plane got hit so there was serious damage pilots often knew it soon and announced it to other pilots **long before using parachute**. Of course the pilot doesn't always know how far his plane can continue flying, but I think it would be great if this "unable to continue mission" could be simulated at least in some cases. Especially when bombers are flying in formation towards target and the lead plane is hit and thus cannot keep planned speed/altitude anymore.

[Fall_Pink?]

Quote:
“Me163 sometimes switches targets and engages enemy fighters instead of bomber stream (tested with pre-set single mission with me163). Me163 should be mainly a bomber attacker and not engage any fighters. Maybe some defensive maneuvers when it encounters fighters, but its focus should be bombers. It's also prone to miscalculate attacks, likely due the large speed difference with bombers. Furthermore, it does not disengage itself quickly from the fight to glide back home. Maybe it should disengage, fly back to home base and distance itself as much as it can when only 10% rocket fuel is left.”

FC > Are bombers set as target in that mission, AFAIK if bombers are target than plane should attack them first, it could switch the target eventually if it is endangered by fighters. Miscalculated attacks can look weird but I'd say that it was not easy to do it right in RL too, maybe we can get them better but making errors from time to time sounds realistic to me. AI planes should disengage from combat when fuel is low even now.

Me > Bombers are set as target for Me163 in that mission I think. You're right, it attacked the bombers first and made 2 (very) wrong passes without firing anything and then started to dogfight with the Mustangs. Mustangs did indeed fire upon the Me163, so maybe that's the logic behind it all. From an AI point of view it sounds logical, but nevertheless, it's not very realistic for a Me163 to do ;-) The Me163 is the odd one out here I think, because gliding back is of course intended. It needs to disengage from the fight to get out of reach of fighters for a safe gliding position.

My main concern here is I think real high speed fighters like early jets (and Me163) need a bit different attack AI most of the time to really exploit their high speed/energy advantage. Jets have so much energy that they cannot make these quick and sudden turns and therefore often miscalculate when they attack relatively slow targets like bombers. Boom and zoom from far away and extend is the preferred tactic most of the time. I think jets generally require a more relaxed and more gentle AI when it comes to attacking. It would definitely look more real that way.

Quote:
Is it possible to add a command like ´disengage´? I now usually use something like get ´rejoin´ or ´cover me´, but that does not seem to work in case of a ground attack in progress. I´d like my wing men to rejoin immediately. Secondly, when the command `back to base´ is given, all wingmen follow a route that takes them back to base except the leader which seems to follow the normal waypoints. Ps. I also see all of my real cpu cores are now involved some how. Is this one of the effects of moving AI code to the DT.dll?”

FC > Do we really need new "Disengage" command or it would be enough to enforce rejoining under any circumstances with the current "Rejoin" command? I'll check RTB command but I need more info, are you talking about your flight or it is about other flights under your command?
Better distribution of the CPU load is not the primary reason for DT.dll but it might help in that regard. In some of our tests performance was approximately the same or even better with 4.11 than same missions in 4.10 despite the lot of new code in 4.11.

Me -> It was my flight under my command (4 F4U's attacking Palau with bombs), a DGEN mission. If the “rejoin” command also implies "disengage" that would also be okay of course ;-)

Quote:
“Bug: single missions, Hungary, dogfight P51's with Me109G14:
4th wingman of each flight of P51's crashes into the lake because they're too low to the ground. Stacking order of a flight that flies "Reihe" (sorry, only know the German word for it right now...), causes problems for the 3rd and 4th wingman. I'd suggest to use a formation with less vertical spacing when lead plane flies at very low altitude. It would lead to fewer crashes of these wingmen.”

FC -> Can you give me more details, was that during the cruise or it was some sort of ground attack, I'm not sure what "Reihe" is but from your description this could be "Line" formation which is not standard for P-51.

Me -> Reihe = line astern. Background: P51's are about to strafe a Hungary position near lake Balaton and fly across the lake. The 4th and last plane in the line is almost leaving a wake in the water and eventually crashes. Of two flights of P51, the 4th one crashed. Line astern position during a ground attack uses a stacking where each wingman flies somewhat below its leader. The 4th one in the flight flies near ground level when the leader flies ~ 100 meters above ground level. The line astern formation during ground attack leads to unnecessary AI crashes if each plane flies beneath its leader. It could be prevented if programmed differently. Let's say: don't use this stacking order when the leader flies at 100 or 200 meters.

Don't get me wrong, 4.11 is a very good patch ;-) 4.11 is a great improvement when compared with 4.10.1 when it comes to AI ;-)

Regards,
FP

[Bearcat]

I like most of the AI improvements .. but one thing that still sticks in my craw is the fact that AI will still keep flying after getting flamed. I can see if it is an engine fire and the plane goes into a dive .. but a wing fire .. the pilot should bail... or crash ... or bail and then crash .. but he definitely should not continue flying and even shooting..

[FC99]

Pe-8 in question lacks the rudder, however I still think it is just showing off, because it eventually returns to level flight and continues its flight nicely. Shouldn't AI be more conservative with maneuvers in such heavies?
He is just trying to stabilize his plane, this is not a designed maneuver.

All aircraft types with air-to-ground rockets are affected by the late pull up issue during ship attacks and also all large caliber aircraft that are able to do strafing attacks on ships.
I have something ready for 4.11.1, thanks for reporting the problem and helping with missions.

From what I've read, when their plane got hit so there was serious damage pilots often knew it soon and announced it to other pilots **long before using parachute**. Of course the pilot doesn't always know how far his plane can continue flying, but I think it would be great if this "unable to continue mission" could be simulated at least in some cases. Especially when bombers are flying in formation towards target and the lead plane is hit and thus cannot keep planned speed/altitude anymore.
We have this in mind but what is easy for human is not necessarily the same for AI. That's what is "hard", what info to provide to AI and make him react correctly. Don't worry, we will do something about it.

Various things
- I'll do something about jets.
- RTB command will send your flight home,you will continue to fly further. If you want everybody,including you,to go home use "Next Waypoint" command until only one is left, that should send everybody home.(Just a guess about this one, try it :) )

- Wingmans too low during attack, IIRC I made new formation just for that case, I'll have to check if somebody changed it or it is not applied to fighters too. ( I had dive bombers in mind while doing it)

I'm not offended by bug reports and reasonable complaints, this actually helps. Trolling is what is evil and I would never accuse you that.

I like most of the AI improvements .. but one thing that still sticks in my craw is the fact that AI will still keep flying after getting flamed. I can see if it is an engine fire and the plane goes into a dive .. but a wing fire .. the pilot should bail... or crash ... or bail and then crash .. but he definitely should not continue flying and even shooting..
There is a part of the code which should deal with this, I'll check if something is wrong there.

FC

[voyager_663rd]

I was testing the new 4.11 release in Quick Mission Builder.
I attacked 3 enemy planes, TBD-1. I got some hits to a plane that was probably the leader of the group. Smoke was coming out of the damaged plane and it started slowly losing altitude.

the bug: its wingman kept following the damaged plane towards the ground and both AI planes crashed.
?

I did the same mission: QMB at 500 m with 3 TBD-1's and everybody was an Ace. I was in an A4.

Disabled the lead, he went in.

Other two kept on their merry way.

Took out new lead--he spun in and the last one kept going.

No bug here.

[FC99]

?

I did the same mission: QMB at 500 m with 3 TBD-1's and everybody was an Ace. I was in an A4.

Disabled the lead, he went in.

Other two kept on their merry way.

Took out new lead--he spun in and the last one kept going.

No bug here.
Thanks for support but there is a sort of bug here. Problem is in the gray area when AI plane is not totally disabled but it can't fly properly either. In such cases AI leader often start to lose altitude and when it's obvious that it is not going to make it it's often too late for the flight to pull out of the dive.

Another annoying example is when you have heavy bombers at high altitude and Leader is damaged. It start to lose alt and lead whole flight down low.

We will do something about it.

[[URU]BlackFox]

I was testing the AI strafing behaviour, and it seems that it just makes one strafing run, no matter the results, and gives up strafing.

The old routine, the one that made the AI get far away from the target before coming in again was not good, and maybe this could be a good time to redo the ground attack logic.

I attached the test mission (I just ran it from the FMB). I tried a fighter (P-47), and a Sturmovik, with the same results.

[Letum]

Another annoying example is when you have heavy bombers at high altitude and Leader is damaged. It start to lose alt and lead whole flight down low.

We will do something about it.

I don't know how easy this would be to code, but perhaps if 'plane A' shows some signs that it might drag a formation down, the formation leader is switched to a more healthy plane in the flight.

If 'plane A' does then loose altitude, that's fine, but also if 'plane A' does not loose altitude, it can still fly with the formation, even if it is not leading it.

[Bearcat]

I like most of the AI improvements .. but one thing that still sticks in my craw is the fact that AI will still keep flying after getting flamed. I can see if it is an engine fire and the plane goes into a dive .. but a wing fire .. the pilot should bail... or crash ... or bail and then crash .. but he definitely should not continue flying and even shooting..

There is a part of the code which should deal with this, I'll check if something is wrong there.

FC


Here is a short video ..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCcZ9kzLXns&context=C3798d2eADOEgsToPDskIiLZbMnf_YMf1raIVQSfOY

Now I know that the AI went into a dive to put out the fire... but we were not that high ... and I have heard of engine fires being put out that way but not wing fires ... usually when the wing catches fire .... the pilot bails or dies... Not goes into a dive to put it out .. and then comes out of the dive on his fire damaged wing and continues to not only attack ... but be deadly... It would go a long way to giving the pilots in AI planes with wing fires .. or fires period .. because even though it is my virtual life ... when the plane's on fire ... I'm out of there.... End of story. The AI should be too. Thansk for getting back so quick and thanks you guys for all the great stuff you do to keep this old girl beautiful.

[Letum]

I have a mission with some P-38s tank busting.
They are set to GAttack some tanks that are set as the target at the waypoint.

The P38s approach the tanks at 2.5k and drop their bombs as if they where heavy bombers. Is this normal? I don't remember this behaviour pre-patch.

[IceFire]

I like most of the AI improvements .. but one thing that still sticks in my craw is the fact that AI will still keep flying after getting flamed. I can see if it is an engine fire and the plane goes into a dive .. but a wing fire .. the pilot should bail... or crash ... or bail and then crash .. but he definitely should not continue flying and even shooting..

There may have to be some subtlety there. Not sure how the AI works but if I were flying a multi engine medium or heavy bomber I may stick with the plane with a fuel fire on a wing and see if it will go out. If so the plane may be flyable back to base. On a Ki-84 with a wing fire I would bail immediately.

I suspect that was also the case with many crews during WWII having read so many reports of B-17s coming back with incredible damage and sometimes suffering fires on the way back. Not all of those ended at all in a happy way but some of them did make it back...

So ... we may not want the AI to jump at the first sign of fire. Some sort of judgement calculation maybe? No idea how it specifically works.

[IceFire]

I have a mission with some P-38s tank busting.
They are set to GAttack some tanks that are set as the target at the waypoint.

The P38s approach the tanks at 2.5k and drop their bombs as if they where heavy bombers. Is this normal? I don't remember this behaviour pre-patch.

Could have something to do with the altitude of the GATTACK point? Mine are always set low (around 500 meters). I'm fairly certain the AI would try for a "level bomb attack" even in 4.10.1 and earlier. Unless the altitude was sufficiently low.

[Pursuivant]

Now I know that the AI went into a dive to put out the fire... but we were not that high ... and I have heard of engine fires being put out that way but not wing fires

Why shouldn't a fire in the wing go out if you dive? The whole idea is that the hard dive deprives the fire of oxygen and heat it goes out, just like blowing out a match.

Another factor is that, realistically, the pilot could divert fuel from the damaged tank, or else the fire consumes all the fuel. Once the fuel is gone, no more fire, since duralloy aluminum doesn't burn that well.

Mind you, I'm not letting the AI or the damage modeling off the hook here, but if you were in combat and you had a fire that went out, leaving the plane basically flyable, wouldn't you fight on if circumstances demanded it?

Looking at the video, if you told me that a player was flying the Ki-84 that got shot up, the behavior wouldn't surprise me in the least.

[Jumoschwanz]

I noticed that Ace AI fighters will keep chasing after and shooting enemy fighters when the enemy fighter is in flames and/or the engine is stopped. Just thought it was a waste of resources and ammo for them.

On the other hand, I have seen a number of times when Ace AI are themselves in disabled fighters or bombers, either on fire or with stopped engines or missing controls and they continue to fly the aircraft instead of bail.

Not a problem for me, and I am sure that in WWII some chose to stick with their aircraft rather than bail, but in the cases I am talking about the aircraft ends up crashing and killing the crew.

Maybe something is damaged or the AI are wounded and they can not bail out? Altitude does not seem to be a factor as sometimes they will bail so low they hit the ground too fast and die.

Sure, sometimes the AI will fly into the ground, but I am sure a lot of aircraft in WWII hit the ground or water while fighting at low altitude also, so it may actually be adding realism to have random aircraft hit the ground, random AI pilots not bailing, and AI fighters shooting at enemy aircraft that are already disabled, maybe even have them shoot at parachutes once in a while?

So depending on how you look at it things with the AI can either be faults or simply imitating humans with all their faults and erratic behavior.

As far as fighting ability goes, the Ace AI is still not as good as the better human pilots flying online, it is damn good but not like human Ace pilots.

I am not saying that I am an ace, but I can probably beat the Ace AI almost every time 1 vs.1 or two. Sometimes I can even take three or four of them out.

When I shoot their aircraft to pieces, I always feel better if they can bail and save their virtual lives. If I disable an enemy AI I often let it limp home and save the ammo for healthier targets. That too might be an interesting trait to put into the AI, some mercy every now and then.

Thanks for your time.... S!

Oh, and yes, I will dive to put a fire out on my aircraft, and if I can I will take a few more shots before the next fire starts no problem....

[Jumoschwanz]

Hello gentlemen,
Is that on purpose? Did the ai "thought" their leader is leading them into that dive? Blindly following orders? Or did the ai just didn't switch to "hes going down, no need to follow. No.2 is the new boss"?PS: I installed that hotfix aswell

There was the example in Erich Hartmann's book where an entire flight of IL2s with heavy bomb loads followed their squadron leaders bad maneuver and they all hit the ground.

I have often thought that any fantastic thing we have ever seen happen in this sim probably happened in WWII at least once also!

[Juri_JS]

Originally Posted by Juri_JS View Post
All aircraft types with air-to-ground rockets are affected by the late pull up issue during ship attacks and also all large caliber aircraft that are able to do strafing attacks on ships.

I have something ready for 4.11.1, thanks for reporting the problem and helping with missions.



Thank you for your efforts FC99.
Can you tell me if there is any news on the Mosquito ship attack issue? I am asking because it seriously hampers one of my campaign projects.

[FC99]

Thank you for your efforts FC99.
Can you tell me if there is any news on the Mosquito ship attack issue? I am asking because it seriously hampers one of my campaign projects.
All issues in your missions are solved. Mosquitoes attacks and avoid crashing into targets.

[FC99]

BlackFox;381105']I was testing the AI strafing behaviour, and it seems that it just makes one strafing run, no matter the results, and gives up strafing.

The old routine, the one that made the AI get far away from the target before coming in again was not good, and maybe this could be a good time to redo the ground attack logic.

Hi, tried your mission and it works as you described. I tried some other Ground Attack missions and in them AI made multiple attacks so it seems that this is situation dependent.

I'll check some of the old manuals for RL ground attack patterns and change AI if necessary.


Now I know that the AI went into a dive to put out the fire... but we were not that high ... and I have heard of engine fires being put out that way but not wing fires ... usually when the wing catches fire .... the pilot bails or dies...
Well, if you have read some of the responses you can see why is AI programming hard.:grin: Same situation but very different reaction to it by different people. It's hard for AI to satisfy everybody. IMO best we can do is to enable AI to exhibit all kind of behavior characteristic to humans.

I noticed that Ace AI fighters will keep chasing after and shooting enemy fighters when the enemy fighter is in flames and/or the engine is stopped. Just thought it was a waste of resources and ammo for them.

First of all, it is good to see you around Jumo, always a pleasure to see that some Il2 veterans are still playing this game.

They can recognize the "kill" sometimes but I'll see what can be done to improve it.

On the other hand, I have seen a number of times when Ace AI are themselves in disabled fighters or bombers, either on fire or with stopped engines or missing controls and they continue to fly the aircraft instead of bail.
Again, there is a part of the code that should deal with such situations, I'll put it on the TODO list.


Not a problem for me, and I am sure that in WWII some chose to stick with their aircraft rather than bail, but in the cases I am talking about the aircraft ends up crashing and killing the crew.
Maybe something is damaged or the AI are wounded and they can not bail out? Altitude does not seem to be a factor as sometimes they will bail so low they hit the ground too fast and die.
That's entirely possible.



So depending on how you look at it things with the AI can either be faults or simply imitating humans with all their faults and erratic behavior.

Exactly, AI have right to be stupid, after all, we have all witnessed idiotic human behavior on servers.:grin:


As far as fighting ability goes, the Ace AI is still not as good as the better human pilots flying online, it is damn good but not like human Ace pilots.
Correct 100%, but if we make AI aces as good as some online pilot I met( you included) who would fly this game? IMO for gameplay reasons, it is ideal for AI to be good but just not as good as best humans.

FC

[Jumoschwanz]

Correct 100%, but if we make AI aces as good as some online pilot I met( you included) who would fly this game? IMO for gameplay reasons, it is ideal for AI to be good but just not as good as best humans.FC

If possible it would be great to have a level above Ace, call it "undefeatable" or "legendary" as if you were flying against one of the great WWII aces.

Just as it is no fun to lose all the time, it is equally boring to always win. People can choose the level they want to play against. If someone loses to the "legendary" pilots in IL2, then they don't have to feel bad as everyone lost to them in WWII also...

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

You can always increase the number of foes!
Up to 32 aces together may be better than you (maybe not). :D

[Pursuivant]

I noticed that Ace AI fighters will keep chasing after and shooting enemy fighters when the enemy fighter is in flames and/or the engine is stopped. Just thought it was a waste of resources and ammo for them.

Fires can go out, engines can be restarted. Also, realistically, a pilot might not notice that an opponent's engine has stopped when he opens fire, or he might be trying to kill the crew before they can bail out.

In terms of the game, it's also possible that the game engine is doing its old trick of not always recognizing a kill as a kill until well after the fact, even if the plane is on fire, has a dead pilot, or has ditched or crash landed.

On the other hand, I have seen a number of times when Ace AI are themselves in disabled fighters or bombers, either on fire or with stopped engines or missing controls and they continue to fly the aircraft instead of bail.

The decision to bail out or stay with the airplane is heavily dependent on the situation. It would be tough for AI to model all the possible situations.

Examples:

Stuck controls.

Normally: Bail out.

Except: You're over enemy territory on a straight and level course back to friendly territory. Then you stay with the plane and bail out over friendly territory.

Except: You're flying straight and level over water. You stay with the plane and bail out over the nearest friendly territory. If that's not possible, you bail out over land.

Except: You're in a plane where you have access to tools, cable runs, etc. and you're flying straight and level. You try to fix the problem.

Except: You're in an airplane which has wounded crew aboard who are too badly injured to bail out. Then, you have everyone except the pilot bail out over friendly territory and then the pilot attempts to make a crash landing.

Fire or Dead Engine.

Normally: Bail out.

Except: You're too low to bail out. Then you ride the plane down and try to crash land.

Except: You're over a friendly populated area or too low to bail out. Then you point the plane towards an open area and ride it down as long as it's possible to do so, then bail out at minimum safe altitude.

Except: You're over water. Then you try to ride the plane down and ditch, since there is survival equipment in the plane that you'd have to leave behind if you jumped.

Except: You're over water near a friendly ship. You turn the plane so you're near the ship and then bail out or ditch, depending on altitude, hoping for rescue.

Except: You're over water near a friendly coast. You turn the plane towards land so you can bail out over land.

Except: You're over hostile coast, but there are friendly ships off the coast. You turn the plane and try to get near a friendly ship.

Except: You're right over your target with a load of bombs. You hold course and bomb your target, then bail or crash. (Or, for the occasional hero, you suicide dive into your target.)

Sure, sometimes the AI will fly into the ground, but I am sure a lot of aircraft in WWII hit the ground or water while fighting at low altitude.

Lots of planes came back with bits of trees imbedded in the wings. In one notable instance, a U.S. jabo actually flew low enough to decapitate a German soldier! And, one U.S. ace who should have known better (Lt. Col. Francis Gabrelski) flew so low to the ground that he messed up his propeller and had to crash land.

[harryRIEDL]

I had a quick QM with a bomber raid with some odd behavior I had TB-3 landing randomly(undamaged and hopping up and down on the terrain) and collisions Two PE-8 ran into each other on the approch to target (average AI Crimieia Map Target Airfield)

[mmaruda]

Not really a bug, but since the AI rear gunner snipers are gone, it's become ridiculous - attacking a formation of IL-4 bombers... Alone! Downed 6 of them in one pass doing about 280kph in 190 A-4. They were shooting all over the place, except at me. This wasn't a fast boom and zoom, I slowly got onto each and every one's tail, and shot the crap out of 'em. In 4.10 I would be dead in seconds.

I know that before the gunners were a pain, but a slow, lone attack on a bomber formation from behind still should be suicide - now it's a stroll in the park. I was actually eating a doughnut during this, and they gave me and Iron Cross... Bit weird.

[BadAim]

I'd like to first note that I'm enjoying the new AI immensely they're much smoother and more human like. One little foible I did notice is that I had my wingman crash right next to me as I landed at missions end when I forgot to give him the "go home" order, just like they've always done. If you have time this might be something to look at.

[WTE_Galway]

I'd like to first note that I'm enjoying the new AI immensely they're much smoother and more human like. One little foible I did notice is that I had my wingman crash right next to me as I landed at missions end when I forgot to give him the "go home" order, just like they've always done. If you have time this might be something to look at.

I have NOT tested it ... however if the wingman still does a CFIT when his leader is landing they most likely also still pancake into hills and mountains when scud running or dogfighting in valleys ... especially on maps like Slovakia while carrying munitions.

[FC99]

One little foible I did notice is that I had my wingman crash right next to me as I landed at missions end when I forgot to give him the "go home" order, just like they've always done. If you have time this might be something to look at.
My reply might sound patronizing but I assure that that is not my intention, I'll use your post just as an example and try to provoke some thoughts.

In above situation first error was one made by human pilot, in fact AI pilots done what many of the real WWII pilots would do, they followed their leader.
This leads to the next point. Being a leader is not easy, not everybody can be a leader in RL. Leadership brings responsibility, leader have to take care about his subordinates and adjust his actions to match ability of his team.

IMO players should try to get into this leadership role more, great leaders are those who can get the most out of their team, overcame its weaknesses and exploit its strengths. As AI improves and become more human-like, role of the leader becomes more and more important and players are missing a lot of fun if they don't dug deeper into Leader role.

My point being, do what your team can do, don't try to force them to do what they can't do.

Now back to the bug report. You are right, that happens. I made new maneuver for low level flying ( you can now lead your flight few meters above the ground, try it but just don't make descent too steep) and I build mechanism that was supposed to take care about situations like you described.
Obviously it's not sufficient and I'll make some adjustments. Thanks for report and ,please, don't take my post personally, it was just used to ilustrate my POV about the leadership in games in general.

[Lagarto]

The problem is that if you fly in No 2 position (leader's wingman) and the leader gets shot down, the rest of the flight (Nos 3 and 4) will formate on you. It happened to me last night. I couldn't communicate with them, and the moment I was about to touch down, they both slammed into the ground.

[[URU]BlackFox]

The problem is that if you fly in No 2 position (leader's wingman) and the leader gets shot down, the rest of the flight (Nos 3 and 4) will formate on you. It happened to me last night. I couldn't communicate with them, and the moment I was about to touch down, they both slammed into the ground.

Some nice thing to implement would be that the leadership of the flight gets transferred when the leader gets shot down. That way the AI can always have a commander (another AI or a human, according to circumstances).I saw this in a 4.09 mod, together with new formations and other stuff, but it was incompatible with newer versions.

Again, I know that it's a massive work, so take it just as a suggestion for future versions of the game.

[Blackjack]

The problem is that if you fly in No 2 position (leader's wingman) and the leader gets shot down, the rest of the flight (Nos 3 and 4) will formate on you. It happened to me last night. I couldn't communicate with them, and the moment I was about to touch down, they both slammed into the ground.

That mostly happens to me if I "request backup" from base , so they sort of latch onto me (sometimes the lead of the flight too!), maybe some sort of that behavour happens when you send "clear my 6" on the radio, I really dont know:confused:

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

it was just used to ilustrate my POV about the leadership in games in general.


Hehe! Well, yes, indeed I primarly used AI wingmen only for spotting NMEs for me, cleaning my six, when I have screwed it, irritating the NME while I try to sneak in and as cannon fodder when I need to escape. In fact I usually only abuse AI. :D

[FC99]

The problem is that if you fly in No 2 position (leader's wingman) and the leader gets shot down, the rest of the flight (Nos 3 and 4) will formate on you. It happened to me last night. I couldn't communicate with them, and the moment I was about to touch down, they both slammed into the ground.
Damn, this is something we must improve. While we are at it, what do you think about giving the human player an option to inform his flight about nearby bandits even when he is not flight leader?

[fruitbat]

Damn, this is something we must improve. While we are at it, what do you think about giving the human player an option to inform his flight about nearby bandits even when he is not flight leader?

I think thats a good idea, you would irl.

Awesome work your doing with the AI, really impressive:grin:

[Fenrir]

Can I add to this that the AI call bandits when the player is flight leader; currently they just break off and engage leaving the oblivious player unaware of their departure!

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Hm? Your AI friends are calling bandits for you and as long as you tell them to fly in formation, they also will not departure if they are not attacked.

[Lagarto]

While we are at it, what do you think about giving the human player an option to inform his flight about nearby bandits even when he is not flight leader?

It's a great idea. I happens to me sometimes that I end up alone against, say, a flight of enemy bombers and I would like someone to come over and give me a hand. I select command 'Anyone help me', only to get an answer 'You're fine' :rolleyes: Not very helpful. How do they know it anyway if they're nowhere in sight?

Fenrir is right, my AI subordinates quietly break off as soon as they 'spot' enemy. I've learned to listen to the sound of their engines and the moment I hear them fade away in the distance I know they did it again.

[Aviar]

Can I add to this that the AI call bandits when the player is flight leader; currently they just break off and engage leaving the oblivious player unaware of their departure!

All you need to do is use your Wingman/Flight 'Rejoin' command and they will get right back into formation....even if they 'see' nearby enemy planes.

Aviar

[Lagarto]

Aviar, the problem, as I understand it, is of different nature. I don't want my AI wingmen to stay in formation, just the opposite. I don't mind them leading me to enemy aircraft they 'spotted' - provided they're kind enough to inform me that they're breaking off formation to engage something!
My AI wingmen are usually better than me in locating enemy in the sky (they don't have to strain their eyes; being computer-controlled, they just 'know' that something's coming), so being a flight leader I rely on them in that matter. All I want is that they call out the 'bandits' instead of just flying away on their own, the way they do now.

[Aviar]

Ok, since this is the AI debugging thread, I'll throw one in here that is a real immersion killer, although it only happens under certain circumstances. However, it is still annoying when it does happen.

If I have a small mission (let's say 3 flyable Allied planes) and I host a coop and all 3 planes are manned by a human....when we get near an enemy flight, the 'AI' will scream out the 'bandits sighted' call.

Well, there is NO friendly AI anywhere on the map because all 3 planes are manned by humans. Who is this AI ghost screaming on the radio that they see bandits? It really breaks the mood.

Ok, vent mode off. This is really not a fault of 4.11, as it's been around for years...maybe from day one. It's just that it happened again today and the post above mine reminded me of it.

So, if this small issue can ever be resolved it would be nice.

EDIT: I forgot...this AI 'ghost' also congratulates you when you get a kill....LOL.

Aviar

[jameson]

That happened to me flying earlier with AI as wingman, he'd been shot down and five minutes later he's praised my shooting! Sadly I was shot down later and during that, looking behind I see the P39 firing and next to him the useless AI watching presumably :(, no warning either. They still fly on your dead six where you can't see them, mind you given they now only just fly, unless you order them to do something, (with the reply, negative! negative!). lol!
The enemy AI are much better in 4.11 tho'.

[Pursuivant]

That happened to me flying earlier with AI as wingman, he'd been shot down and five minutes later he's praised my shooting!

There's lots of little ways that friendly AI radio messages are messed up. Huge amounts of lag before a message is transmitted is just one.

Even more jarring is a "calm voice" "This is [Number] . . ." statements followed by a long period of silence, then a "freak out" message (e.g., "I'm bailing out!").

Another annoyance is that the game doesn't have unit callsigns, just generic "color" names and all units use the same "frequencies." This means, during a big mission, when multiple flights of the same color are in the air, you can have multiple "red 2" (or whatever) calling out different messages simultaneously.

Even worse, since friendly planes never identify their location on the map, you've got no way of knowing which "red 2" (or whatever) is under attack/returning to base/bailing out.

Another annoyance is that periodically someone (I've never figured out who) will call out random numbers. I've been playing IL2 for something like 8 years now and I still don't know what those random numbers mean. Is it ground control calling out altitudes and courses? If so, whose altitude and course? Why?

If you're going to have ground control, it should actually vector you towards your target.

Then of course, there's the friendly AI which calls out "bandits" (or whatever) without giving you any useful information about: A) Number, B) Type, C) Location, D) Altitude, E) Activity.

In a better world, you'd get a report like "2 bandit fighters, 5 o'clock high, inbound!" or "Multiple bogies, 20,000 feet, grid coordinates 20-32, inbound!"

In a perfect world, you'd have even more info, like "2 109s, 5 o'clock high, coming in!" (i.e., actually beginning an attack run) or "Multiple bogies, angels 20, 17 miles off Lunga Point, inbound. Course 137 degrees, speed 250 knots."

Finally, while it's merely a "color" thing, some of the AI dialog just sounds wrong when translated into other languages/dialects. Every air force had its own method of doing things and its own slang.

For example, "He's going to hell" might be a good literal translation from the Russian, but a 1940s British pilot might say "That Jerry's gone for a Burton" when claiming a kill over a German plane, while an American pilot of the period might say, "That Kraut's down for the count!"

The better add-on voice packs get this right. Stock voice packs, not so much.

[apexGP]

Just wanna add a few observations of my own;

Generally, AI (friend and foe) will not withdraw from an engagement zone after sustaining damage that causes heavy oil and/or fuel loss. I would imagine that this should realistically illicit a fairly immediate RTB protocol at the first opportunity. There are some exceptions of course, such as with heavy bombers approaching a target zone, but with flights of smaller A/C (singles or even mutli-engine), they should generally withdraw in an attempt to save themselves and their A/C, being that their ability to execute their mission objectives would at that point be severely compromised. I often see fighter AI with critical engine damage just carrying on like nothing's wrong until they fall out of the sky.

Fighter AI (friend or foe) can often pull off spectacular deflection shots, but then fail to hit a non-maneuvering (and often damaged) target that's directly in front of them. This one has caused me some issues. I've seen my own AI wingmen (of all skill levels) pull off amazing snapshots with a single burst, but then fly right up behind a damaged, non-maneuvering opponent and miss repeatedly until they decide to break off (in frustration?:confused:) and leave a potential threat that they should have taken down to become a threat again. They don't attempt to re-engage. I've left several wingmen's wing before when they were literally only moments from serving the coup de grace (ie; sustained guns blazing) on a damaged, straight and level foe, to deal with other threats, only to be later shot down by that very same damaged enemy that my AI wingman let off the hook! Sometimes other wingmen in my flight were right behind me just watching it happen too:!: Almost like the rounds they were firing and missing were actually seen by them as hits, and they broke off their attack cuz they now considered that enemy dead and simply didn't 'see' them anymore. Very strange.

Often, ace AI (QMB) will stay with their A/C after the engine has been disabled in what at first seems to be an attempt at a dead-stick emergency ditch, but ends up becoming a funeral pyre because they don't try to find open areas to attempt the landing. I've witnessed behavior where they actually fly right into a town instead of any of the surrounding fields they had the option to glide to when they still had the altitude available. These pilots are alive when this happens, I fly by and look and then I sometimes observe them in the replay. Dead-sticking carries risks of course, and I'm not implying that every AI should survive when attempting one... but they seem to not give themselves the opportunity because they don't try to guide their planes to open areas.

Most of these observations happened in single-player missions with varying levels of mission complexity, with the exception of the last example.

Excellent work so far! I appreciate all your efforts immensely :-)

[Lagarto]

I often see fighter AI with critical engine damage just carrying on like nothing's wrong until they fall out of the sky.

...and only then they exclaim: 'Damn, I'm hit!' (or something like that), as if they just discovered that fact :grin:

Seriously, this is one of the reasons why AI units suffer such unrealistically high losses, up to 100% in one go.

[eduzk]

At least once this happened in dynamic campaign game: We flew eight Bf109s. Number one crash-landed, but the pilot stayed in the cockpit. Two, three and four continued their patrol route, but the second flight kept circling over the crashed number one.

[JG26_EZ]

I don't have many details regarding the "glitch" I've heard reported in my missions, but something to note just incase others are now experiencing it aswell..

Two old missions. AI was in P39's '42
While hosting, twice now, I've been asked by a pilot "Are you still here?"
I waved it off the first time.. but then again today.. different mission but same P39's.. Someone asked again "Are you still here?"
I replied "Yes", and we continued flying..
When we were finished the mission, I asked what the issue was..
He replied that the P39's were flying under the ground and thought that the host had disconnected (the reason for asking if I was sill there).

Like I mentioned at the start.. I don't have a .ntrk or any hardcore evidence, but figured I'd mention it incase others notice the same problem. (It might have been on my end, but I haven't had anyone speak of this problem before now/v4.11)

[Alien]

Please get the kill stealing issue repaired at last! Everytime when I damage enemy plane and get on his tail to finally kill him, my ,,wingmen'' dive on him and tear him apart. And just moments ago I torn an enemy hurri and it was falling without its tail, then got hit by 1!!! MG bullet of my no 3 and when it hit the ground, it wasn't a kill for me. But when I try to do the same, the kill goes to AI. WTF? I know you haven't made this aspect of the game but please get it finally fixed. Please.

[Pursuivant]

Please get the kill stealing issue repaired at last! Everytime when I damage enemy plane and get on his tail to finally kill him, my ,,wingmen'' dive on him and tear him apart.

More to the point, the program needs to register a destroyed plane as being destroyed at the moment it loses a vital part, the crew bails out, it ditches, or it makes a crash landing.

Having the computer figure out when a plane is destroyed due to damage should be simple. If damage to the plane is sufficiently bad that the crew bails out, the computer should register a kill at the same time.

If damage kills the pilot(s), the computer should also register a kill.

Figuring out when a plane has ditched is a bit harder. But, if the computer detects that a land plane is sinking into water, it should immediately register the kill.

Figuring out when a plane has crash landed is a bit trickier, but it can't be that hard. Just have the computer recognize a kill when a) the plane's propeller is bent, b) the landing gear is up or sheared off, & c) the plane is stationary.

And, as always, for people who don't like "instant kill claiming" there should be an option in the UI so that you can turn it off.

[Lagarto]

Also, if I inflict critical damage while attacking an aircraft, unintentionally collide with it or even ram it and then have to bail out, and that attacked aircraft goes down, it's never registered as a kill if my own aircraft crashed first. A kill is a kill, even a hard-won one, and should be registered as such.

[Alien]

More to the point, the program needs to register a destroyed plane as being destroyed at the moment it loses a vital part, the crew bails out, it ditches, or it makes a crash landing.

Having the computer figure out when a plane is destroyed due to damage should be simple. If damage to the plane is sufficiently bad that the crew bails out, the computer should register a kill at the same time.

If damage kills the pilot(s), the computer should also register a kill.

Figuring out when a plane has ditched is a bit harder. But, if the computer detects that a land plane is sinking into water, it should immediately register the kill.

Figuring out when a plane has crash landed is a bit trickier, but it can't be that hard. Just have the computer recognize a kill when a) the plane's propeller is bent, b) the landing gear is up or sheared off, & c) the plane is stationary.

And, as always, for people who don't like "instant kill claiming" there should be an option in the UI so that you can turn it off.

+1!

[FC99]

First, thanks to everybody who is reporting the problems. This game is so big and complex that no single person knows everything about the game, only cumulative knowledge of many people comes close.

Aviar, the problem, as I understand it, is of different nature. I don't want my AI wingmen to stay in formation, just the opposite. I don't mind them leading me to enemy aircraft they 'spotted' - provided they're kind enough to inform me that they're breaking off formation to engage something!
I'll take a look at that, I think that I know why this happen and if I'm right that shouldn't be too hard to fix.


My AI wingmen are usually better than me in locating enemy in the sky (they don't have to strain their eyes; being computer-controlled, they just 'know' that something's coming)
Don't bet on that, AI ability to spot enemies is reworked completely in 4.11, to a point that AI ability is probably more realistic than player's.


Well, there is NO friendly AI anywhere on the map because all 3 planes are manned by humans. Who is this AI ghost screaming on the radio that they see bandits? It really breaks the mood.

Ok, vent mode off. This is really not a fault of 4.11, as it's been around for years...maybe from day one. It's just that it happened again today and the post above mine reminded me of it.

So, if this small issue can ever be resolved it would be nice.
I'll check that, this may be related to the problem Lagarto reported so both things might be solved in one go.

They still fly on your dead six where you can't see them, mind you given they now only just fly, unless you order them to do something, (with the reply, negative! negative!). lol!

Depends on your wingman's skill, additionally, AI's are more restricted in their FM in 4.11 and you as a leader must assure that your wingmans can follow you. That is no different than in RL.


Generally, AI (friend and foe) will not withdraw from an engagement zone after sustaining damage that causes heavy oil and/or fuel loss.

There is a mechanism in game that should take care of that but it probably need some refinements. Hard part with such situations is in finding good general rule because whatever you try to use there is always few exceptions.


Fighter AI (friend or foe) can often pull off spectacular deflection shots, but then fail to hit a non-maneuvering (and often damaged) target that's directly in front of them.
We will try to improve that although direct 6 o'clock shots are not that easy really due to the small size of the target. I'll see if they will get better if they allow small deflection in such situations.

Often, ace AI (QMB) will stay with their A/C after the engine has been disabled in what at first seems to be an attempt at a dead-stick emergency ditch, but ends up becoming a funeral pyre because they don't try to find open areas to attempt the landing.

That's another old thing, we will try to improve it. It is especially annoying when they try to ditch in the field when they could easily glide to the nearest airfield.


Two old missions. AI was in P39's '42
While hosting, twice now, I've been asked by a pilot "Are you still here?"
I waved it off the first time.. but then again today.. different mission but same P39's.. Someone asked again "Are you still here?"
I replied "Yes", and we continued flying..
When we were finished the mission, I asked what the issue was..
He replied that the P39's were flying under the ground and thought that the host had disconnected (the reason for asking if I was sill there).

This is probably a connection problem or he is using modded map with changed landscape heights.

Please get the kill stealing issue repaired at last!
We have made some changes in that but people tend to notice more the things where they feel "cheated". Interesting is that during Beta testing one of the testers thought that AI might be too good in estimating the kill and breaking off the attack.

More to the point, the program needs to register a destroyed plane as being destroyed at the moment it loses a vital part, the crew bails out, it ditches, or it makes a crash landing.

And, as always, for people who don't like "instant kill claiming" there should be an option in the UI so that you can turn it off.
I'm more inclined to make AI better and reduce "kill steals" that way. Occasional "steals" are completely realistic and they happened in WWII, they happen online so AI should not be an exception IMO.

[Alien]

OK, but it happens every time. Just like in 4.101, 4.09 or any earlier version. That's really annoying.

[Pursuivant]

I'm more inclined to make AI better and reduce "kill steals" that way. Occasional "steals" are completely realistic and they happened in WWII, they happen online so AI should not be an exception IMO.

I agree completely. After all, IL2 is extremely unrealistic in that the game TELLS YOU when you've gotten a kill, and instantly assigns it to you (or another pilot), as opposed to you having to visually observe the kill, claim it after the mission, get corroboration from another source, and then work out who gets credit.

Of course, what would be amazingly cool is if you could select kill claiming options by realism level and air force.

Default would be the current system - more or less instant kill claiming and only one pilot gets credit. But, you could have these options:

1) Different Kill Claim Options.

A) Easy Credit: Basically, make stuff up. If you scored hits on an E/A, you can claim a kill.

B) Strict Claiming: Your kill must be confirmed by at least one friendly unit, or it must fall on land behind friendly lines. Unless you have a gun camera system, solo kills far behind enemy lines don't get counted.

2) Partial Credit: You can claim damaged, probable kills and confirmed kills.

3) Shared Credit: You can "split" kills with other pilots who also scored hits on the plane.

4) Ground killed planes count as air kills.

5) Damaged heavy bombers count as 1 kill. Destroyed heavy bombers count as 2 "kills."

6) Killed planes are sorted by nationality.

7) Kill markings are different based on which air force you're flying for, the nationality of your opponents and/or the theater you're flying in.

[Lagarto]

When I first read that in 4.11 the AI would check the line of fire before opening up, I hoped I would no longer have to fear my overzealous AI mates firing from behind my back and right over my head to get the aircraft I'm after. However, the current situation seems even worse in that respect. Is that a side effect of the general increase in AI's aggressiveness?

[Fall_Pink?]

1st AI bug/request:

- is it perhaps possible for AI to 'recognize' and act differently when they meet heavily defended enemy ground objects while on route? When they fly to a ground attack target they fly sometimes over heavily defended air bases (which are not their target) like nothing's happening at all. Some random behavior would also be nice, perhaps depending on skill level of flight leader.

I know, it sounds like asking too much, but I would love to see some smart AI behavior here like e.g. flying nap of the earth, temporarily taking a different course or increasing altitude. Now a lot depends on the mission designer, but he/she can only preprare so much and the problem is still there if dynamic campaign missions are used.

2nd AI request:

is it possible ground attack planes (or medium bombers like A20) never fly up hill after they've attacked? I can imagine a preferred ground attack pattern will have to be calculated that AI can use. E.g. a small village surrounded by hills can sometimes only be attacked in two ways. North to south and vice versa. It would be great if AI could calculate optimal attack patterns by themselves (within certain limits) if the mission designer or dgen messed things up.

Rgs,
FP

[FC99]

Aviar, the problem, as I understand it, is of different nature. I don't want my AI wingmen to stay in formation, just the opposite. I don't mind them leading me to enemy aircraft they 'spotted' - provided they're kind enough to inform me that they're breaking off formation to engage something!

Can you give me more details, I checked this a little in the game and if I'm leader they stay with me unless I order attack and if AI is leader they call bandits so I need to know more about the circumstances when they don't behave as you expect them.

OK, but it happens every time. Just like in 4.101, 4.09 or any earlier version. That's really annoying.
Theoretically AI will not attack heavily damaged plane but if they already had that plane as a target they might proceed with the attack. Aces and Veterans will check target status and they are more likely to abort the attack. I'll tweak that and hopefully get better behavior.


Of course, what would be amazingly cool is if you could select kill claiming options by realism level and air force.
Maybe one day, this is not the highest priority at the moment. IMO we still have more serious issues with AI.

When I first read that in 4.11 the AI would check the line of fire before opening up, I hoped I would no longer have to fear my overzealous AI mates firing from behind my back and right over my head to get the aircraft I'm after. However, the current situation seems even worse in that respect. Is that a side effect of the general increase in AI's aggressiveness?
AI gunners are the only ones who have complex friendly fire check. You are right in your assumption that more aggressive AI is responsible for "shoulder shooting", I'll make them more restrained when player is in front of them.

1st AI bug/request:
- is it perhaps possible for AI to 'recognize' and act differently when they meet heavily defended enemy ground objects while on route? When they fly to a ground attack target they fly sometimes over heavily defended air bases (which are not their target) like nothing's happening at all. Some random behavior would also be nice, perhaps depending on skill level of flight leader.
Possible, in 4.11 we only changed some aspects of AI behavior, there are many areas we didn't touched at all. Ground attacking is one of those things and but it is WIP.


is it possible ground attack planes (or medium bombers like A20) never fly up hill after they've attacked? I can imagine a preferred ground attack pattern will have to be calculated that AI can use. E.g. a small village surrounded by hills can sometimes only be attacked in two ways. North to south and vice versa. It would be great if AI could calculate optimal attack patterns by themselves (within certain limits) if the mission designer or dgen messed things up.
Possible, we need dynamically created routes for proper functioning of the triggers so we will have to deal with that problem if we don't want to crash all of the flights into the hills.

FC

[Lagarto]

Can you give me more details, I checked this a little in the game and if I'm leader they stay with me unless I order attack and if AI is leader they call bandits so I need to know more about the circumstances when they don't behave as you expect them.
FC

OK, I'll pay more attention to that phenomenon to see what makes my AI subordinates silently drift away to hunt on their own. I don't claim it happens every time but it does happen and there must be some rule to it.
And thank you very much for taking time to restrain the 'shoulder shooting'. Presently my AI squad mates make me more anxious than the enemy.

[Luno13]

I imagine it did happen though, intentionally or not, so it shouldn't necessarily be eliminated completely, in my opinion.

It's good to hear that more changes are planned!:)

[Alien]

I've also noticed that AI's accuracy is way too good, it counts deflection angle just like a computer, no human has ability to make such crackshots almost head-on and with 500 knots of passing speed. That's impossible. And even a rookie level pilot can do such things. IMO, you should limit their accuracy a bit, because that's unrealistic and only 50+ kills aces have enough shooting experience to shoot in this way.

[FC99]

I've also noticed that AI's accuracy is way too good, it counts deflection angle just like a computer, no human has ability to make such crackshots almost head-on and with 500 knots of passing speed. That's impossible. And even a rookie level pilot can do such things. IMO, you should limit their accuracy a bit, because that's unrealistic and only 50+ kills aces have enough shooting experience to shoot in this way.
We have spent ~3 months in tweaking AI shooting ability. I collected plenty of data and current AI shooting percentage is below best human players. Aces AI are somewhere at the very good players level.

[Alien]

OK, but rookies are above rookie human level, IMO.

[Ra'Kaan]

OK, but rookies are above rookie human level, IMO.

I have to agree. Although this is not nesecarily a bad thing as it forces us to get better faster.

I do a lot of training in many aircraft in a simple mission I created with some bombers, ships, ground targets and Rookie Zeros at Guadalcanal.

Just the other day I sat on the runway and allowed the mission to proceed while flipping through the camera views to observe AI behavior / tactics / maneouvers etc. To be honest, I didn't set out to perform any tests or anything, I just sorta got caught up in the little AI drama unfolding before me.

The first thing I noticed immediatly was these little AI nuggets knew EXACTLY where to find my AI wingmates. Without missing a beat, they methodically shot down every one of my AI planes turning immediatly to the next plane no matter if it was visable, or in a position to be seen etc. They just turned into the next nearest aircraft and blew it from the sky.

Mind you, the AI planes I setup for my side are mere eyecandy and are just patroling around for ambiance and are not ordered to engage the enemy.

Once all my sides AI were downed, these supposed rookies immediately turned and bee-lined directly for my aircraft - still sitting without the engine running on the runway a few virtual miles away from them - the lead AI pumped copious amounts of lead into my aircraft making me wonder if he would ever run out of ammo (this was after he single handedly downed 6 planes) then his AI wingman failed to pull out of the dive and proceeded to crash his zero into the ground obliterating me in the process. (Kamakazi AI behavior??? LOL )

After all my squadron and myself were dead, the AI went to it's final patrol waypoint as it should.

At this point, I was laughing so hard. =)

I wished I had flipped on the flight recorder, but I guess my point is that the AI still know EXACTLY where their enemies are at all times reguardless of distance. That sounded harsh, but I mean to say, within a certain distance - I think.

I'm not critisizing, just posting my observations.

Which begs the question, do I need to rebuild my mission from scratch to enable the new AI behavior ? I assumed the AI would just fly according to their new 4.11 programming.

[Alien]

(...)do I need to rebuild my mission from scratch to enable the new AI behavior ?(...)
No, that's an absurd. You did everything just OK. My first post was to point their experience level in shooting, but your is 1000 times better! A question to Daidalos Team: how did this issue manage to get through beta-testing? I hope that it's a subject to change :D

PS I haven't noticed behavior like this. Maybe even the opposite of it. I made myself a mission where I flew a 109 (alone) and escorted a couple of Heinkels over MTO map. 3 Wildcats with rookie level (I wanted to test their deflection shooting more) attacked us. I dove on them, appearing just below the sun and shot one down. The other two didn't notice it, but when I attacked the second one, they both answered. That was the best combat I've ever had. At first, I tried just to damage one and rejoin bombers, but I missed him and when I was in half-way (Wildcats were about 1-2 kms behind me) I realised that they might continue their pursuit and finally get closer to the bombers. So I turned back. When I got to EFs, they took the challenge. We started to fight equally (the 2 of them, but unexperienced, against me, a killer in a 109). But I got pissed off when 1 of them shot when he was exactly above me (to the right, but I was in a turn) and with 450 kph speed RIGHT into my cockpit (HTF did the ROOKIE do this?!) and hit my leg and sight. I continued the fight, but now they had advantage, so I tried to escape (I was low on ammo - at least I thought so) by hiding in a large cloud. I made a couple of circles inside and when I got out, there was no enemy there - they flew away. So I turned to rejoin the heinkels, but then an idea appeared: now the Wildcats weren't expecting me, so I could do a fast run, kill one of them and the other one wouldn't be any problem then. So I turned into heading leading to the shore, next to the cloud. When I got there, I spotted one Wildcat circling clockwise and the other one counterclockwise (?) above him and a bit to the left. So I dove to kill the lower one. But I overshot and hit him just a few times (remember that I had no crosshairs). The other one immediately jumped on me, but I was flying faster, so I easily got to his tail and damaged him. His entire rudder got off, he also had his left wing looking like a Swiss cheese, so I thought that he was going to crash and just watched, looking out not to get suprised by the other one. But there was only the badly damaged one. After 10 mins of following, I was sure that he wasn't to crash so I dove from the direction of the sun. I had no MG rounds left, just a cannon which, as you know, has really small amount of ammo, so I ,,aimed'' carefully. I hit him with about 3 rounds and got away, watching again. He was shaking a bit more, but that was all. So I attacked again and he literally blew up, about 30 meters before my nose. I had an oil leak and several more damages. I turned to base immediateley and landed without problems. After clicking the ,,quit'' button, I was informed that I shot them all down. So the circling one had got to be killed in that ,,bad'' attack. That was really my best combat experience, thanks!

[FC99]

The first thing I noticed immediatly was these little AI nuggets knew EXACTLY where to find my AI wingmates. Without missing a beat, they methodically shot down every one of my AI planes turning immediatly to the next plane no matter if it was visable, or in a position to be seen etc. They just turned into the next nearest aircraft and blew it from the sky.
Once they find enemy flight there is nothing strange that they can locate and attack nearby planes. They must have some sort of situational awareness and ability to communicate with their friends.



Once all my sides AI were downed, these supposed rookies immediately turned and bee-lined directly for my aircraft - still sitting without the engine running on the runway a few virtual miles away from them
I'll check that, if you were distant enough they should not see you and attack you but as you were still on the ground they possibly treated you as ground target and that part of the code is not changed yet.


But I got pissed off when 1 of them shot when he was exactly above me (to the right, but I was in a turn) and with 450 kph speed RIGHT into my cockpit (HTF did the ROOKIE do this?!) and hit my leg and sight.
There is no guarantee that rookies will miss all the time. Chances are that they will miss but it is also possible that they will hit you with the first bullet. Luck plays a big part in game just as in life.

In my shooting tests Rookies were scoring with only 1% of shots fired, anything less than that would be ridiculous IMO.

[Pursuivant]

I'll check that, if you were distant enough they should not see you and attack you but as you were still on the ground they possibly treated you as ground target and that part of the code is not changed yet.

I don't see anything wrong with this. One flight takes out an enemy flight over the enemy's home airfield. They've got ammo left over, so they go down to strafe before heading home. On the way down, they see an enemy plane on the runway ready to take off. That makes it an obvious, easy, priority target - exactly the sort of thing that any pilot would aim for first.

The only thing strange about the whole scenario is that the wingman crashed, but maybe not so strange if he was a rookie, more focused on keeping station and following his leader than pulling out of his dive.

[Ra'Kaan]

I don't see anything wrong with this. ...


Actually, I agree!

I really want to be sure the devs saw this in my last post -


I'm not critisizing, just posting my observations.


I am very grateful for the TD devs continued interest in making this the best sim in history!


The only thing strange about the whole scenario is that the wingman crashed, ...


I'm sticking with AI smart enough to "decide" to kamakazi. ;)

[Aardvark892]

The He-111 that is torpedo capable, the H-6, will not fly a torpedo run AI routine. Using my "Torpedoes Away" QMB pack, I've tested the Axis, Airfield (Carrier) Attack (no AAA) with the Ju-88's that can carry the LT 5b and LT 5W. I set the autopilot on at mission start and watch what happens. There are no problems with the 88's.

With the exact same parameters, the 111's will not commit torpedo runs, dropping their 5b's and 5W's while flying blissfully unaware over the target carrier, in no sort of flight profile that would work at all for torpedo runs.

I've attached the QMB missions to this for your testing. There are no Bridge or Armor attack missions. For more info on this pack if you're interested:

http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=4160

Otherwise, Exellent work on Il2 overall!

EDIT: I've discovered it's not the AI programming. It has something to do with waypoint placement. Apparently the 111's need different waypoint parameters to drop torpedoes. I'm in the middle of experimenting with it and I'll post here if I can figure out what works and why.

EDIT 2: Okay... for some reason the 111's won't use torpedoes only in QMB. I took the QMB mission, saved it as a single mission, deleted all the other flights, ships, etc. until there was just one plane and one ship. I changed nothing of the 111 H-6's waypoints or settings. It worked perfectly. The same mission in the QMB it simply doesn't work. I know that other torpedo carriers work in the QMB, like the 88's, so I'm at a loss now to explain why it's happening. I checked every flyable torpedo-able airplane in both the QMB and the single mission. Every single one of them worked in both... except for the 111's. They simply won't torpedo in the QMB.

[SPAD-1949]

We have spent ~3 months in tweaking AI shooting ability. I collected plenty of data and current AI shooting percentage is below best human players. Aces AI are somewhere at the very good players level.

Well i'm not experienced with other human players, but here what I found out about AI behaviour:
Was just testing ETO from the beginning upwards and got stuck in 41 flying the 109.

Its not all of AI flewn AC that became a harder enemy, some became comparatively weaker and their fighting behaviour is generaly a bit weaker, because they have not this vast ammount of overspeed ability and no overheat problems, like before.

But you cant hide in clouds. AI can. Clouds are allways dense, when you are in pursuit and allways a little to transparent when you are pursued.
The deflection shooting of especially Hurricanes MkIIc is uncompared. If it happens that AI gets just a little window for a fire solution, it does, and it hits.
The difference of Ace to Rookie is just: The Ace will get you with the first or second round in a devastating manner, like Motor burning, Player AC torn into pieces, at least two of the controls away. Rooky just hits jou with several rounds of his first burst.
You can fight them down as long as you can avoid headons and blackouts, which, with all due respect is more or less unlikely, if you have to mess up in a flight against flight situation.
Fighting man against man will give you a 25% Chance against an ace or a 90% Chance against rookies.
I dont think AI is affected by blackouts, because they can turn very hard, witout giving much energy, even when in the bottom of a low jojo.
Then they come up for a sure kill headon, which to avoid is a little bit unlikely and cost you precious energy.

All in all its way more interesting then before, even if I have no chance finishing begun campaigns when there are to many missions against to many Hurricanes (JG27 campaigns Africa).

[SPAD-1949]

Another for me unpleasant behaviour comes with the new starting positions.
Even if I set myself als flight leader, AI starts up engines and immediately give full throttle for a liftoff. My assigned wingman should be so polite to wait until I give full throttle.
Within this theme Complex I made another oservation about the accelerating behaviour of AI.
First thes accelerate like living hell then just sleep away so I can overtake them easily on the runway.
Also I could not manage to place a spawning object for me on the airfield compex. I allways start at the usual starting point, while my flight uses their spawning planes.

[Aviar]

Also I could not manage to place a spawning object for me on the airfield compex. I allways start at the usual starting point, while my flight uses their spawning planes.


Here is an example of how to set up a 2-plane flight:

-Set your Takeoff Type to Pairs or Line. (See screenshot 1)

-Set your Spawn Point for each plane in the flight. (See screenshots 2 and 3)

Now any human taking a plane in that flight will spawn where you see the Stationary P-38's. If a plane is AI controlled, it will spawn at the Takeoff waypoint, so be careful where you place it.

Aviar

[SPAD-1949]

Tried it, did not work. Is this only für Multiplayer Mode? I assign my spawn point to an Avatar plane on the Field, but spawn at the regular starting point on the runway.
And while I sat up a mission to try it again, i found another light flaw, as it seems to me.
If trying to land the FW190 there is a real hardship getting out speed and height our of this slick AC. Cuting the throttle means reduction in sound. With engine idle, it takes about two minutes to reduce speed from 400kph to 300kph while remaining on the same level. Even skidding does not work to well. Pulling hard up setting all flaps and gear out adds several hundret meters on level and pointing the nose towards the airfield means a real hardship staying below 250kph. with 4.10 I could land this AC with 170kph, now its nearly impossible to bleed speed below 220kph. Forcing a landing with damaged machine in vicinity of the airfield is nearly impossible because you have to stay so long in the line of fire when reducing speed. Historical correct? Or is it just me?

[Aviar]

SPAD-1949,

You didn't mention if you were asking about single or Coop missions. I assumed you were making a coop.

If the 'Pairs' or 'Line' setting is not working, try the Normal setting. It's strange because this feature seems to work differently in Single and Coop missions.

*If you post the mission here and tell me exactly what you are trying to do, it would be much easier to show you.

Aviar

[FC99]

Actually, I agree!

I really want to be sure the devs saw this in my last post -


I'm not critisizing, just posting my observations.


You can criticize us, why not?:grin: As long as critic is polite and constructive it helps us to make the game better. AI is complex and it's impossible for a single person to try and experience everything that is possible in game.That's why users input and opinions means a lot for us.

We have already made a lot of changes for 4.11.1 that have been initiated in this thread and we will continue to do that.

FC

[Lagarto]

Something should be done about the unrealistically high losses among the AI. I see several solutions:

1) a/c with damaged engine(s) should immediately break off / turn back and try to reach friendly lines; now they press on until it’s too late.
2) AI is no good at finding a suitable place for emergency landings, I often see them crash into forests.
3) Their strafing technique is suicidal – when attacking target they actually throttle back (!), then slowly pull up and orbit their target, instead of speeding away at full bore just above the ground, like all real-life strafers did.

[Luno13]

DT have mentioned that ground attack patterns will be re-worked. You make a good point with the rest. Furthermore, some AI should chose to break off, even without receiving damage (hit and run tactics or when losing the initial advantage, etc).

[SPAD-1949]

SPAD-1949,

You didn't mention if you were asking about single or Coop missions. I assumed you were making a coop.

I beg you pardon, single missions

If the 'Pairs' or 'Line' setting is not working, try the Normal setting. It's strange because this feature seems to work differently in Single and Coop missions.

Now that you mention it, I reconfigured the set and it works. Even to start out of the camo net boxes which usually result in a collision, when trying to park beneath.


*If you post the mission here and tell me exactly what you are trying to do, it would be much easier to show you.


You mean, copy the .mis file text here or is ther a possibility to share files?

[Aviar]

Yes, you can simply post the contents of your mis file or you can compress the mission files into a Zip and then attach it to your post.

Aviar

[Pursuivant]

I'm noticing that the Ace AI seems to be too willing to trade head-on shots with well-armed enemy AC, rather than maneuvering for position.

While "playing chicken" makes sense for well-armed and armored planes which aren't very fast or maneuverable, like the IL2, it makes no sense for more vulnerable planes with good maneuverability, such as the A6M2, Bf-109E/F or IK3.

[UWBurn]

For the next patch would be nice to see some improvement in the AI behavior related to escorts and multi-flight formations. Currently, when you place a bomber flight, and an0ther bomber flight is placed to form up on the first one (assigning the lead flight as a target on the various waypoints) everything is fine. If a fighter flight is to form up on a bomber flight they start a sweep escort over them, this might be ok, but not always convenient (i.e. long escorts over large bomber formations didn't sweeped, often just flew beside). The same applies to fighter tasked to form up on another fighter flight: the start to sweep over the leading flight. To avoid this one have to manually place the waypoints, accuratley timing them so that the various flights loosely fly togheter.
Having a more advanced waypoint option (something like the patrol and take off ones added in 4.11), allowing to specify how to form up on the targeted flight would be really welcome for me, allowing to build more complex large formations without spending A LOT of time testing he missions to ensure the AI fly together and don't collide each other.

[Treetop64]

I mistakenly put this in the General Debugging thread. Sorry!

"I've been very well impressed by the improvements in v4.11, and have been enjoying the results of TD hard work. The changes in AI behavior in particular are a real gem. However, after many hours or flying in the sim since the new patch I've come to accept that there is one aspect of AI behavior that seems to have taken a major step backwards; their formation flying.

First, pre 4.11, when flying bombers or ground attack aircraft, with a little bit of practice a human player could maintain a good position within the formation, no matter what he may be flying and where in the formation he was flying, because the AI itself did a good job keeping formation. There was only a little bit of wobble, and the consistency of holding attitude and altitude of the formation was pretty much solid.

Now in 4.11, the AI is all over the place. Formations constantly rise and fall by many tens of meters, like roller coaster rides, all the way to and from the target area. Individual aircraft within the formation constantly make drastic changes in acceleration and deceleration. The lead aircraft will turn over on his back every two minutes or so, again all the way to and from the target area, resulting in even more of the formation's rising and falling.

I understand the point of making the AI turn over like that, but it occurs far too frequently. It looks and feels cheap. Pilots in the real war may have done it, but maybe only a few times while strategically maneuvering for position during an actual combat situation, and perhaps only rarely - if ever - while transiting in formation - especially if it were a formation of bombers or ground attack aircraft.

TD, believe it or not, there are many of us who enjoyed formation flying. There is a sense of progression when you start a campaign as the junior pilot, and move your way up the ranks (and formation) as you complete missions and gain experience, eventually leading a wing, and the squadron itself. However, with the way the AI flies formations now, it is virtually impossible for the player to do that anymore as it has become prohibitively difficult keeping up with the AI as it performs all it's gyrations.

Like many, I've been a huge fan of your work and since TD's involvement have witnessed each successive version of IL-2 go from strength to strength. Unfortunately, this AI formation issue, IMO, is a blot on the copybook. I ernestly hope that others agree with me on this and that this issue gets resolved.

Thanks!"

[Aviar]

I mistakenly put this in the General Debugging thread. Sorry!

"I've been very well impressed by the improvements in v4.11, and have been enjoying the results of TD hard work. The changes in AI behavior in particular are a real gem. However, after many hours or flying in the sim since the new patch I've come to accept that there is one aspect of AI behavior that seems to have taken a major step backwards; their formation flying.

First, pre 4.11, when flying bombers or ground attack aircraft, with a little bit of practice a human player could maintain a good position within the formation, no matter what he may be flying and where in the formation he was flying, because the AI itself did a good job keeping formation. There was only a little bit of wobble, and the consistency of holding attitude and altitude of the formation was pretty much solid.

Now in 4.11, the AI is all over the place. Formations constantly rise and fall by many tens of meters, like roller coaster rides, all the way to and from the target area. Individual aircraft within the formation constantly make drastic changes in acceleration and deceleration. The lead aircraft will turn over on his back every two minutes or so, again all the way to and from the target area, resulting in even more of the formation's rising and falling.

I understand the point of making the AI turn over like that, but it occurs far too frequently. It looks and feels cheap. Pilots in the real war may have done it, but maybe only a few times while strategically maneuvering for position during an actual combat situation, and perhaps only rarely - if ever - while transiting in formation - especially if it were a formation of bombers or ground attack aircraft.

TD, believe it or not, there are many of us who enjoyed formation flying. There is a sense of progression when you start a campaign as the junior pilot, and move your way up the ranks (and formation) as you complete missions and gain experience, eventually leading a wing, and the squadron itself. However, with the way the AI flies formations now, it is virtually impossible for the player to do that anymore as it has become prohibitively difficult keeping up with the AI as it performs all it's gyrations.

Like many, I've been a huge fan of your work and since TD's involvement have witnessed each successive version of IL-2 go from strength to strength. Unfortunately, this AI formation issue, IMO, is a blot on the copybook. I ernestly hope that others agree with me on this and that this issue gets resolved.

Thanks!"

I tend to agree with this observation. Also, I was wondering why bombers with rear and turret gunners need to be pulling maneuvers to 'check their 6'? Aren't the gunners spotting for enemy planes?

I've even seen bomber flights miss a waypoint pulling these maneuvers. Then they have to circle around so they can 'complete' the missed waypoint. Then they fall way behind the pack.

I know DT put a lot of time and effort into this new feature and some further tweaking may still be needed.

Aviar

[[URU]BlackFox]

I read in a book from Martin Caidin that it was the last plane in a formation the one to keep an eye on the 6 o'clock section. Of course I have no clue if the AI in the game "talk" to each other, so this is just pure speculation.

Having only the last plane in each flight do the "check manouvers" could solve the issue, while still keeping the new AI "blind spots" active.

But then again, I don't know if the code would allow for any of this, just trying to help.

[CzechTexan]

I suppose this is not a bug and is probably in the wrong forum but it is "A/I" so here is my post.

Sorry if this has been covered but i have not read all 12 pages...
I'm trying to get fighters like F4F-4 and P-400 to strafe ground targets and Japanese landing craft. They will not do it. I've tried everything I can think of.

If you add bombs to the Wildcat it will attempt to bomb and the same with P-39D-1 (my substitute for P-400 for ground attacks).
Lots of strafing were done with these on Guadalcanal and I'm just trying to make a good re-enactment of it but it's just not working.
Any suggestions or maybe a fix in the future?

[Aviar]

I suppose this is not a bug and is probably in the wrong forum but it is "A/I" so here is my post.

Sorry if this has been covered but i have not read all 12 pages...
I'm trying to get fighters like F4F-4 and P-400 to strafe ground targets and Japanese landing craft. They will not do it. I've tried everything I can think of.

If you add bombs to the Wildcat it will attempt to bomb and the same with P-39D-1 (my substitute for P-400 for ground attacks).
Lots of strafing were done with these on Guadalcanal and I'm just trying to make a good re-enactment of it but it's just not working.
Any suggestions or maybe a fix in the future?

The AI will not attack ships with guns only. As Oleg used to say...this is a 'feature', not a bug. ;)

Aviar

[FC99]

BlackFox;392407']I read in a book from Martin Caidin that it was the last plane in a formation the one to keep an eye on the 6 o'clock section. Of course I have no clue if the AI in the game "talk" to each other, so this is just pure speculation.

Having only the last plane in each flight do the "check manouvers" could solve the issue, while still keeping the new AI "blind spots" active.

But then again, I don't know if the code would allow for any of this, just trying to help.
Lot of different techniques were used in RL, we are currently examining our options and we will make some changes to make AI capable to check their six and at the same time to keep their formation.


Sorry if this has been covered but i have not read all 12 pages...
I'm trying to get fighters like F4F-4 and P-400 to strafe ground targets and Japanese landing craft. They will not do it. I've tried everything I can think of.

I'll take a look at it, can't promise anything for 4.11.1 , if we make changes they will be in 4.12 at earliest.

[CzechTexan]

I'll take a look at it, can't promise anything for 4.11.1 , if we make changes they will be in 4.12 at earliest.

Great! I guess it has been a "feature" and I just never noticed it because i mainly used the Sturmovik for ground attacks and not other fighters.
I do think fighters need to be fixed for strafing to make it more realistic though. Thanks for the reply!

[Sapper]

I suppose this is not a bug and is probably in the wrong forum but it is "A/I" so here is my post.

Sorry if this has been covered but i have not read all 12 pages...
I'm trying to get fighters like F4F-4 and P-400 to strafe ground targets and Japanese landing craft. They will not do it. I've tried everything I can think of.

If you add bombs to the Wildcat it will attempt to bomb and the same with P-39D-1 (my substitute for P-400 for ground attacks).
Lots of strafing were done with these on Guadalcanal and I'm just trying to make a good re-enactment of it but it's just not working.
Any suggestions or maybe a fix in the future?

Try using the P39D2 armed with the 37mm.

[Lonestar]

Hi,
I do not know whether someone has this already observed, but the F4U1A AI behaves during a bombing run from a certain height very strange!
At a height above 1250m, the F4U1A extend his undercarriage and goes into a dive! The bombs will triggered and the undercarriage again retracted!

Saw it in 4.11m plus hotfix patch during a DCG mission and a test mission in FMB!
Payload F4U1A: 2x500

picture: EDIT

Hope it helps!

[jameson]

Lonestar, see 3'40" on:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-PwTTQz6Zw&feature=related
It's normal behaviour apparently :)

[Lonestar]

Oh, interesting!
I've never seen that before, then all back! :shock:
Many thanks for the vid, jameson!

[Derda508]

Hi there,

as some people before mentioned, the "stealing" of kills by friendly ai is a real nuissance esp. for offliners.

Otherwise I love the new ai!

[Treetop64]

Gotta love the white text over the white clouds...:rolleyes:

[Whacker]

Two things to add, one a comment and other a behavioral oddity.

First, I've noticed the AI crashing during some dogfights that others have mentioned, it's only been average or below and when they're pulling very hard at very low altitudes. While I'd agree that *some* of this should be "buggy" behavior, I disagree that it should be taken out completely. Historically un/less-well trained pilots often did crash their aircraft while trying to perform acrobatics. I wouldn't expect a veteran or ace to have an accelerated stall, but a rookie definitely could.

Second, I apologize if this has already been reported. I've noticed the AI will sometimes perform some rather odd, extreme maneuvers at low altitude in a turning fight. The main thing I see is them maneuvering wildly while upside down for a good 2 or so seconds while 100 ft or so above the ground. If I had to make a guess, it looks like they're trying to roll inverted to dive and separate, but they can't because the planet earth is in the road.

[IceFire]

Interesting. I will look for that behavior on my next several flights.

I have noticed the AI pulling too hard and crashing but it's been on the lower AI levels and I think this is in the realm of feature rather than bug. It's nice to see the AI pull too hard, screw it up and stall out. It looks very natural and realistic.... and it doesn't happen so often as to be regarded as artificial. At least not for me.

[Whacker]

I have noticed the AI pulling too hard and crashing but it's been on the lower AI levels and I think this is in the realm of feature rather than bug. It's nice to see the AI pull too hard, screw it up and stall out. It looks very natural and realistic.... and it doesn't happen so often as to be regarded as artificial. At least not for me.

Agree. It needs some tweaking but historically there were plenty of deaths and aircraft losses due to pilot error in all aspects of flight. I just read something not too long ago about when they switched from P-47's to P-51's in Europe, there were more than a few deaths right off the bat due to pilots trying to dive like they did in the jugs, which the Mustangs couldn't handle. I don't necessarily expect that level of AI modeling, but stuff like rookie mistakes are a welcome change IMO.

As for the acrobatic weirdness, try it against mainly veteran or above pilots, in airplanes with good roll rates. Bring the fight down the near the ground and get behind them. If they decide they want a turning fight, you should see what I mentioned. There will be lots and lots of hard rolling, and some of that zany upside-down flying. I'll try to get a screenshot, since the track saving and replay seems to be broken as of now (4.11hotfix).

[Luno13]

It has been acknowledged that .trks no longer work. DT is unlikely to fix this. Instead, be sure to record an .ntrk. Set a key, or press ESC and click "start recording" or similar.

[Whacker]

Well that stinks... What's the difference between a .trk and .ntrk? So you have to decide when a mission starts if you want to record it or not? Seems kinda silly.

[IceFire]

Well that stinks... What's the difference between a .trk and .ntrk? So you have to decide when a mission starts if you want to record it or not? Seems kinda silly.

TRK was setup to record the inputs from the player (and AI) into the flight model. It's an extremely unreliable format as slight or minor changes to the flight model and AI modeling over the years has made saving anything in TRK a near useless endeavor. The NTRK format is a very different beast in that it records more information including the actual positions of aircraft and damage states so that the playback is virtually identical between versions no matter how much has changed.

It's why the BlackDeath.ntrk or the Kamikazi02.ntrk still work many years after they were created.

I know what you mean about deciding to record later... and perhaps there is a solution using NTRK that would be possible but TRK was always problematic. As soon as IL-2 went from version 1.0 to 1.01 things started to go astray.

[Luno13]

Right. And those training tracks? Before, you could actually take control of the aircraft to complete the training. Now, it's just a boring movie that doesn't really teach much at all.

What is nice is that you can make an .ntrk of an .ntrk. So, make a long recording of your flight, and then play back and re-record only the interesting bits. It's useful to add the recording indicator as this shows a timer to tell you how long you've been recording, and at what minute something noteworthy occurred. While pressing the recording hotkey creates file like "00001.ntrk" you can go into the records folder and change it to something more descriptive, like "Il2_pwns_noobs" (no spaces or some symbols allowed).

Add this line to your conf.ini under [Game]:

RecordingIndicator=1

[MOG_Hammer]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cdw0YGBhd6g&feature=youtu.be

Pe-8 in question lacks the rudder, however I still think it is just showing off, because it eventually returns to level flight and continues its flight nicely. Shouldn't AI be more conservative with maneuvers in such heavies?

It is not showing off, it is rolling on its side to defend itself against YOU, the german aircraft offender. Having no rudder does not impede you to successfuly roll your plane. Why the AI would be more conservative than any human pilot? This is actually bringing you more human like attitude from the AI.

[MOG_Hammer]

I like most of the AI improvements .. but one thing that still sticks in my craw is the fact that AI will still keep flying after getting flamed. I can see if it is an engine fire and the plane goes into a dive .. but a wing fire .. the pilot should bail... or crash ... or bail and then crash .. but he definitely should not continue flying and even shooting..

If the mission writer unckecks the parachute box in the full mission builder for any particular AI flight, there is no parachute, thus no bailing out of the pilot. Besides, if it was a P-38, it can be brought home with a flaming wing for about 20 km. Sometimes yes the AI will continue to fight back, because it is the only valid option it has. Besides, do you always bail the moment you are burning in your crate?

[MOG_Hammer]

Could have something to do with the altitude of the GATTACK point? Mine are always set low (around 500 meters). I'm fairly certain the AI would try for a "level bomb attack" even in 4.10.1 and earlier. Unless the altitude was sufficiently low.

To setup dive bombing, set the waypoint before GAttack to something higher or equal to 1500 meters. The same for the GAttack point. You must use the set button to assing the target. Then just after the GAttack waypoint, set alt to no more than 600 meters. Your dive bombing attacks will always be successful, even with rookies.
Tactical: tactical flights that flies from high above should descend to no more than 500 meters 10 km from target. Put the Gattack point much lower, and always assing a tactical boming attack, about no more than 100 meters, or even less.
Level Bombing: stay high, put the GAttack right over the target, and never assing the target with the set button. If you set the target with the set button, the flight will begin a shallow dive just like tactical bombing, and it will look odd. In level bombing the only thing that should move are the bomb day doors. Aircraft should stay straight and level. 10 km from target, align the path on a direct course to target. You might want to use even more than that, especially if there is a tight turn just before.

Torpedo attack: fly low, between 50-100 meters from sea level, at least for the last 10-20 km, until GAttack point that you assing to the ship you want to destroy. Try to use wenever possible a slight angle in your waypoint toward the stern of the target if the flight is attacking a moving ship. Assign the target by using the set button at the GAttack waypoint. Make sur you put an alt of about 500 meters after the GAttack waypoint, giving 5-10 km for the flight to pull up. Might not always work.

Kamikaze Bombing. This one is the easiest of all to set up. Just make the last waypoint of the flight to Gattack, and assing it to a target. It will ram into it. And since 4.10.1m, the bomb also detonate. Aircraft crashing into ships are actually doing real damage too.

Hope that little tutorial helped.

Hope that helps to set up good bombing tactics for the AI.

[Luno13]

Hi DT,

After testing the DGen, it came to my attention that there seems to be a few changes in ground attack. After making an attack, Il-2s will regroup at a very high altitude (1000m) far away from the target, before making another attack. This might be good defense from AAA, but it exposes them to enemy aircraft. Cruising altitude is under 300 meters, sometimes at treetop height, so it's strange to see them climbing so quickly afterwords.

Also, when I asked a flight of Hs-129s to attack a ground target, they passed over the target, then split-S from 300 meters into the ground. The entire flight was destroyed.

Love all the work so far guys, but I can't wait for what's next :cool:

[IceFire]

To setup dive bombing, set the waypoint before GAttack to something higher or equal to 1500 meters. The same for the GAttack point. You must use the set button to assing the target. Then just after the GAttack waypoint, set alt to no more than 600 meters. Your dive bombing attacks will always be successful, even with rookies.
Tactical: tactical flights that flies from high above should descend to no more than 500 meters 10 km from target. Put the Gattack point much lower, and always assing a tactical boming attack, about no more than 100 meters, or even less.
Level Bombing: stay high, put the GAttack right over the target, and never assing the target with the set button. If you set the target with the set button, the flight will begin a shallow dive just like tactical bombing, and it will look odd. In level bombing the only thing that should move are the bomb day doors. Aircraft should stay straight and level. 10 km from target, align the path on a direct course to target. You might want to use even more than that, especially if there is a tight turn just before.

Torpedo attack: fly low, between 50-100 meters from sea level, at least for the last 10-20 km, until GAttack point that you assing to the ship you want to destroy. Try to use wenever possible a slight angle in your waypoint toward the stern of the target if the flight is attacking a moving ship. Assign the target by using the set button at the GAttack waypoint. Make sur you put an alt of about 500 meters after the GAttack waypoint, giving 5-10 km for the flight to pull up. Might not always work.

Kamikaze Bombing. This one is the easiest of all to set up. Just make the last waypoint of the flight to Gattack, and assing it to a target. It will ram into it. And since 4.10.1m, the bomb also detonate. Aircraft crashing into ships are actually doing real damage too.

Hope that little tutorial helped.

Hope that helps to set up good bombing tactics for the AI.
I should have said that as a general rule I use 500 meters... but yes of course the different situations call for different altitudes :)

[Phabius]

I don't know if this is a problem with the aircraft or with the airfield, but this is what happened to me:

I've set a flight fo two He 111 H-6 to takeoff from Tatar Bunar airfield (Bessarabia AX6) and sink some soviet Hunters offshore. So far, so good, and the're precise on hitting the ships with the torpedoes.

But when they're back and land, they seem to visit every "parking spot" on the airfield, and eventually crash on fixed airfield objects...

[Aviar]

I don't know if this is a problem with the aircraft or with the airfield, but this is what happened to me:

I've set a flight fo two He 111 H-6 to takeoff from Tatar Bunar airfield (Bessarabia AX6) and sink some soviet Hunters offshore. So far, so good, and the're precise on hitting the ships with the torpedoes.

But when they're back and land, they seem to visit every "parking spot" on the airfield, and eventually crash on fixed airfield objects...


Two questions;

-Are the "...fixed airfield objects..." that the planes are crashing into objects that YOU placed on the map?

-Are you using a modded version of IL-2?


Aviar

[KG26_Alpha]

I don't know if this is a problem with the aircraft or with the airfield, but this is what happened to me:

I've set a flight fo two He 111 H-6 to takeoff from Tatar Bunar airfield (Bessarabia AX6) and sink some soviet Hunters offshore. So far, so good, and the're precise on hitting the ships with the torpedoes.

But when they're back and land, they seem to visit every "parking spot" on the airfield, and eventually crash on fixed airfield objects...

Have a look in the Bessarabia PDF read me file that came with the map originally, it shows the airfields layouts and restrictions for aircraft.

http://www.gamefront.com/files/21561157/Bessarabia-Readme.pdf

[Aviar]

Link is broken?

Aviar

[KG26_Alpha]

Link is broken?

Aviar

Just tested ...... working ok

http://www.gamefront.com/files/21561157/Bessarabia-Readme.pdf

[Phabius]

Aviar -

Two questions;

-Are the "...fixed airfield objects..." that the planes are crashing into objects that YOU placed on the map?

-Are you using a modded version of IL-2?


No, those are objects already in the default airefield.
No, I'm using a clean 4.11 install.

[Aviar]

Aviar -

Two questions;

-Are the "...fixed airfield objects..." that the planes are crashing into objects that YOU placed on the map?

-Are you using a modded version of IL-2?


No, those are objects already in the default airefield.
No, I'm using a clean 4.11 install.

I did my own test on that particular airfield but did not get the results you had. I suggest you post the mission if you want me to take a closer look at it.

PS - I still could not get into Gamefront. It might be a security setting on my end. I can't even bring up their front page.

Aviar

[Bearcat]

Why is it that when I fly in a QM with more than 2 enemy AI they all go after me? I have run 8vs 8 QMs (I can't go any higher because when I do I will have 2 or 3 flights of enemy AI all trying to get to me at once..) WHERE after the initial pass and usuallybefore i can even latch onto another bandit good there are at least 3 planes all on my tail .. even when I tell the friendly AI to attack.. or ask for help.. I still get doyuble and triple teamed and am usually out of the running before any help does anything... Is this just me or what?

[Aviar]

Why is it that when I fly in a QM with more than 2 enemy AI they all go after me? I have run 8vs 8 QMs (I can't go any higher because when I do I will have 2 or 3 flights of enemy AI all trying to get to me at once..) WHERE after the initial pass and usuallybefore i can even latch onto another bandit good there are at least 3 planes all on my tail .. even when I tell the friendly AI to attack.. or ask for help.. I still get doyuble and triple teamed and am usually out of the running before any help does anything... Is this just me or what?

Try flying from the rear of the pack and see what happens. AI will usually attack the first enemy it spots. If you are always leading the pack you are putting yourself in that situation.

This is a long-time issue and probably something that DT should look into fixing. (Limiting the number of AI planes attacking a particular enemy plane.) *For instance, in BoB II - Wings of Victory, you can go into the config file and set the limit there.

Aviar

[Bearcat]

I'll try that..

[Phabius]

Aviar, I've just made the following test, and maybe it was my mistake... I've placed the Takeoff and Landing points reversed on the airfield (being the T spot the Takeoff point not the Landing point). I would like to know if this is normal behavior then...

I've started FMB and loaded the Bessarabia map. Placed one default He 111 H-6 on the map (ticked player aircraft). Takeoff from the mentioned airfield, near Tatar Bunar (AX6), straight from west to east. Added two more waypoints to the north and then back to Landing, on the same airfield, coming from west to east. At mission start, turned Auto Pilot on and let it go. The He landed ok, went straight to the T spot, then turned and began its long tour across the airfield, spinning over what seems to be all the supposed parking slots. After the tour, the plane stopped just near the T. It did not crash on any airfield object this time (though on the other mission it did, over a default object). When I've reversed the Waypoints, with Takeoff from east to west, landing over the T spot, everything was fine. That was my mistake then.

I've mentioned another behavior like this by mistake on another topic (4.11 General debugging), should have posted it here... ;)

It was a similar issue, but this time in QMB, which has default mission types to choose from!

Tested with a Fw190 A-4 on the Kuban map.
Just choose a flight of one (or even four) Axis Fw 190 A-4 (Ace) and start a QMB Scramble mission in Kuban Map.
The airfield in question is near Anapa.As soon as the mission starts, let the auto pilot take control. After the flight, when the aircraft reaches its landing pattern, it will land far before the strip on the descending part of a hill. When it finally reaches the airfield strip, it will take a tour there and visit most parking spots before finding the right one and stops. While it's doing that, the other planes in the flight will follow the pattern landing down the hill, but only untill the airstrip is reached, when they just disappear because the first plane is still fooling around the airfield. They will never reach their parking spots.

[Treetop64]

Just flew a ground attack mission early in a Russian campaign on the L'viv map. Formation of nine I-153s to attack a train. I'm in the second of three 3-ship flights.

The train was totally destroyed during the initial bomb run. Multiple bomb hits were scored. The engine, coal car, and every car was hit and destroyed. However, the AI planes returned to make strafing runs on the wrecked engine and continued doing so until they were out of ammunition.

[Aviar]

Just flew a ground attack mission early in a Russian campaign on the L'viv map. Formation of nine I-153s to attack a train. I'm in the second of three 3-ship flights.

The train was totally destroyed during the initial bomb run. Multiple bomb hits were scored. The engine, coal car, and every car was hit and destroyed. However, the AI planes returned to make strafing runs on the wrecked engine and continued doing so until they were out of ammunition.

The AI looks at a train as a single unit/target, even though it has multiple cars hooked up to the locomotive. Even if the train is damaged and has stopped moving, the AI sees it as 'alive'...until every car in the train has been destroyed.

My guess is that you are mistaken. There must have been at least one train car still alive. However, if you can provide a track as proof....

Even better, you could post the campaign mission here and I would be happy to take a look at it.

*I assume you are talking about 4.11.1 unmodded.

Aviar

[Treetop64]

The AI looks at a train as a single unit/target, even though it has multiple cars hooked up to the locomotive. Even if the train is damaged and has stopped moving, the AI sees it as 'alive'...until every car in the train has been destroyed.

My guess is that you are mistaken. There must have been at least one train car still alive. However, if you can provide a track as proof....

Even better, you could post the campaign mission here and I would be happy to take a look at it.

*I assume you are talking about 4.11.1 unmodded.

Aviar

Yep. v4.11.1 Unmodded. No mods were ever installed.

The entire train was wrecked. I even did a low fly-by and paused just to take a close look and make sure. Any surviving cars tend to stick out in an obvious manner, but there were none. The engine, and it's coal car, was definitely wrecked but the AI planes were continuously targeting it after it was knocked out.

I don't have video but I can send the mission file if you're still interested.

[Aviar]

I don't have video but I can send the mission file if you're still interested.

You can compress the mission into a Zip file and then attach it to your post. I can then download it and check it out.

Aviar

[Treetop64]

Attached.

Had to change the extension from .rar to .zip in order to upload.

[Aviar]

Just flew a ground attack mission early in a Russian campaign on the L'viv map. Formation of nine I-153s to attack a train. I'm in the second of three 3-ship flights.

The train was totally destroyed during the initial bomb run. Multiple bomb hits were scored. The engine, coal car, and every car was hit and destroyed. However, the AI planes returned to make strafing runs on the wrecked engine and continued doing so until they were out of ammunition.

I tested the mission. As I was afraid, you were mistaken. Not all the train cars were destroyed in the bombing. (See the first screenshot)

As you can see, the locomotive was still intact. Now of course the 153's try and kill the remaining locomotive. (See second screenshot)

However, the problem seems to be that their weak machine guns are not powerful enough to destroy the locomotive, as I observed many direct hits. (I know in a recent patch the train damage models were changed, so this may be the answer....they may be more harder to destroy.)

After the 153's run out of ammo, they return to base. I would say that it's up to the player to make sure that locomotive gets destroyed. (Maybe bring rockets next time.)

Aviar

[Treetop64]

I tested the mission. As I was afraid, you were mistaken. Not all the train cars were destroyed in the bombing. (See the first screenshot)

As you can see, the locomotive was still intact. Now of course the 153's try and kill the remaining locomotive. (See second screenshot)

However, the problem seems to be that their weak machine guns are not powerful enough to destroy the locomotive, as I observed many direct hits. (I know in a recent patch the train damage models were changed, so this may be the answer....they may be more harder to destroy.)

After the 153's run out of ammo, they return to base. I would say that it's up to the player to make sure that locomotive gets destroyed. (Maybe bring rockets next time.)

Aviar


No disrespect intended, Aviar, but you explaining very obvious things here regarding the lack power of their machine guns in destroying the engine. I already know the I-153's machine guns aren't powerful enough to destroy an "active" locomotive, moving or not. I already understand that any car destroyed in the train will render the entire train immobile. I don't have a particular beef with successfully destroying the engine, coal car, gun car (if it has one) and all the other cars of the train. If some of the train survives, so be it. Move on and fly the next mission.

I've been playing IL-2 since it's initial release ten years ago; by now I know the visual differences between a destroyed and active engine, coal car, gun car, and regular car of both a Soviet and German train in the game.

The issue I pointed out in my original post is that the ENTIRE TRAIN, i.e. the locomotive, coal car, and all the other cars, was destroyed during the initial bomb run in the mission that I flew, and yet the AI made repeated strafing runs on the already destroyed locomotive. Again, the locomotive, and all the other cars, were destroyed. Period. Understand that. This isn't a point of pride or anything like that, it's just a simple fact.

Now, if you flew the mission once and the locomotive actually survived in your particular bomb run, fine. The AI returns to strafe the locomotive and will continue to do so until A: it is successfully destroyed, or B: they run out of ammo. In the case of the I-153 M62, the latter is very likely to occur. Once again, that is understood. Now, fly the mission again, and if the whole train is knocked out (as happened when I flew the mission) you will see that the AI returns to attack the destroyed locomotive anyway. Don't tell me "Oh, I'm sorry, but you're mistaken. The locomotive must have survived."

I wished I had saved a screen shot or video of the mission when it occured, but with the way the video replays are misbehaving in recent patches, I'll have to fly the mission again, hope the entire train gets knocked out again on the bomb run, and screen-shoot what the AI does after that.

I didn't think this would be such a big deal, but simply being told "Oh, no. You've just mistaken the locomotive as being destroyed" is insulting, frankly, and specific clarification was required.

[Aviar]

Fair enough. I certainly didn't mean to insult you in any way. My only excuse is that I was getting ready for work, but I wanted to get back to you as soon as possible and so I was a little rushed.

I went back and tested the mission again. This time the entire train was destroyed (see first screenshot)

After that, the 153's did in fact continue strafing the destroyed locomotive. (See 2nd screenshot) So, you were correct in your report. I would suggest filing an official bug report with TD. You can even use my screenshots if you like, as they usually prefer some sort of 'proof'.

Aviar

[JtD]

Thanks for reporting and confirming. I don't think any further "official" reports are necessary, after all, this is the topic dedicated to AI bug reporting.

[Treetop64]

Thanks for double-checking Aviar. I haven't had time to play in the last couple days.

BTW, no hard feelings. It was like being called a liar when you know you're telling the truth, and that can be frustrating. I know you were only trying to help.

:cool:

[FC99]

It seems that problem with the trains is the old one, I tried it in 4.05 and it was the same as 4.11.1. Can somebody who have one of the older versions installed double check that.

[sniperton]

I too have some strange AI wing behaviour since 4.11.1. I fly offline missions generated by DCG. I order flight #2 to join, leader says OK, then leaves with his mates for home. Same result when I point out the enemy and give order to attack. It seems to me that pre-set wayponts might be "stronger" then the orders of the squad leader. Can anyone confirm?

[JtD]

Hi sniperton, it is always good to record a track and share it, it is the easiest way for TD to look into issues. They may be very specific and hard to reproduce. In case of AI I've also had issues like you describe, but not always and found it very hard to pinpoint the circumstances under which AI will go foolish.

I know that low fuel level may cause AI to head for home, can this be a reason for what you are seeing?

[Aviar]

It seems that problem with the trains is the old one, I tried it in 4.05 and it was the same as 4.11.1. Can somebody who have one of the older versions installed double check that.

Confirmed. I tried the same scenario (153's bombing an ammo train) in 4.08m and the 153's kept strafing the destroyed locomotive.

Aviar

[K_Freddie]

Not sure whether this has been mentioned (too lazy to read a 1000 posts :grin: )

Offline play:
I notice that on all Ace settings 4vs4, when getting onto any AI opponents tail, it's supporting number will be onto me if I don't hit my target on the first pass.
At the same time I ask my #2 to cover me.. he's nowhere to be seen ??, even after minutes of dodging the covering opponent.

Summary:
Target AI are able to work as a team more than your own AI = No good ;)
This is not random, but every quick mission set.

[jameson]

Agree about Ai, sits in your blind spot and does nothing to help not even give a warning. If you're head of four, if you don't order them to do something they just follow you around, even if six enemy ai are shooting at you, lol!

[sniperton]

Hi sniperton, it is always good to record a track and share it, it is the easiest way for TD to look into issues. They may be very specific and hard to reproduce. In case of AI I've also had issues like you describe, but not always and found it very hard to pinpoint the circumstances under which AI will go foolish. I know that low fuel level may cause AI to head for home, can this be a reason for what you are seeing?

With Murphy I can say that odd things only happen when ntrk recording is off...:confused: Otherwise I completely agree, and, yes, AI is not always foolish: that's the biggest problem -- at least so far as debugging is concerned. ;) As to fuel level, flight #2 left me after some 80-100 kms of flight with G.50 Freccias, so I don't believe it was the reason. Anyway, next time it happens I will check it.

[FC99]

Confirmed. I tried the same scenario (153's bombing an ammo train) in 4.08m and the 153's kept strafing the destroyed locomotive.

Thanks for checking, fix ready for 4.12.

[Sita]

i'm sorry if somebody already talks about it ...

i notice that TB3 no attacking ground target not by level bombing ...

now they do it like Il2 ... yesterday i watch like two TB3 keep the formation goes down from 2500 meters till 200 meters and drop bombs on the car convoy ...

its not logical for this monster plane ...

[Whacker]

I'm going to toss this up here in this thread, even though it might be considered 1. controversial and 2. a feature request, but I personally mostly view it as "buggy".

Simply put, the AI has ESP and can detect you trying to sneak up on them, even if it's from a completely unviewable quadrant.

For example, if I set up a mission in FMB. Identical aircraft, say 109E-4's, theater irrelevant but I like sands of time. I'll start the badguy on a level flight at 1000 meters flying a perfectly straight and level track at say 300 kph. I'll start myself about 2km directly behind and below by about 200 meters. Proceed to "sneak up" on the badguy as best I can, staying directly below and behind, which I know for a fact is within the blind area. With full mouse of trackir movement, visibility in my approach area does not exist. One would have to turn the aircraft several degrees on the horizontal plane to see back directly behind. No matter what, if I execute a perfect approach completely in the blind spot, the badguy will always, always "detect" me and go defensive when I'm close enough. The detection range varies by skill as far as I can determine.

I view this as a bug, there is no possible way one pilot could detect another one sneaking up like that unless they did some active, conscious flight direction change in order to "clear six". One should be able to "sneak up" on another aircraft in blind spots if done correctly.

Also would like to reiterate that I realize AI development is difficult, imperfect science at best with everyone pissing and moaning about his or her particular desires, complaints, etc. Also realize there are other bigger fish to fry, like tweaking the jets a bit or who the heck knows what else.

Is there any way we could get something done to help address this in 4.12?:)

[JtD]

But we already have this in 4.11, that's why the AI is performing manoeuvres to check their six.

[Aviar]

I'm going to toss this up here in this thread, even though it might be considered 1. controversial and 2. a feature request, but I personally mostly view it as "buggy".

Simply put, the AI has ESP and can detect you trying to sneak up on them, even if it's from a completely unviewable quadrant.

For example, if I set up a mission in FMB. Identical aircraft, say 109E-4's, theater irrelevant but I like sands of time. I'll start the badguy on a level flight at 1000 meters flying a perfectly straight and level track at say 300 kph. I'll start myself about 2km directly behind and below by about 200 meters. Proceed to "sneak up" on the badguy as best I can, staying directly below and behind, which I know for a fact is within the blind area. With full mouse of trackir movement, visibility in my approach area does not exist. One would have to turn the aircraft several degrees on the horizontal plane to see back directly behind. No matter what, if I execute a perfect approach completely in the blind spot, the badguy will always, always "detect" me and go defensive when I'm close enough. The detection range varies by skill as far as I can determine.

I view this as a bug, there is no possible way one pilot could detect another one sneaking up like that unless they did some active, conscious flight direction change in order to "clear six". One should be able to "sneak up" on another aircraft in blind spots if done correctly.

Also would like to reiterate that I realize AI development is difficult, imperfect science at best with everyone pissing and moaning about his or her particular desires, complaints, etc. Also realize there are other bigger fish to fry, like tweaking the jets a bit or who the heck knows what else.

Is there any way we could get something done to help address this in 4.12?:)


When I set up a similar situation in the FMB, I was able to sneak up on the enemy AI 6 without being 'seen'. (Test mission is attached if anyone would like to check it out.)

When I set up a similar mission in the QMB, the AI always knew I was behind him.

I'm not sure why the AI in the QMB seems to be programmed differently.

Aviar

[JtD]

I've managed to sneak up on AI in QMB, too. I've also managed to be spotted, against all odds.

But imho it is better to have AI react to you when it should, then to have it not react when it should. AI programming is not a 0-1 issue, pun intended.

[Sita]

Please check how TB3 attacking ground targets ...
now they do it really wrong ... they acting like il2 Sturmovik... dive on target from 3000m till 500- 200 m ...

[Juri_JS]

I don't know if this has been reported before, but there is something wrong with the strafing behaviour when the leader of a flight is the human player. The AI planes of a flight that is lead by a human player will not attack ground targets, even when an attack command is given. This only happens when the planes are not equipped with bombs or rockets. Bomb or rocket attacks are correctly performed by the AI. When the human player is not leading the flight and is just a wingman, the AI will correctly do the strafing attacks, but the players plane will not take part in the attack when flown on autopilot.

I have upload two test missions (see attachment).
In the first the human player is the wingman and the AI planes will strafe the target, but the players plane will not attack when flown on autopilot. In the second mission the player is the flight leader and the AI will not do a strafing attack.

[FC99]

I notice that on all Ace settings 4vs4, when getting onto any AI opponents tail, it's supporting number will be onto me if I don't hit my target on the first pass.
At the same time I ask my #2 to cover me.. he's nowhere to be seen ??, even after minutes of dodging the covering opponent.

Depends on the situation, he might have his own problems, be out of ammo or damaged. They were less agressive in 4.11 but in 4.11.1 there should be no difference between all AI flights and mixed flights.

If you're head of four, if you don't order them to do something they just follow you around, even if six enemy ai are shooting at you, lol! Than just order them to do what you want.

i'm sorry if somebody already talks about it ...

i notice that TB3 no attacking ground target not by level bombing ...

now they do it like Il2 ... yesterday i watch like two TB3 keep the formation goes down from 2500 meters till 200 meters and drop bombs on the car convoy ...

Please, provide the mission and I'll take a look.

When I set up a similar situation in the FMB, I was able to sneak up on the enemy AI 6 without being 'seen'. (Test mission is attached if anyone would like to check it out.)

When I set up a similar mission in the QMB, the AI always knew I was behind him.

I'm not sure why the AI in the QMB seems to be programmed differently.

AI is the same but lot of AI code depends on random numbers which are not really random. Every mission will always start with the same sequence and unless there have been some events which break the sequence it will always play the same. In QMB type missions fight starts fast and there is no chance for that sequence to be changed.

So if you have a mission where AI decided to look at the area where your plane is they will do it every time you play that mission. For breaking the randoms quickly it's best to fire short burst with your guns.

I don't know if this has been reported before, but there is something wrong with the strafing behaviour when the leader of a flight is the human player. The AI planes of a flight that is lead by a human player will not attack ground targets, even when an attack command is given. This only happens when the planes are not equipped with bombs or rockets. Bomb or rocket attacks are correctly performed by the AI.
Tried your mission and AI attacks targets without any command.


When the human player is not leading the flight and is just a wingman, the AI will correctly do the strafing attacks, but the players plane will not take part in the attack when flown on autopilot.
Autopilot will not attack if you use unlimited ammo, it attacked correctly with limited ammo when I tried your mission.

FC

[Juri_JS]

Autopilot will not attack if you use unlimited ammo, it attacked correctly with limited ammo when I tried your mission.

FC

For testing self-made missions I am always using the lowest difficult setting. Disabling unlimited ammo fixed the problem. Thanks alot for the advice FC99. :)

[Sita]

Please, provide the mission and I'll take a look.




FC, sorry i started new company ( exactly same like that in i see this strange acting of TB3) and i think that mission was deleted ...

can give only ntrk records (((( sorry(

[K_Freddie]

Depends on the situation, he might have his own problems, be out of ammo or damaged. They were less agressive in 4.11 but in 4.11.1 there should be no difference between all AI flights and mixed flights.

My #2 was happily floating around off to one side (watching the show ;) ) while the only 2 enemy AI left were trying to do me

To add to this..
On a career, I was #4 and we attacked and decimated around 6 russki bombers. On looking at the track I found 2 yak escorts about 1000 feet above the bombers, that just went around in circles while we had 'lunch'.

Sorry have no tracks or saved stuff, but will save in future.
:cool:

[greybeard1]

I posted a poll at SimHQ and thought could be useful make you aware of its output (at least so far). As you can see, it looks there's still half of user disappointed, mainly for too demanding enemy AI. Honestly, I'm one of these latter. Not a criticism, would be a suggestion. Here follows the link:

http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3599699/4_11_AI_what_do_you_think.html#Post3599699


Regards,
GB

[[URU]BlackFox]

My squadron flies coops regularly, and the new AI has revitalized this kind of game. Maybe you should try lowering the AI level in the missions you play until you get used to it. Just don't expect to shoot down loads of enemies every miossion as you used to. I myself have had to disengage dogfight and just let them be a lot of times, just like in real life.

[Lagarto]

In DGen campaigns it's fairly easy to adjust the AI to one's skill level by tweaking the numbers in the [Skill] section of DB file. I usually fly against something like A10,V20,N40 (10 aces, 20 veterans, 40 Normals) and can stay alive long enough to enjoy a given campaign. I also learned to expect a violent counterattack the moment I shoot down one of theirs :)
The only gripe I have about the new AI is their deflection shooting skills, which seems a bit too good in high-G turning fights. Perhaps the AI should have a limiting factor equivalent to human's blacking out.

[Stig1207]

In my view, it's not that the enemy AI are too good in 4.11, but that the friendly AI aren't up to scratch. The enemy AI may have always been better than the friendly AI but since 4.11 the difference is striking.

/ Stig

[greybeard1]

Thanks for your comments.

Indeed, I set AI=Easy in DGen Options and still a single error of mine causes my death in game. I don't expect racking up lots of victories in each mission but often just to survive (even if I fail a move...). I linked poll thinking this raises question level from opinion confrontation to statistic.

[[URU]BlackFox]

In the matter of friendly AI having an inferior performance, I agree. Even if I could just tell my Stuka Flight to correctly perform a low level attack on a truck column, and not just drop bombs anywhere with no reason, I would be glad.

Something that would be awesome for 4.12 is that you could tell your attack flight which profile to use (dive, level, shallow dive, skip bomb, etc.). Nowadays the AI attacks correctly only if you stick to the aircraft Java code role (a Stuka won't strafe even if it finds a light truck column, for example). And having your flight identify a target when you don't use padlock is a little hard.

[Treetop64]

BlackFox;441290']My squadron flies coops regularly, and the new AI has revitalized this kind of game. Maybe you should try lowering the AI level in the missions you play until you get used to it. Just don't expect to shoot down loads of enemies every miossion as you used to. I myself have had to disengage dogfight and just let them be a lot of times, just like in real life.

+1

There are still some relatively minor quirks and errors in the AI behavioral routines that are thankfully far-between, but the recent AI overhaul has revitalized the game, offline and online. It changed the way I play the game. Often times I find myself now thinking and behaving as though my backside is really inside that aircraft (as opposed to feeling totally invincible and fearless, and being other-worldly aggressive in an artificially predictable environment). I've seen the AI do totally human things, like stall and/or crash in a panic, and I've seen some AI fighter flights actually turn around and run away from a fight.

[FC99]

The only gripe I have about the new AI is their deflection shooting skills, which seems a bit too good in high-G turning fights. Perhaps the AI should have a limiting factor equivalent to human's blacking out.
In high G fights it is inevitable that the only shots AI will have are those "under the nose" blind shots and AI is limited in that regard. They anticipate your future point and shoot there. If you pull hard and than change your path a little you are pretty safe. That's basic evasive maneuver which you have to do against humans too.

Nevertheless I'll try to improve their behavior, it is funny though that since the introduction of new shooting model into the development version, about year ago, I'm constantly decreasing AI shooting ability. :grin:

In my view, it's not that the enemy AI are too good in 4.11, but that the friendly AI aren't up to scratch. The enemy AI may have always been better than the friendly AI but since 4.11 the difference is striking.

/ Stig
There was a bug in 4.11 which resulted in AI planes under the player command to be less aggressive than the enemy and friendly AI which are not under player command. That's fixed in 4.11.1 and there should be no difference in behavior between friendly and enemy AI.

But there is a one other important difference, AI guys understand each other and they do their thing. It is different with human leader, players should ,in general, communicate with their AI friends more. If player is a leader he should act as one and tell AI what to do but at the same time he should take care to put his AI friends in the position where they can execute given orders.

Few weeks ago I played some coops with Microwave and in one of the missions I was in the FW190 with Spit on my tail. I called my AI wingman to help me but as long as I was maneuvering wildly AI was not able to follow me. Than I just did what I would do with human wingman, I set my plane in gentle turn, far enough to stay safe but close enough to enemy AI to keep him interested.

I repeated the order to my wingman to cover my butt and it didn't take long before he was right behind the enemy AI and blew him from the sky, perfect Drag & Bag, bread and butter of human Focke Wulf pairs.

Another "problem" with AI is that every player expect different thing from them, it's hard to please everyone.

[Lagarto]

I'm willing to communicate with my AI friends more, provided that I have some commands, like that 'Anyone help me!', under one key. In a dogfight I'm usually too busy to select a proper command from the list.

[Stig1207]

There was a bug in 4.11 which resulted in AI planes under the player command to be less aggressive than the enemy and friendly AI which are not under player command. That's fixed in 4.11.1 and there should be no difference in behavior between friendly and enemy AI.

But there is a one other important difference, AI guys understand each other and they do their thing. It is different with human leader, players should ,in general, communicate with their AI friends more. If player is a leader he should act as one and tell AI what to do but at the same time he should take care to put his AI friends in the position where they can execute given orders.

Few weeks ago I played some coops with Microwave and in one of the missions I was in the FW190 with Spit on my tail. I called my AI wingman to help me but as long as I was maneuvering wildly AI was not able to follow me. Than I just did what I would do with human wingman, I set my plane in gentle turn, far enough to stay safe but close enough to enemy AI to keep him interested.

I repeated the order to my wingman to cover my butt and it didn't take long before he was right behind the enemy AI and blew him from the sky, perfect Drag & Bag, bread and butter of human Focke Wulf pairs.

Another "problem" with AI is that every player expect different thing from them, it's hard to please everyone.[/QUOTE]

In 4.11.1 have lately for the most part been playing 4 vs 4 in QMB. When we engage the AI I have to order them to attack otherwise they just follow me around.

On quite a few occasions I have checked six to see my wingman there as he should be, but a bandit is flying right past him onto my tail! The wingman doesn't shoot at the bandit or even warn me.

There seems to be a whole different level of cooperation between the enemy AI compared to the friendly. Which is a good thing, they are a real challenge, and if the friendly AI were on a par with the enemy AI it would a make for an even more immersive experience.

/Stig

[Pursuivant]

I'm willing to communicate with my AI friends more, provided that I have some commands, like that 'Anyone help me!', under one key. In a dogfight I'm usually too busy to select a proper command from the list.

Isn't it possible to create "macros" which map a series of key strokes to single key?

Since we're on the topic of commanding AI. It would be nice if some of the gunner AI routines could be ported to wingman commands. For example, having your wingman be able to tell you to "break left/right" or "stop that" (if you're maneuvering too wildly for him to follow you).

If DT wanted to get really funky with the AI routines, they could include the following:

1) Ability to give warnings to ANY airplane in your flight/squadron - even if you're not in command.

A) Give the player the ability to warn of incoming enemies (currently you can't "call out" bogies if you sight them first - although the AI is generally good about sighting).

B) The ability to tell any airplane to climb/dive/break/evade if they're about to be attacked by surprise.

2) The ability to reassign AI under your command if you take losses. For example, if you lose 2 planes from your squadron, instead of each remaining plane flying solo, you can reassign them to make one pair of wingman and lead.

3) Better ability to communicate with your lead if you're wingman. In addition to the evasive and sighting commands in Suggestion 1, there should also be commands like, "I can't follow you.", "Can't comply.", "Slow down." and "Continue present action." Unlike standard commands, your lead doesn't necessarily have to follow them.

4) The ability to specify particular offensive and defensive tactics for your section/flight/squadron - things like "Thatch Weave" or "Lufberry Circle" and whatever the period name for "Drag and Bag" was.

5) Some ability for the player to program AI behavior - allowing him to make custom formations or implement his own squadron/flight tactics.

6) Some control over AI landing routines - so a flight/squadron leader can command badly damaged planes to land first/divert to auxiliary airfield.

7) Ability to command AI planes to leave the fight - i.e., "Break off," to stop attacking. "Go home," to leave the fight and return to base. "We're scrubbing the mission," to tell your entire squadron/flight to return to base without engaging the enemy - this is appropriate if planes in your flight/squadron collide or get badly shot up by flak before you ever reach the target, making it suicidal to continue.

8) Ability to control AI aggressiveness - from "be very careful" to "whatever the cost". This is appropriate for campaigns where you need to conserve planes/pilots or where certain missions make or break the campaign.

9) Differences in AI pilot behavior - especially for campaigns. Some pilots might be slightly better or worse at flying or gunnery than their nomimal skill level would indicate. Some might have better or worse eyesight - limiting or improving spotting ability (e.g., Greg "Pappy" Boyington's eyesight wasn't all that great - he often left the job of spotting distant bogies to the rest of the pilots in his flight). Some might be particularly reckless, prone to panicking in a crisis or outright cowardly. Some might be "by the book" while others might be willing to innovate new tactics. Actual "personality" for the people in your squadron would be fun, and give you even more incentive to keep your squadron-mates alive.

[Stig1207]

Few weeks ago I played some coops with Microwave and in one of the missions I was in the FW190 with Spit on my tail. I called my AI wingman to help me but as long as I was maneuvering wildly AI was not able to follow me. Than I just did what I would do with human wingman, I set my plane in gentle turn, far enough to stay safe but close enough to enemy AI to keep him interested.

I repeated the order to my wingman to cover my butt and it didn't take long before he was right behind the enemy AI and blew him from the sky, perfect Drag & Bag, bread and butter of human Focke Wulf pairs.



I tried that today on 2 occasions and it worked for me too, my wingman bagged the bandit on both occasions.

I also tested the issue of the friendly AI following the human player docilely around if not ordered to attack, thinking it may have been pre-4.11.1 hotfix.
But they still do that. I flew blue, 4 Fw190's(A4 142ata) vs 4 Spitfire Vb, and when I attacked the bandits my flight just followed me without engaging. I also allowed the Spits to catch us, ie. just flying straight and level while they closed in, and watched as they passed by my AI flight and attacked me without any reaction from my AI mates. Usually the bandits didn't bother firing at the AI, only going after me, but on one occasion my no. 4 was attacked and he broke calling for help. But no.3 didn't even respond, he stayed in formation behind me.

So in that respect at least, the friendly AI is limited and also unrealistic, you shouldn't have to order your wingman or members of your flight to clear your tail in that situation.

/Stig

[Lagarto]

Possibly an issue that needs some attention - AI fighters, when making passes at aircraft flying low and slow (usually damaged machines limping back home), quite often crash into the ground, even over flat land.

Another variation of the same problem - recently I've watched a badly smoking AI fighter about to belly-land. His wingman tried to stay in formation with him and crashed.

[eduzk]

The AI pilots of a flight sometimes go 'ballistic' after combat. They let go of their controls and only pull up in the last second when they are about to dive into the ground, then let it go again. It has occurred in older versions too but I think it is more common now. If you are in command you can order them to rejoin, but if not, there is not much to do.

I know one way that should make it happen: You are the flight leader and use autopilot to fly into your landing waypoint. When you reach the WP, your map waypoints change into the landing circle route. If you disengage the autopilot now, any AI pilot who hasn't reached the landing WP by then will lose control. You need to wait for the last one to reach it to make them act normally. (It has been this way for long, not a recent problem)

[Jumoschwanz]

I like playing with the AI a lot and just have a few observations about it.

The first thing I would like to bring up is the way the AI seems to be "wired" to your brain when you fly against it. By this I mean when you are on an AI pilot's 6, even though he should be having a little trouble seeing what you are doing back there, they seem to move in a way that is directly dependent on your control inputs, almost as if you are controlling the AI aircraft with your control inputs.
I can make almost all AI opponents do what I want to do and even fly in front of my guns with various control inputs. This lets me shoot down Ace AI that are in much faster aircraft by "commanding" them to climb and turn and scissor with my slower aircraft.

I thought that the ace AI would be more realistic if a slight delay was introduced between the time you moved your controls and the AI reacted to it. Not much but enough to make it seem like they had to look at what you are doing and move their own controls during a fight.

Of course I do not want to make it easy to shoot down Ace AI, I just want them to appear more human. I hope that the Ace AI are not dumbed down because noobs cry about not being able to shoot them down or escape them. I believe they should offer the experience of jousting with an actual human IL2 online Ace with many years experience, where the average player would rarely be able to shoot them down or escape their attacks. The best human opponents should be able to shoot them down maybe one out of two times, that is what would keep the sim interesting for old-timers and make a great goal and practice tool for neophytes and those who enjoy flying offline as much as on. If someone wants target practice or satisfaction let them set the AI to a lower setting than ACE.

Lastly I notice that the Ace AI should be a lot more effective than they are but for some reason when they are on the tail of an opponent or target they take extra time to do some redundant and useless barrel rolls etc.. This may help them foil certain tailgunners, but when they are on the tail of an enemy fighter aircraft all it does is wastes their energy and a lot of opportunities to make shots.

I still have the original IL2 installed, and the old FB also, which are both fun to play with now and then for various reasons. When fighting the Ace AI in the original IL2 a combination of their behavior and the vastly different flight/weapon models compared to IL246 makes it as interesting a challenge as ever. I would definitely say that IL246 is far better than the original IL2, but that there may be a few things worth looking at in the original IL2 AI etc. that might offer a useful perspective.

Thank you for all the wonderful work that is done on IL246.

[jameson]

109g6as v Lagg7 1944 ace is certainly interesting. When converging level but with him still 5km distant, if I engage WEP and start to climb he commits to another routine entirely which concedes advantage and makes him an easy kill, but if I don't climb or use WEP he goes for the head on shot. I haven't noticed him messing around much behind me though, just insanely attacking, even stalling into the deck attempting to turn much too quickly. No kill for that though ingame, more's the pity. If he's zoom climbing and you're below and in his six he will just keep climbing straight up with the usual outcome (him dead!) but will attempt 180 roll and dive as I come into gun range. All in all much more fun though.

[RegRag1977]

109g6as v Lagg7 1944 ace is certainly interesting. When converging level but with him still 5km distant, if I engage WEP and start to climb he commits to another routine entirely which concedes advantage and makes him an easy kill, but if I don't climb or use WEP he goes for the head on shot. I haven't noticed him messing around much behind me though, just insanely attacking, even stalling into the deck attempting to turn much too quickly. No kill for that though ingame, more's the pity. If he's zoom climbing and you're below and in his six he will just keep climbing straight up with the usual outcome (him dead!) but will attempt 180 roll and dive as I come into gun range. All in all much more fun though.

109 vs La7 ace and 1vs1 in general improved greatly due to brilliant AI programming. But still there's some suggestions i would like to make.

As you said it seems that AI has trouble seeing player's dot after a 5km distance, AI ace often seeming to see player at the very last moment which makes it lose a great part of its maneuvrablity advantage (vs Luftwaffe types, for instance). I think this is why AI doesn't follow the climb...just a theory though...
Another thing, when head on La7 rarely fires at player, and when does very often misses, while player wont miss and will score (fatal wing or engine) hits: to me AI ace aiming should be far more accurate especially head on.
Another interesting thing i noticed is the way AI generally avoid head on by using rolls to move out of plan: could the roll be faster, as is now it often allows player to score hits.

Ai ace seems unable to aim when player (coming head on) is under its position and very close to the ground, when in this position it will never have a shot letting the engagement prolong itself when it should try to make it the shortest possible.

Close to the ground, well unfortunately AI ace have the greatest problems to fight efficiently, and if you slow down there to stall speed in scissors (even La7ace 50%fuel vs Bf109G14 80%), its dead very often. AI ace doesn't seems to know how to slow down quickly and to maintain low speed enough to have firing position before player: nose-to-nose generally ends up with AI defeated. Ai overshoots way too easily, could they perhaps zoom climb or barrel roll instead of coming back in scissors, exposing themselves to canon fire?

When AI sits in player's six following him in a diving spiral, AI seems to hesitate and disengages when a properly flown La7 would easily follow the maneuver (lag pursuit) and use its superior rate of turn and acceleration to keep position right on player's six: now he's leaving too soon, giving lots of degrees for free (sometimes even its 6 low), as if it lost its orientation, this prolonging the fight.

AI La7 ace (but so far i noticed this with all the good turners) will never try to shoot at an (moderately far to far target) extending player to force a break turn and have easy kill. Instead it stays patiently behind waiting for the wingover and the fatal (read above remarks) head on pass.

Also AI ace doesn't like neg G maneuvers, this can cause them to hit the ground apparently without reason (i thought it could be elevator trim related?). Same seems to occur when player snap rolls into a high speed turn close to ground (perhaps due to AI GLocking?).

I also noticed P40 early(flying tigers version) vs Ace Ki43: Ki43 seems to have a sort of unstability in the rolling axis, and i guess this makes him often miss when he's shooting. Other than that the other remarks also apply to this case.

Seems like AI aces don't like the high speed fighting of p51 when fighting them under 1000m with the 'Stang and to my surprise and fun, they often hit the ground for no reason. two times i witnessed Ki43 pilots bailing out without giving a fight!lol

The "slow speed close to the ground" fight is in general fatal to AI ace, i noticed that too while flying bombers against Ace La7. Perhaps this was a feature to allow bomber pilots a chance in offline campaigns. Fighters Aces take alot of hit against human controlled gunners, would be nice to see them actually attack more vulnerable parts from higher speed/angles, just like human ace do.

The zoom climbs and hard turns are new things i find great (i don't know why but reminds me of AI in LockOn when you fight canon only :) ) Give AI it's aggresivity and aim (head on, extending fighter, better close to ground ability, ability to decelerate quicker) and AI will be as deadly as aces online.

I cannot wait for the improvement, i'm really impressed so far, it's very nice what you guys at TD manage to get out of this game: you have my gratitude for this.

I also felt that the weight limit for AI aces seemed to be 50%, under this why no maneuverability gains?

[Luno13]

Of course I do not want to make it easy to shoot down Ace AI, I just want them to appear more human. I hope that the Ace AI are not dumbed down because noobs cry about not being able to shoot them down or escape them. I believe they should offer the experience of jousting with an actual human IL2 online Ace with many years experience, where the average player would rarely be able to shoot them down or escape their attacks. The best human opponents should be able to shoot them down maybe one out of two times, that is what would keep the sim interesting for old-timers and make a great goal and practice tool for neophytes and those who enjoy flying offline as much as on. If someone wants target practice or satisfaction let them set the AI to a lower setting than ACE.

I don't agree here. The AI in a historical combat flight sim should represent the skill level of a human who has limited experience, training, and has emotions such as fear.

Humans online have way more experience in gunnery and maneuvering than any of the top WWII aces and and make maneuvers without feeling strain on their bodies, or with fears of death.

If mission planners are going to use Ace AI, it should be at a level consistent with reality.

The primary focus should be immersion. If you want it to, the AI can feel very convincing, but if you look for ways to exploit it, you will never be satisfied with any version of an AI - it's simply not possible to make something like that which runs on a PC. If you want to have a super-challenging fight where you can't just "game the game" with the AI, you can play online with everyone else.

Otherwise, there could be a fifth AI mode called "uber" which acts more like a human sitting at a PC console. Mission builders could use that for arcadey 1 vs 1s, and leave the rest of the AI levels for more plausible scenarios. However, that too will be exploited and deemed too easy within months, I think.

[Dami55an]

I hope this can be fixed in the future.
http://www.gqth.info/0.jpghttp://www.gqth.info/7.jpghttp://www.gqth.info/8.jpghttp://www.gqth.info/9.jpghttp://www.ymeu.info/test5.jpg

[Lagarto]

The first thing I would like to bring up is the way the AI seems to be "wired" to your brain when you fly against it. By this I mean when you are on an AI pilot's 6, even though he should be having a little trouble seeing what you are doing back there, they seem to move in a way that is directly dependent on your control inputs, almost as if you are controlling the AI aircraft with your control inputs.


+1! When the AI got improved recently, I really hoped that I would finally be able to surprise it with slashing attacks or by coming from below and behind. No such thing. With the 'extra pair of eyes in the butt', the AI always know you're there and gets out of the harm's way just in time. In this way the game favours highly manouverable planes like I-16, at the expense of heavier fighters, like Bf 110.

[JtD]

AI doesn't always know where the enemy is, I've bounced them numerous times. That's one of the features of the improved AI. Attacks from behind and below do work, but only every now and then. AI often reacts to threats at their six because they are being warned by their wingmen, or are aware of the fact that you've just gotten to your six before you reach a spot where they can't see you. AI performs search manoeuvres, and also manoeuvres in order to maintain or re-establish visual contact.

Personally I prefer to have AI maybe a bit more aware than human pilots of equal skill, because as soon as you find a way to reliably beat AI the game becomes boring. AI completely incapable of defence against an attack from low six would be exactly that. I'm happy they manage to react to this threat, even if maybe a bit too often.

[Jumoschwanz]

Otherwise, there could be a fifth AI mode called "uber" which acts more like a human sitting at a PC console.

That might be fun.

I agree that no pilot in WWII probably had as many hours flying combat as some have flying IL2.

I still fly online and still get shot down as much as I shoot others down, there are a lot of good pilots out there. It would just be fun to not have to go online at certain times and places for that experience. There is not always others flying online on the servers I like to fly on.

Just like a chess master playing a computer, it would be intriguing to see if within the limits of the IL2 flight models and hard settings, how tough the AI could be made. It is fine and dandy now, and I am grateful for all the efforts through the years put into the sim.

I try different things for fun though, like ont to four biplanes vs. four LA7s and other stuff like that and I noticed that the biplanes can win because the AI will not use the superior speed of their aircraft or other advantages it has, they will try to turn with aircraft it is impossible for them to turn with, which any real WWII ace would not do, even those with much fewer hours than good IL2 online players.

Not trying to complain, just thinking out loud.......S!

[Bearcat]

There may have to be some subtlety there. Not sure how the AI works but if I were flying a multi engine medium or heavy bomber I may stick with the plane with a fuel fire on a wing and see if it will go out. If so the plane may be flyable back to base. On a Ki-84 with a wing fire I would bail immediately.
I suspect that was also the case with many crews during WWII having read so many reports of B-17s coming back with incredible damage and sometimes suffering fires on the way back. Not all of those ended at all in a happy way but some of them did make it back...
So ... we may not want the AI to jump at the first sign of fire. Some sort of judgement calculation maybe? No idea how it specifically works.

Exactly .. Maybe in a bomber.. but not fighters.. I have never read an account of a pilot sticking around ina fighter that was on fire.. unless he was wounded and couldn't bail . but then he shouldnh't be able to fight very well either ..


Why shouldn't a fire in the wing go out if you dive? The whole idea is that the hard dive deprives the fire of oxygen and heat it goes out, just like blowing out a match.
Another factor is that, realistically, the pilot could divert fuel from the damaged tank, or else the fire consumes all the fuel. Once the fuel is gone, no more fire, since duralloy aluminum doesn't burn that well.
Mind you, I'm not letting the AI or the damage modeling off the hook here, but if you were in combat and you had a fire that went out, leaving the plane basically flyable, wouldn't you fight on if circumstances demanded it?
Looking at the video, if you told me that a player was flying the Ki-84 that got shot up, the behavior wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Not in a fighter...

Not sure whether this has been mentioned (too lazy to read a 1000 posts :grin: )
Offline play:
I notice that on all Ace settings 4vs4, when getting onto any AI opponents tail, it's supporting number will be onto me if I don't hit my target on the first pass.
At the same time I ask my #2 to cover me.. he's nowhere to be seen ??, even after minutes of dodging the covering opponent.
Summary:
Target AI are able to work as a team more than your own AI = No good ;)
This is not random, but every quick mission set.

This....

Agree about Ai, sits in your blind spot and does nothing to help not even give a warning. If you're head of four, if you don't order them to do something they just follow you around, even if six enemy ai are shooting at you, lol!

This again.. You would think that SOMEBODY in the AI flight would do some covering.. at least your wingman.. Even if you could program it so that your wingman would immediately attack whoever is shooting at you ... You ask for help .. you get that Roger I got you covered bit. and you look over your shoulder and there 3-4 AI either taking turns on you or flying around without a clue.. Often the warning of a bandid on your six comes after you are already in flames..

1 on 1 te AI is great.. very challenging .. much improved.. but those friendlies..

[Luno13]

Not trying to complain, just thinking out loud.......S!

I understand the need for a challenge. I just anticipate that making the existing AI forms very challenging would break the experience of dynamic and player-made careers. If anything, the high-deflection gunnery is still too good (but as others have said, the wingmen like to do their own thing). I hope my post didn't come across in the wrong way, but it's my opinion based on a fresh perspective. I have been flying RoF exclusively for months and now I'm finding WWII crates to be speedy, unmaneuverable, and unforgiving, and my enemies are tiny dots which only get big for a fraction of a second. In short, frustrating. I have to focus more on planning and getting a good position rather than yanking and banking, which seems to be the way it was really done in the past. I don't downplay the skill and excitement of close-in fighting, but I would prefer to use the sim to step into the moment, and create plausible narratives about historical situations.

Cheers.

[RegRag1977]

Exactly .. Maybe in a bomber.. but not fighters.. I have never read an account of a pilot sticking around ina fighter that was on fire.. unless he was wounded and couldn't bail . but then he shouldnh't be able to fight very well either ..




Not in a fighter...




Yes they did though few of them survived to tell: sometimes they prefered to stay in a burning/hard smoking aircraft rather than to bail out above enemy controlled areas. Especially on eastern front (for obvious reasons), they would try to join friendly territory at all costs.

Famous example: HSU Georgiy Golubev story -Pokryshkin's wingman- reported in Dmitry Loza's "Attack of the Airacobras" (p. 162 to 165). He managed to stay in his burning aircraft controlling the rudder with only one foot, because the fire started to burn his other one. Despite blinding smoke in the cockpit that caused irritation of his eyes he flew his aircraft until he was sure he was behind friendly lines, then only bailed out.

[Bearcat]

Yes they did though few of them survived to tell: sometimes they prefered to stay in a burning/hard smoking aircraft rather than to bail out above enemy controlled areas. Especially on eastern front (for obvious reasons), they would try to join friendly territory at all costs.

Famous example: HSU Georgiy Golubev story -Pokryshkin's wingman- reported in Dmitry Loza's "Attack of the Airacobras" (p. 162 to 165). He managed to stay in his burning aircraft controlling the rudder with only one foot, because the fire started to burn his other one. Despite blinding smoke in the cockpit that caused irritation of his eyes he flew his aircraft until he was sure he was behind friendly lines, then only bailed out.

Yes but what he didn't do was go on the attack.. either of the guy who shot him or some other guy.. he tried to leave the theater as quickly as possible ......

[RegRag1977]

Yes but what he didn't do was go on the attack.. either of the guy who shot him or some other guy.. he tried to leave the theater as quickly as possible ......

True he did not go on the attack in this particular example, though he had to dodge two attacks by a 109 pilot before leaving the theater IIRC.

Anyway, I just posted this in order to give an example. That said, in general, of course, i'm sure a pilot would bail out immediately, and it should be like that in game.

[K_Freddie]

Offline DFs:

The AI still can see through its engine cowling... Beside the crazy aerobatic dances that no ordinary pilot would ever do once in his lifetime... try this.

Go into a tight turn with the AI on your six.. keep your turn until the AI does it's stupid 'dance'. At this point it cannot see you - you then change your direction slightly... the AI immediately stops it's dancing, realigns then dances again for the next shot - way to go !!.

Besides that I'm sure the FMs have been badly fudged.. I mean really bad.
The Spit seems to be able to turn on a tickey without any blackout.. then blackouts with no apparent reason ??

Plenty work to be done here.. don't be biased - just do it as it is/should be ?

[IceFire]

Offline DFs:

The AI still can see through its engine cowling... Beside the crazy aerobatic dances that no ordinary pilot would ever do once in his lifetime... try this.

Go into a tight turn with the AI on your six.. keep your turn until the AI does it's stupid 'dance'. At this point it cannot see you - you then change your direction slightly... the AI immediately stops it's dancing, realigns then dances again for the next shot - way to go !!.

Besides that I'm sure the FMs have been badly fudged.. I mean really bad.
The Spit seems to be able to turn on a tickey without any blackout.. then blackouts with no apparent reason ??

Plenty work to be done here.. don't be biased - just do it as it is/should be ?
Doing AI work is tricky... that said the AI does not see through their cowling anymore. They used to but not anymore. Now they make a guess as to where you are and estimate for blind shooting just as a human would do. I think they still have to cheat a bit with regards to some levels of awareness and target acquisition. It's difficult because you can make the ultimate game AI but only be able to run a few of them at a time due to the CPU cycles required or you can find a balance point with some fidelity issues and be able to run the dozens of AI that are required to make this look good.

[Luno13]

Besides that I'm sure the FMs have been badly fudged.. I mean really bad.
The Spit seems to be able to turn on a tickey without any blackout.. then blackouts with no apparent reason ??

Sounds like placebo effect. I haven't had random blackouts, and it's possible to blackout in turns, although I avoid it.

Plenty work to be done here.. don't be biased - just do it as it is/should be ?

Ah, another conspiracy-theory. :rolleyes:

[K_Freddie]

Do a quick mission..
Crimea map, dora-9 vs spitIXs, aces + 4 each.. record and watch the tracks...

People complained about the AI before TD.. see it now ;)

I'm not sure whether HSFX6 has anything to do with it... but the AI behaved the same before the mod

Another point ..:)
Not sure whether it's a visual artifact or an upgrade that was mentioned in earlier versions
The AI control surface positions, Rudder and elevator, are in extreme positions... complete stall should occur.
Are we still looking at certain ..AI invincibility which cannot be ironed out in the game engine. ??

No it's not a conspiracy, but a note for the developers.
I've been at the game just as long, if not years longer than yourself.. and know the nuances of the versions.
:)

[K_Freddie]

I think they still have to cheat a bit with regards to some levels of awareness and target acquisition.
It seems so as every time they know exactly where to 'blind' shoot with a combination of all control surfaces, nearly a 100% of the time, which is an impossibility for any human, hence AI :grin:

Not only that.. with all the control surface agitation the AI still maintains a superior speed advantage.

I've practised my skills with the ace AI for years, but have never seen anything like this... it's like chalk and cheese. As I said .. a BIG AI fudge has occurred.

One doesn't mind the ability to 'lead shoot', but the ability to place the a/c in any 3D position without 'costs'... is a bit much. This in not coming from a noob.. it's coming from a 4000hr plus on FW190s sim person.

;)

[Luno13]

I'm not sure whether HSFX6 has anything to do with it... but the AI behaved the same before the mod

If you're running a mod, it's not DT's problem. Simple as that.

I've been at the game just as long, if not years longer than yourself.. and know the nuances of the versions.

It doesn't matter how long you've been here (and I have to wonder how you can claim that you've been here longer when you don't know anything about me). You won't know any of the 'nuances' until you've programmed it yourself.

People complained about the AI before TD.. see it now

You really think their AI is worse? And I'm supposed to believe that you know the 'nuances'? Psh.

[CWMV]

That would be my only gripe about the AI, make them adhere to the same AI as the player.
Other than that its much much better than before.

[FC99]

they seem to move in a way that is directly dependent on your control inputs, almost as if you are controlling the AI aircraft with your control inputs.
Well, that's rather normal, air duels are like dancing, what you do depends a lot on what enemy is doing.

I thought that the ace AI would be more realistic if a slight delay was introduced between the time you moved your controls and the AI reacted to it. Not much but enough to make it seem like they had to look at what you are doing and move their own controls during a fight.
AI react on your plane attitude not on your control inputs.


Lastly I notice that the Ace AI should be a lot more effective than they are but for some reason when they are on the tail of an opponent or target they take extra time to do some redundant and useless barrel rolls etc.. This may help them foil certain tailgunners, but when they are on the tail of an enemy fighter aircraft all it does is wastes their energy and a lot of opportunities to make shots. That's not intended behavior, we will fix it when we find exact cause for this.

When fighting the Ace AI in the original IL2 a combination of their behavior and the vastly different flight/weapon models compared to IL246 makes it as interesting a challenge as ever. I would definitely say that IL246 is far better than the original IL2, but that there may be a few things worth looking at in the original IL2 AI etc. that might offer a useful perspective.
What exactly you have in mind?


Just like a chess master playing a computer, it would be intriguing to see if within the limits of the IL2 flight models and hard settings, how tough the AI could be made.
It took purpose built monster machine to beat human champion in chess. Chess is great game but you always have same position at the start. Same number and type of pieces. Movement is limited on 8x8 board. Compare that with Il2, 300+ planes, combinations of types, numbers and positions are infinite. And you want AI to make decisions in a fraction of a second. This is hard task for AI.


As you said it seems that AI has trouble seeing player's dot after a 5km distance, AI ace often seeming to see player at the very last moment which makes it lose a great part of its maneuvrablity advantage (vs Luftwaffe types, for instance). I think this is why AI doesn't follow the climb...just a theory though...That is correct.

Another thing, when head on La7 rarely fires at player, and when does very often misses, while player wont miss and will score (fatal wing or engine) hits: to me AI ace aiming should be far more accurate especially head on.
:grin: What to do now, some says AI shoots too good and some says it is too bad? No way to please everybody.

Close to the ground, well unfortunately AI ace have the greatest problems to fight efficiently, That's true and that's very hard situation for AI, detailed collision check can be very time consuming so some compromises are necessary to keep game smooth.

Also AI ace doesn't like neg G maneuvers, this can cause them to hit the ground apparently without reason (i thought it could be elevator trim related?). Same seems to occur when player snap rolls into a high speed turn close to ground (perhaps due to AI GLocking?).That's probably related to one bug in ground avoidance logic, it should be better in 4.12

two times i witnessed Ki43 pilots bailing out without giving a fight!lolCowardliness is not reserved for humans only, some AI values their lives more than the fight.

I also felt that the weight limit for AI aces seemed to be 50%, under this why no maneuverability gains?Where you heard this, I don't think there is anything like it in code.

The AI in a historical combat flight sim should represent the skill level of a human who has limited experience, training, and has emotions such as fear.

Humans online have way more experience in gunnery and maneuvering than any of the top WWII aces and and make maneuvers without feeling strain on their bodies, or with fears of death.
I'm afraid that we must make compromise here and make AI bit better than historical. IMO using Rookies and Average AI for the most part and some Veterans and Aces in historical missions provides good approximation of WWII skill level.


Plenty work to be done here.. don't be biased - just do it as it is/should be ?Blackout is not plane dependent, it can't be more unbiased than that.

[IceFire]

It seems so as every time they know exactly where to 'blind' shoot with a combination of all control surfaces, nearly a 100% of the time, which is an impossibility for any human, hence AI :grin:

Not only that.. with all the control surface agitation the AI still maintains a superior speed advantage.

I've practised my skills with the ace AI for years, but have never seen anything like this... it's like chalk and cheese. As I said .. a BIG AI fudge has occurred.

One doesn't mind the ability to 'lead shoot', but the ability to place the a/c in any 3D position without 'costs'... is a bit much. This in not coming from a noob.. it's coming from a 4000hr plus on FW190s sim person.

;)
I'm trying to visualize the problems and I'm not 100% sure what I'm expecting to see. Do you have any tracks recorded that illustrate what's going on? I'd like to see... if you can point out the timecode when weird things are happening that would be even more useful.

[Bearcat]

Quote:
I thought that the ace AI would be more realistic if a slight delay was introduced between the time you moved your controls and the AI reacted to it. Not much but enough to make it seem like they had to look at what you are doing and move their own controls during a fight.

AI react on your plane attitude not on your control inputs.

That is good to know ...

Quote:
Lastly I notice that the Ace AI should be a lot more effective than they are but for some reason when they are on the tail of an opponent or target they take extra time to do some redundant and useless barrel rolls etc.. This may help them foil certain tailgunners, but when they are on the tail of an enemy fighter aircraft all it does is wastes their energy and a lot of opportunities to make shots.
That's not intended behavior, we will fix it when we find exact cause for this.

That is good to know as well and hopefully will probably address the issues I raised with the friendly AI

Quote:
When fighting the Ace AI in the original IL2 a combination of their behavior and the vastly different flight/weapon models compared to IL246 makes it as interesting a challenge as ever. I would definitely say that IL246 is far better than the original IL2, but that there may be a few things worth looking at in the original IL2 AI etc. that might offer a useful perspective.


I don't know about that .. I think the 1946 AI is much better overall than the original IL2 AI.. in every way..

Quote:
Just like a chess master playing a computer, it would be intriguing to see if within the limits of the IL2 flight models and hard settings, how tough the AI could be made.
It took purpose built monster machine to beat human champion in chess. Chess is great game but you always have same position at the start. Same number and type of pieces. Movement is limited on 8x8 board. Compare that with Il2, 300+ planes, combinations of types, numbers and positions are infinite. And you want AI to make decisions in a fraction of a second. This is hard task for AI.

I think the enemy AI is pretty nice.. especially since 4.10 .. it is the behavior of the friendly AI that gets me.. Heck if my AI wingman acted like the wing men of the bandit I am chasing I would be happier.. and maybe I am wrong but it seems to me that they do not both act the same. Even when I tell them what to do more often than I'd like there will be 3 or four friendlies flying around me while I have 3-5 bandits taking turns ripping me a new one at the same time..

Quote:
Originally Posted by RegRag1977 View Post
As you said it seems that AI has trouble seeing player's dot after a 5km distance, AI ace often seeming to see player at the very last moment which makes it lose a great part of its maneuvrablity advantage (vs Luftwaffe types, for instance). I think this is why AI doesn't follow the climb...just a theory though...
That is correct.

Another good to know..

Quote:
Another thing, when head on La7 rarely fires at player, and when does very often misses, while player wont miss and will score (fatal wing or engine) hits: to me AI ace aiming should be far more accurate especially head on.
What to do now, some says AI shoots too good and some says it is too bad? No way to please everybody.

I dunno about that one either.. I don't do too many headons with ace AI .. I usually loose no matter what they are flying.



Originally Posted by Luno13 View Post
The AI in a historical combat flight sim should represent the skill level of a human who has limited experience, training, and has emotions such as fear.

Humans online have way more experience in gunnery and maneuvering than any of the top WWII aces and and make maneuvers without feeling strain on their bodies, or with fears of death.
I'm afraid that we must make compromise here and make AI bit better than historical. IMO using Rookies and Average AI for the most part and some Veterans and Aces in historical missions provides good approximation of WWII skill level.

I agree 100%. This is exactly my take and what I do when I made missions ..

[Luno13]

Thanks for the Q & A, FC!

[Stig1207]

Quote:
I think the enemy AI is pretty nice.. especially since 4.10 .. it is the behavior of the friendly AI that gets me.. Heck if my AI wingman acted like the wing men of the bandit I am chasing I would be happier.. and maybe I am wrong but it seems to me that they do not both act the same. Even when I tell them what to do more often than I'd like there will be 3 or four friendlies flying around me while I have 3-5 bandits taking turns ripping me a new one at the same time..


Hitting the nail on the head. The friendly AI are pretty much clueless compared to the opposing AI. A wingman would try to clear his lead's tail if he's in a position to do so, without waiting to be ordered to do so, and vice versa, that's the idea of flying as a pair, teamwork, supporting one another.
The enemy AI can do it, and the friendlies should be able to do so.

Stig

[SPAD-1949]

Quote:
I think the enemy AI is pretty nice.. especially since 4.10 .. it is the behavior of the friendly AI that gets me.. Heck if my AI wingman acted like the wing men of the bandit I am chasing I would be happier.. and maybe I am wrong but it seems to me that they do not both act the same. Even when I tell them what to do more often than I'd like there will be 3 or four friendlies flying around me while I have 3-5 bandits taking turns ripping me a new one at the same time..


Hitting the nail on the head. The friendly AI are pretty much clueless compared to the opposing AI. A wingman would try to clear his lead's tail if he's in a position to do so, without waiting to be ordered to do so, and vice versa, that's the idea of flying as a pair, teamwork, supporting one another.
The enemy AI can do it, and the friendlies should be able to do so.

Stig

Well I saw a big difference in AI behaviour between 4.10 and 4.11
With 4.10 enemy AI was extremely agressive and there was little chance surviving a 4 vs 4 fighter encounter where all were set ace. Usually you were killed within seconds from a headon sniper shot, less then 5 rounds necessary. Also friendly AI were agressive and you stood little chance staying in formation when heading towards the enemy.

With 4.11 evrything seems a little to sissy. Your flight leader avoids the encounter, enemy AI lost lots of agressivity.
I added a simple fighter mission where it was immediately to be seen. Try it in 4.09, 4.10 and 4.11 and you will easyly recognize the differences.

[K_Freddie]

Control surface positions...
I'm not sure how the AI is modelled but in this pic the rudder and elevator positions are at max = instant violent stall.... Not so with the AI.
These positions are held throughout the turn.... Also :)
Doing a lot of crimea quickies... The Spit AI can do the most amazing turns and not black out, then while doing a mild turn just flies into the ground.
I'm beginning to enjoy pre-modded IL2 more :)

[Pursuivant]

Yes they did though few of them survived to tell: sometimes they prefered to stay in a burning/hard smoking aircraft rather than to bail out above enemy controlled areas. Especially on eastern front (for obvious reasons), they would try to join friendly territory at all costs.

I can think of other obvious situations where a fighter pilot would stay with his plane if it was on fire:

1) Too low to bail out. The pilot would ride the plane down and try to crash land/ditch.

2) Close enough to base/smooth ground to possibly make an emergency landing. This option has claimed a lot of real life pilots over the years, since sometimes the choice to try to make an emergency landing rather than immediately bail out is the wrong one.

3) Over water, but close enough to land to possibly bail out or crash land on dry ground. Similar to the situation above, but particularly applicable when flying over shark-infested or extremely cold waters, where falling into the water was almost certain death.

4) "Doomed hero." Pilot is mortally wounded and/or plane is in too bad a condition to get back to base, but the pilot can still complete a vital mission by sticking with the plane until the very end. Very rare, but it did happen. A slightly more common scenario is where the pilot sticks with his plane long enough that it won't crash onto a friendly populated area.

5) Stubbornness. As long as the fire isn't burning him, a pilot might try to deal with smoke or fire rather than bailing out.

Many fighters carried fire extinguishers in the cockpits, and pilots could try to blow smoke out of the cockpit by slightly opening the canopy. The wind rushing over the gap created a partial vacuum which could suck the smoke out. They could also try to extinguish fires by going into long, hard dives, shutting down the engine, or shutting off damaged fuel tanks, which sometimes worked.

[Pursuivant]

I still think that Ace AI is too aggressive about taking head-on shots in meeting engagements where neither side has the advantage.

In "AI vs. AI" dogfights I've set up in the QMB, I see way too many "double kills" where Ace AI fighters take each other out during the first head-on pass.

Especially where one fighter has a big speed or maneuverability advantage over the other, the AI should try to avoid head-on shots and use their speed and/or maneuverability to set up a safer firing situation.


Another flaw seems to be that AI fighters who are superior in both speed and maneuverability prefer "boom and zoom" tactics rather than pure maneuvering, even when maneuver tactics would take the enemy out more quickly and with less risk to the attacker.

Furthermore, AI B'n'Z tactics usually don't use enough speed or altitude to get a really advantageous angle on the target. Often, AI planes will make a pass, then fly off to a distance of 2-3 kilometers before turning around and making diving attack from 20-30 degrees above, giving a human player plenty of time to try to "jam" the attack or take a head-on shot at the merge.


Finally, AI rookie or average pilots are still too prone to breaking off the fight and flying around before resuming the attack. Unless they've lost sight of their opponent, it's more common for inexperienced fighter pilots to be too aggressive rather than not aggressive enough.

An excessively aggressive rookie will burn off too much altitude and/or speed maneuvering to stay on his opponent's tail. Often, this is combined with target fixation, which leads to loss of situational awareness. Sometimes, it results in the pilot actually overshooting his target.

I don't know if IL2 models an inexperienced fighter pilot's loss of Situational Awareness when they're focusing on chasing or firing at a foe, but it would be a cool addition if it isn't already there.

[Stig1207]

Well I saw a big difference in AI behaviour between 4.10 and 4.11
With 4.10 enemy AI was extremely agressive and there was little chance surviving a 4 vs 4 fighter encounter where all were set ace. Usually you were killed within seconds from a headon sniper shot, less then 5 rounds necessary. Also friendly AI were agressive and you stood little chance staying in formation when heading towards the enemy.

With 4.11 evrything seems a little to sissy. Your flight leader avoids the encounter, enemy AI lost lots of agressivity.
I added a simple fighter mission where it was immediately to be seen. Try it in 4.09, 4.10 and 4.11 and you will easyly recognize the differences.

I must stress that I haven't had time to try your mission probably, but I have flown it a few times in 4.11.and 4.10 on autopilot, and yes, I can see the difference. I think though that this stems from the overhaul the AI recieved in 4.11, where the AI won't always just wade into any fight, but sometimes may seek a more advantageous position before engaging or even running away.
So in general the AI in 4.11 are probably less aggressive in 4.11 than in earlier versions, but on the otherhand that probably makes them more 'human'. I consider the enemy AI much improved and more of a challenge in 4.11, but in some respects the friendly AI arn't in the same league.

I have attached a ntrk to illustrate what I (and Bearcat) have mentioned, where the friendlies don't react to bandits flying along side them and attacking the flight leader (yours truly), until I request assitance. In the track i haven't I haven't given the order to 'attack fighters' so the friendlies just follow me around in formation and then I more or less just let the enemy attack me.

Stig

[K_Freddie]

AI Combat Reports - 2560AD

1) Me = (ace)Spit-IX vs AI (ace)Spit-IX (Crimea Map - 1000m)

The usual being bounced, turn into attack.
Spit does extraordinary rudder/elevator rolls to get a burst on me - I avoid it with an inward snap roll. The Spit stays with with me and we match each other turn for turn without either getting a bead on the other. The AI then flies into the beach during a turn...???.
I was nowhere near blacking out and the AI was turning at the same speed/rate - Huh!
This was repeated 3x - all results similar

2)Me = (ace)FW190A9 vs AI (ace)FW190A9 (Crimea Map - 1000m)
The usual being bounced, turn into attack.
AI FW doesn't even match the spit with first attacking move. With superior roll rate and better control it makes no attempt to do what the Spit did. After the first pass it makes no attempt to follow me, stay close like the spit.
In the same plane I was onto the AI FW in less than 270 degrees and I just followed it (glued myself to it's rear end) without shooting until it also flew itself into the ground for no apparent reason. It did purely defensive moves with no matching aggressiveness like the spit.
This was repeated 3x - all results similar

The disparity is as wide as a canyon here.. or maybe the limitation is the human imagination (most likely suspect) ;)
I'm really tired of the AI flying into the ground, sea or any lump of dirt that is 'in the sky' !!

[K_Freddie]

I have a proposal for TD with regard to the AI.

Why don't you guys ask everyone whose had medium to extensive experience in any particular a/c to write a report(or multiple reports) on their tactics used in certain scenarios, online or offline.

Filter the basic/important aspects and incorporate these ideas into the AI programming.

Whaddya say.. hey!!
:grin:

Edt: Taking this further.. how about seperate aircraft enthusiasts working on their fav aircraft - Pits, FMs, DMs... etc - team work type thingy.
From there it goes for production testing, then final acceptance into the game.. I'm sure there are a gazillion people ready for many teams of production - TD will be the umbrella controlling body ?? :)

Edt2: I actually like this idea.. it has BIG ideas and results.. imagine a 'world perfect flight sim'.. freak me out somewhat!!

[RegRag1977]

"Quote:

I also felt that the weight limit for AI aces seemed to be 50%, under this why no maneuverability gains?

Where you heard this, I don't think there is anything like it in code."


Do you mean there is no difference in AI ace agility whatever fuel load you select for AI?


It could be nice to see AI ace start spiraling when it sees player still closing (or firing) after the zoom climb, that instead of being easily shot down while hanging on its prop.

[FC99]

The friendly AI are pretty much clueless compared to the opposing AI. A wingman would try to clear his lead's tail if he's in a position to do so, without waiting to be ordered to do so, and vice versa, that's the idea of flying as a pair, teamwork, supporting one another.
The enemy AI can do it, and the friendlies should be able to do so.

AI don't know what is your idea about their behavior, you have to tell them what you want. Things you might find logical might not be logical or desired for someone else. I guarantee you that for every stupid thing AI do in game I can find you equivalent stupidity done by humans in WWII.

Control surface positions...
I'm not sure how the AI is modelled but in this pic the rudder and elevator positions are at max = instant violent stall.... Not so with the AI.
These positions are held throughout the turn....
And it's not any different in 4.05 for example which is not done by DT. One must ask himself why was that not a problem before for you and now it's a game-breaker.:rolleyes:


I don't know if IL2 models an inexperienced fighter pilot's loss of Situational Awareness when they're focusing on chasing or firing at a foe, but it would be a cool addition if it isn't already there.
This is not modeled directly but there is a mechanism in the game which results in AI behave in a way you propose.


Why don't you guys ask everyone whose had medium to extensive experience in any particular a/c to write a report(or multiple reports) on their tactics used in certain scenarios, online or offline.

Filter the basic/important aspects and incorporate these ideas into the AI programming.
You can't go into details regarding tactics or anything else in 300 planes sim. If this is a "study" sim with only couple of planes than yes, than you can make code for every possible matchup, but not in Il2.


Edt: Taking this further.. how about seperate aircraft enthusiasts working on their fav aircraft - Pits, FMs, DMs... etc - team work type thingy.
From there it goes for production testing, then final acceptance into the game.. I'm sure there are a gazillion people ready for many teams of production - TD will be the umbrella controlling body ?? :)
Nobody stops them to do that but you would be surprised how few such enthusiast actually exist.


"Quote:

I also felt that the weight limit for AI aces seemed to be 50%, under this why no maneuverability gains?

Where you heard this, I don't think there is anything like it in code."


Do you mean there is no difference in AI ace agility whatever fuel load you select for AI?

Obviously, I don't understand what you are saying. I thought that you are saying that Aces AI have some artificial weight limit. AFAIK that's not the case, changes in weight should affect them same as humans.


It could be nice to see AI ace start spiraling when it sees player still closing (or firing) after the zoom climb, that instead of being easily shot down while hanging on its prop.I'm not too happy with AI's B'n'Z and Energy fighting but we can't do all at once. As far as air AI is concerned ratio between Oleg's and DT code in game is something like 60:40 so we have almost doubled the AI code in just a few patches. Considering that we are comparing the team that was payed to work full time on the game with the team that is doing voluntarily job in the free time it is easy to see that DT pays lot more attention to AI than it was the case in the past but we can't do miracles.

[RegRag1977]

I'm not too happy with AI's B'n'Z and Energy fighting but we can't do all at once. As far as air AI is concerned ratio between Oleg's and DT code in game is something like 60:40 so we have almost doubled the AI code in just a few patches. Considering that we are comparing the team that was payed to work full time on the game with the team that is doing voluntarily job in the free time it is easy to see that DT pays lot more attention to AI than it was the case in the past but we can't do miracles.


haha my remarks were absolutely not criticism :) : just take them as simple requests from (greedy/impatient?) someone who's actually enjoying the new AI coding very much. I'm well aware of AI improvements in the last patches and am pleasantly surprised and very grateful... Team Daidalos AI is actually beginning to have some nerves and skills, and to me this is already like a miracle!

Don't worry, whatever the results (and they are very good so far, and promising) in all fairness, i think everyone here knows we have you and TD to thank for it.

Please professor go on making the "creature" alive:twisted:!

[Stig1207]

[QUOTE=FC99;468490]AI don't know what is your idea about their behavior, you have to tell them what you want. Things you might find logical might not be logical or desired for someone else. I guarantee you that for every stupid thing AI do in game I can find you equivalent stupidity done by humans in WWII.


Giving orders to your wingman / flight(s) under your command in a given situation during a mission is one thing, but there are other things that are basic, and a wingman who didn't know what to do if a bandit jumps on his leads tail in WWII would have been the exception, not the rule.

If a RL pilot checked six and saw a bandit in between him and his wingman, I reckon, providing they both got back to base, that the wingman would be meekly washing his (the lead's) underpants.

Sure pilots did stupid things and made mistakes, especially in the heat of combat, and AI making wrong choices, making a run for it instead of a fight, and so on is as it should be, that's realistic. However, an AI wingman that clears his lead's his tail without being ordered to do so, is also more realistic than one that doesn't.

/Stig

[Pursuivant]

Sure pilots did stupid things and made mistakes, especially in the heat of combat, and AI making wrong choices, making a run for it instead of a fight, and so on is as it should be, that's realistic. However, an AI wingman that clears his lead's his tail without being ordered to do so, is also more realistic than one that doesn't.

I agree. If you're a wingman, your standing orders are to keep enemy planes from attacking your lead.

A wingman who doesn't do that unless you specifically tell him to do so isn't much of a wingman. Maybe for Rookie AI, but certainly Average or better wingmen should move aggressively to drive off enemy planes threatening his lead - WITHOUT BEING COMMANDED TO DO SO.

The only exception would be if the wingman has been forced to take evasive action himself and/or has lost Situational Awareness as to where his lead is.

If the AI wingman doesn't do this automatically, then there should be some way of making it do so, by creating "standing orders" for AI.


Actually, the ability for mission builders and/or players to "program" the AI using standing orders would be an incredibly cool addition to the game, and would be a very simple way to deal with a whole host of tactical situations that would otherwise drive an AI programmer nuts.

I could see it working sort of like a macro or script, where the player/mission builder could order certain units to do things like hold a certain course or altitude relative to another plane, fire/not fire at certain targets, avoid/attack certain planes or classes of planes, etc. Variants of this programming could be used to do things like make fighters stay within a certain distance of the bombers they're escorting, make bombers divert to a secondary target if clouds cover the primary target, fighters only drop drop tanks if they encounter fighters, or have planes in your flight trail enemy planes back to their base.

[FC99]

I agree. If you're a wingman, your standing orders are to keep enemy planes from attacking your lead.

A wingman who doesn't do that unless you specifically tell him to do so isn't much of a wingman. Maybe for Rookie AI, but certainly Average or better wingmen should move aggressively to drive off enemy planes threatening his lead - WITHOUT BEING COMMANDED TO DO SO.
OK, so desired behavior is to set wingman into defend leader mode when they notice the enemy with the exception of Rookies which will blindly follow the leader unless told otherwise?

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



If the AI wingman doesn't do this automatically, then there should be some way of making it do so, by creating "standing orders" for AI.

Actually, the ability for mission builders and/or players to "program" the AI using standing orders would be an incredibly cool addition to the game, and would be a very simple way to deal with a whole host of tactical situations that would otherwise drive an AI programmer nuts.
We are in a process of enhancing comms and some of the things you want will be available to player that way.


I could see it working sort of like a macro or script, where the player/mission builder could order certain units to do things like hold a certain course or altitude relative to another plane, fire/not fire at certain targets, avoid/attack certain planes or classes of planes, etc.
Everything that involves messing with the mission file is sensitive topic because of backward compatibility. Once you put something into mission file you are stuck with it so all eventual additions require careful evaluation. Hard part here is designing robust and flexible scheme for adding various parameters but we are working on it. Main task for 4.13 will be triggers and that will cover lot of your wishes.

[secretone]

[QUOTE=FC99;468490]AI don't know what is your idea about their behavior, you have to tell them what you want. Things you might find logical might not be logical or desired for someone else. I guarantee you that for every stupid thing AI do in game I can find you equivalent stupidity done by humans in WWII.


Giving orders to your wingman / flight(s) under your command in a given situation during a mission is one thing, but there are other things that are basic, and a wingman who didn't know what to do if a bandit jumps on his leads tail in WWII would have been the exception, not the rule.

If a RL pilot checked six and saw a bandit in between him and his wingman, I reckon, providing they both got back to base, that the wingman would be meekly washing his (the lead's) underpants.

Sure pilots did stupid things and made mistakes, especially in the heat of combat, and AI making wrong choices, making a run for it instead of a fight, and so on is as it should be, that's realistic. However, an AI wingman that clears his lead's his tail without being ordered to do so, is also more realistic than one that doesn't.

/Stig

With Greatest Respect To TD: +1 on Stig's idea; there is often no time to think and give orders in combat - people have to know how to act in an unexpected situation in order for a unit to be effective as a team. I know that this concept of teamwork was accepted by the Americans, Germans and British.

[RegRag1977]

I agree. If you're a wingman, your standing orders are to keep enemy planes from attacking your lead.


Which is one of the very most difficult task to master, it is very rare to see it well performed by human players playing online BTW. Rarely have i seen it performed correctly...But that's just my limited experience of the game you may say.

The saving wingman, well that works especially in theory.

As wingman you must have a superior SA, a good intelligence of the dynamic of a fight, and you have to have a good aim too, qualities that are never ever found by less skilled fighter pilots, not to talk about the will to protect that must be stronger than the greed and the call of glory...


A wingman who doesn't do that unless you specifically tell him to do so isn't much of a wingman. Maybe for Rookie AI, but certainly Average or better wingmen should move aggressively to drive off enemy planes threatening his lead - WITHOUT BEING COMMANDED TO DO SO.

Right, though you are actually describing an expert pilot as wingman, certainly not an average one. That's maybe the other ace of the squad and his wingman you are talking about in your post, perhaps not the direct wingman. Perhaps more than by wingman, cover should be provided by the 2nd (or other) element (ZVENO, Red Flight, Rotte), but anyway they should not be able to obey orders if engaged, and they should chose their life by disengaging over saving the leader in case of encountering superior enemy.

Only a very small elite of human pilots are "much of a wingman", perhaps your standards are set too high. Wingman, it is not easy job you can comply just by obeying orders...Wingman able to give protection = very high skill level! The only diffference with aces (apart from kill ratio obviously) is a different kind of aggressiveness, less "primal" i would say.


The only exception would be if the wingman has been forced to take evasive action himself and/or has lost Situational Awareness as to where his lead is.

Yes, but one should note that these exceptions come in particular cases: especially if the leader did not plan the attack correctly, and did not spot the danger (call it again human pilot mistake) or if the flight is attacked by surprise, in which case there would not be much to wait from the unlucky wingman...If the leader does something really too dangerous i doubt the wingman will risk his life to save the greedy leader. Even in the real world i'm sure they would rather save their own life instead. This should be taken into consideration too when programming AI. It would be strange to have an AI just to sacrifice it when things go wrong to allow a last card to be played. This just would not be realistic at all...On the contrary, good planning of the attack, waiting to see and chosing not to engage should be somehow rewarded instead.


If the AI wingman doesn't do this automatically, then there should be some way of making it do so, by creating "standing orders" for AI.

I can't see why Ai should automatically do something as difficult as finding the lost leader in the middle of a fight when it is only the very best human fighter pilots that are able to do so in real life and in game (no icons, close cockpits of course). Often the flight is scattered by the attackers : this is actually why the surprise attack is the best.

When surprised and scattered there's not much you can do but try to save your life if your ac performance allows it. Otherwise i can not see why human player would not be shot down. It happened all the time during WW2 even to the very best.


Actually, the ability for mission builders and/or players to "program" the AI using standing orders would be an incredibly cool addition to the game, and would be a very simple way to deal with a whole host of tactical situations that would otherwise drive an AI programmer nuts.

I could see it working sort of like a macro or script, where the player/mission builder could order certain units to do things like hold a certain course or altitude relative to another plane, fire/not fire at certain targets, avoid/attack certain planes or classes of planes, etc. Variants of this programming could be used to do things like make fighters stay within a certain distance of the bombers they're escorting, make bombers divert to a secondary target if clouds cover the primary target, fighters only drop drop tanks if they encounter fighters, or have planes in your flight trail enemy planes back to their base.

These are all great ideas but to me they should only work if the wingman AI is veteran or ace, and only when the flight has the initiative of the attack with a great margin to exploit or when the flight controls the situation. If suprise attacked or against superior enemy AI "protection" skills should be decreased drastically, even to a lower point that what we have now, if possible (ie finding oneself alone against a whole enemy squadron).

[RegRag1977]

[QUOTE=FC99;468490]AI don't know what is your idea about their behavior, you have to tell them what you want. Things you might find logical might not be logical or desired for someone else. I guarantee you that for every stupid thing AI do in game I can find you equivalent stupidity done by humans in WWII.


Giving orders to your wingman / flight(s) under your command in a given situation during a mission is one thing, but there are other things that are basic, and a wingman who didn't know what to do if a bandit jumps on his leads tail in WWII would have been the exception, not the rule.

If a RL pilot checked six and saw a bandit in between him and his wingman, I reckon, providing they both got back to base, that the wingman would be meekly washing his (the lead's) underpants.

Sure pilots did stupid things and made mistakes, especially in the heat of combat, and AI making wrong choices, making a run for it instead of a fight, and so on is as it should be, that's realistic. However, an AI wingman that clears his lead's his tail without being ordered to do so, is also more realistic than one that doesn't.

/Stig

With all respect, I think the problem is not here: in fact the wingman should be shot at/down first, he should be asking for his leader's help in the first place, not the contrary :) . You would never see a pilot trying to kill a leader by placing his fighter between the target and his wingman: this is what should be changed IMHO.

But again, if a wingman is shot at, then perhaps the leader did a mistake by not seeing the one "that will kill you friend".

[Stig1207]

OK, so desired behavior is to set wingman into defend leader mode when they notice the enemy with the exception of Rookies which will blindly follow the leader unless told otherwise?

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

Even a rookie, seeing a bandit on his leaders tail, would know he has try to help if he can, or at least warn his leader of the danger.

A major part of a fighter pilots duties is shooting down enemy aircraft, so why wouldn't No 3 try to shoot down the bandit that's attacking the flight leader if he's in a position to do so?

RegRag:

With all respect, I think the problem is not here: in fact the wingman should be shot at/down first, he should be asking for his leader's help in the first place, not the contrary . You would never see a pilot trying to kill a leader by placing his fighter between the target and his wingman: this is what should be changed IMHO.


I agree, but I have seen No 3 of my flight doing the same thing, flying past the wingman to attack the leader, but the difference is that the bandit wingman opens fire and No 3 breaks off, screaming for help:grin:

Also, regarding your post 230. Some may be better than others at flying wing, and even an AI wingman should not be expected to risk his 'life' trying to save his leader. But the issue here is that the AI wingman doesn't react at all to the attack on his (player) flight leader unless he is commanded to so. And that is even if the attacking bandit is flying right beside him or maybe even in his gunsight, and this is whether the wingman is a rookie or an ace, there's no difference.
It should be obvious for an AI wingman what's happening and also fairly obvious what he needs to do, but how well he does is of cause another matter.

/Stig

[Fall_Pink?]

@moderator: please make it a sticky

We will continue to develop and release further AI improvements in future patches. Please help us to identify any 4.11 AI related issues and post them here with detailed description, screenshots, videos, etc. Thank you.

Daidalos Team

Well, I few a few missions 4.11.1 today again (crappy cold weather outside, thus...). Some some AI moves that maybe should looked into are:

- fighters escorts that engage, then disengage and fly away, higher and higher. Then turn back in a very long dive at high speed or disengage completely and move on to their next waypoint.
- Jabo's that attack and make a pass at their target, then slightly zoom up again and want to make a hard left or right bank and steeply downwards for a second pass. This second move brings them very close to the ground and they sometimes crash.

Rgs,
FP

edit: using 4.11.1 and latest hsfx .16.

[Jumpy]

Three things That I would like fixed. AI bombers don't maintain level on bomb run. They seem to make either a shallow dive or shallow climb, level out and then drop bombs. Also jettisoning their bomb load when attacked is unrealistic. That would have been a court martial offense, at least. At the moment if I make a bomber attack mission in FMB I can cause most of the bombers to dro their bombs before they get to the target just by attacking them myself, or by being attacked by the AI fighters.
The last thing is probably just my opinion, but I think it unrealistic that the AI crews fly happily along in an aircraft that is streaming flame. In reality, if it burns, you bale!

[D-XXI]

I'd like the radar removed from the enemy AI planes ;)! Often, when Í'm way out of visibility range, they ignore other planes from my side and start chasing my plane all the way to my home airfield.
I would like to have a fair chance of getting home savely if I ran out of ammo/fuel or if my plane is damaged.

[Bearcat]

AI don't know what is your idea about their behavior, you have to tell them what you want. Things you might find logical might not be logical or desired for someone else. I guarantee you that for every stupid thing AI do in game I can find you equivalent stupidity done by humans in WWII.


Yes but I would be happy if my wingman/flight just attacked the plane chasing me when I ask for cover or I ask for help from anyone.... I will have one plane in front of me and 3 trying to nail me while the rest of my flight is just flying in formation with me and I ask for help and more often than not the other 3 planes in my flight will either keep flying around or attack the plane in front of me leaving the one(s) attacking me alone to do their business. I know I have beating this horse but it is always more frustrating when it is fresher in my mind.. and I just finished a QM. Even if the plane that warned me attacked the plane it was warning me about it would be a good thing. It drives me nuts because I know pretty much that shortly after I hear "Roger I got you covered.." I'm a goner. I can tell them to attack.. ask for help.. Yet with the enemy AI when I attack one plane the whole flight goes after me. I don't want miracles. I just want them to do something and the frustrating thing is that sometimes they do quite well but they are not as frequent as I would like to see.

I just thought of something.. would it be possible to add a check 6/check MY 6 command in the "views" menu? Sometimes when I try to use the padlock so that I can tell the AI "attack my target" which works more often than not they will do it .. but far too often the target I padlock is the one in front of me, probably because he is closer instead of the one behind me. Perhaps if we had a specific "Padlock Enemy 6" command that was also server side settable like some of the other views that would enable us to padlock the enemy behind us first and then tell the AI "attack my target" and they would.. that might work. As it is now telling either my wingman or my flight "cover me" or "anyone help me" is 8 times out of 10 a waste of time because they still more often than not just fly right by the bandits and that is just so so frustrating. The enemy AI is great... but the friendly AI makes offline flying almost no fun at all...

I know that eventually you guys will sort this out.. I have higher hopes for IL2 than any oter sim that I fly and it is primarily because of TD .. but the wait is a bummer.

[Bearcat]

This prompted me to wonder.. When we get that warning as the leader does it come from our wingman? If so can a routine be written to have him attack the plane he sees? Because of the nature of the friendly AI I usually set them all t Ace for all the good it does. One thing I have noticed is that when I try to protect my flight it seems I get better help but it's spotty.

[Aviar]

Sometimes when I try to use the padlock so that I can tell the AI "attack my target" which works more often than not they will do it .. but far too often the target I padlock is the one in front of me, probably because he is closer instead of the one behind me.

If you are talking about internal Padlock, be aware that the target nearest the center of your view will be padlocked first. The proximity of targets in relationship to your plane (in terms of distance) has no factor. So, if you wish to padlock a plane on your 6, the best way is to look over your shoulder and then use the Padlock command.

Also, don't forget that you have two powerful commands for occasions when there are multiple targets in your view ---> 'Padlock Next' & 'Padlock Previous'. These will scroll through viable targets within your pilot's view.

If you are lucky enough to have enough buttons (I have a CH HOTAS), these two commands are a must, along with your main Padlock commands.

*In reference to the first part of my post, I actually have macro commands (so I only need to press one button) that will have my pilot look back over his left/right shoulder and automatically padlock an enemy plane within view. If there are no enemy planes in view behind me, the pilot's view will automatically return to the forward position. Little 'tricks' like this are invaluable to players like me who don't use TrackIR but still want a dynamic range of view options.

Aviar

[Jumpy]

This prompted me to wonder.. When we get that warning as the leader does it come from our wingman? If so can a routine be written to have him attack the plane he sees? Because of the nature of the friendly AI I usually set them all t Ace for all the good it does. One thing I have noticed is that when I try to protect my flight it seems I get better help but it's spotty.

I think you are risking making the game too easy. Sometimes I laugh at the wingman. "who's side is he on?!" Personally, if the AI always attacked and removed threats to my 6o'clock, I might become bored and leave the game. I don't see the point. I just like trying to outfly my attacker. What I suggest is that we are able to jump to another plane if we are shot down. That would be fun, or perhaps even jump to the wingman's aircraft while our original aircraft becomes AI controlled. Then you could personally attack or chase off the attacker, and then resume control of your original aircraft. A bit like co-op play, I guess. Comments?

[Jumpy]

I'd like the radar removed from the enemy AI planes ;)! Often, when Í'm way out of visibility range, they ignore other planes from my side and start chasing my plane all the way to my home airfield.
I would like to have a fair chance of getting home savely if I ran out of ammo/fuel or if my plane is damaged.

What I do is this: Fly as fast as I can. Maintain trim. Every time the engine over heat warning goes out I close the Radiator until it gets hot again. Fly very low and hug the contours of the ground and if you make it to home base:- Make sure you have set up a couple of light flack guns , 50 cal, 20mm or 25mm to defend your home airstrip. Draw the chasing plane into them. I have done this when out of ammo and been successful. It really is more fun than just flying home watching the scenery.

[Bearcat]

I think you are risking making the game too easy. Sometimes I laugh at the wingman. "who's side is he on?!" Personally, if the AI always attacked and removed threats to my 6o'clock, I might become bored and leave the game. I don't see the point. I just like trying to outfly my attacker. What I suggest is that we are able to jump to another plane if we are shot down. That would be fun, or perhaps even jump to the wingman's aircraft while our original aircraft becomes AI controlled. Then you could personally attack or chase off the attacker, and then resume control of your original aircraft. A bit like co-op play, I guess. Comments?

I totally disagree.. How would having your wingman attack one of the 1,2,3 or sometimes 4 planes attacking you at once make it easier? You still have to down the bandit you are chasing because if you don't .. he will turn the tables on you and go on the offensive .. even inmost cases if he is damaged so I don't see that making things easier at all and you will still have another plane on you... I cannot tell you how many times I get caught in a 3 or 4 way crossfire while the other members of my flight are literally just flying around.. Sometimes as it has been said by others the plane shooting me will be between my wingman and me.. which just should not be period. Often the wingman will not respond until I am down or am going down with a blown off wing.. then he goes on the offensive. That should not be if the bandit is between he and I. As I said .. there have been times when the friendlies have been spot on.. but more often than not hat is not the case. But enough of that.. I am sure TD knows what the deal is (as far as the problem.. the solution may be more elusive) so I am getting off this soapbox for now.. Hopefully in the next patch .. which also hopefully will not be too much longer, or shortly thereafter some of this will be addressed.

[Lagarto]

Fly very low and hug the contours of the ground
That's usually enough to shake off pesky attackers. Not long ago I was trying to get back to base in a badly shot-up machine, with three AI on my tail. After a few twists and turns they all crashed, one by one. Not very realistic but, as fan boys used to say, "you can't model everything" :)

[Bearcat]

Yes that works sometimes.. Other times I have had them chase me all the way back to base.. but that I can live with.. Like I said.. enemy AI is not my issue.. I think they are fine.. much MUCH im,proved.. they don't do that climb to the sun maneuver ... they actually stall out if trying to turn too sharply.. the enemy AI is FANTASTIC compared to what it was in 4.0 .. I am confident that TD will address this or do their best to.. So far I have not been let down by any update we have had and I realize that these guys have real lives and day jobs and that this is largely a labor of love and I appreciate it like I know most of the folks who come here do.....

[robday]

For the next patch would be nice to see some improvement in the AI behavior related to escorts and multi-flight formations. Currently, when you place a bomber flight, and an0ther bomber flight is placed to form up on the first one (assigning the lead flight as a target on the various waypoints) everything is fine. If a fighter flight is to form up on a bomber flight they start a sweep escort over them, this might be ok, but not always convenient (i.e. long escorts over large bomber formations didn't sweeped, often just flew beside). The same applies to fighter tasked to form up on another fighter flight: the start to sweep over the leading flight. To avoid this one have to manually place the waypoints, accuratley timing them so that the various flights loosely fly togheter.
Having a more advanced waypoint option (something like the patrol and take off ones added in 4.11), allowing to specify how to form up on the targeted flight would be really welcome for me, allowing to build more complex large formations without spending A LOT of time testing he missions to ensure the AI fly together and don't collide each other.

Recently I have been playing a campaign (offline) in the Bf110 G2 over the Kuban map and have found that the aircraft exhibit different behaiviours dependant on loadout. Flying as second man in the second element of the formation, if the loadout is the Bk3.7 gunpod and the mission task is ground attack, the second element will take up the "escort pattern" over the first flight. When enemy fighters are encountered the whole formation go haring after the fighters (despite the fact that we are escorted by four Bf109,s). After this engagement the survivors proceed to target but the second element will not attack the target. If we are loaded with bombs the second element flys alongside the first and when encountering fighters simply leaves the 109,s to go after the soviet fighters, whilst proceding to target to make the attack.
Is there some way to ensure that if the mission task is ground attack the members of your group will stick to the mision objective?

[Juri_JS]

At the moment I am building a mission with Ju-87B2 and Swordfish in it, both aren't carrying bombs. To my surprise the Swordfish are attacking the Stukas. I tested the mission with other ground attack plane types and all are showing the same behaviour, except the Ju-87B2, which acts like a normal bomber.

So my questions is, is there a way to stop the AI of ground attack aircraft from attacking other bombers? If not, would it be possible to add an option in FMB that can stop the AI of a flight group from engaging other planes?

[FC99]

- fighters escorts that engage, then disengage and fly away, higher and higher. Then turn back in a very long dive at high speed or disengage completely and move on to their next waypoint.
I made some changes in that regard, can you post your problematic mission so I can test if the problem is fixed.


- Jabo's that attack and make a pass at their target, then slightly zoom up again and want to make a hard left or right bank and steeply downwards for a second pass. This second move brings them very close to the ground and they sometimes crash.
I'm aware of that but I don't know what is the exact cause of that, I'll check it when I find time.

Three things That I would like fixed.

1. AI bombers don't maintain level on bomb run.

2. Also jettisoning their bomb load when attacked is unrealistic.

3. The last thing is probably just my opinion, but I think it unrealistic that the AI crews fly happily along in an aircraft that is streaming flame.
1. Not a priority.
2. Are you talking about bombers or fighters with bombs?
3. I'll check that, they should bail when on fire.

Often, when Í'm way out of visibility range, they ignore other planes from my side and start chasing my plane all the way to my home airfield.
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.

I would be happy if my wingman/flight just attacked the plane chasing me when I ask for cover or I ask for help from anyone....
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.

Recently I have been playing a campaign (offline) in the Bf110 G2 over the Kuban map and have found that the aircraft exhibit different behaiviours dependant on loadout.

Correct, sometimes AI behavior depend on loadout. If two flights are in the mission and second have first one as a target than the second one will behave as escort if it doesn't have bombs or rockets. In case that second flight have offensive weapons than it will act as a flight in formation with the first one.


Is there some way to ensure that if the mission task is ground attack the members of your group will stick to the mision objective?
Not really. I must add new parameter for behavior enforcement. Best you can do now is to be very creative in mission design.

At the moment I am building a mission with Ju-87B2 and Swordfish in it, both aren't carrying bombs. To my surprise the Swordfish are attacking the Stukas. I tested the mission with other ground attack plane types and all are showing the same behaviour, except the Ju-87B2, which acts like a normal bomber.

So my questions is, is there a way to stop the AI of ground attack aircraft from attacking other bombers? If not, would it be possible to add an option in FMB that can stop the AI of a flight group from engaging other planes?Planes that are categorized as Attack planes in the game will attack other non-fighter planes unless they are carrying offensive weapons.

It's possible to add new option. When? I don't know.

[Alien]

Not only jabos drop bombs when attacked. I play a QMB mission now to practice shooting (Crimea, low altitude, my advantage, 4 Il-2m3s + 3 Il-2s 3rd series and me in a Bf 109G-6) and every time I am next to the Ilyushins, they dump their bombs. IMO, they should do it when they're badly shot, unless they are already flying coffins (my attacks usually end up with a tailless Il-2 spinning to the ground after a single very short burst from a 20-50m distance, just like the experts hunted 8)). So it isn't just fighters' case, it's a common problem, especially in the eastern front.

[Bearcat]

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?

[Lagarto]

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 glad to hear I'm not the only one who minds it. AI certainly don't black out, which gives them unrealistic advantage.

[Mundschenk]

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?

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