Outperformed by AI every single time
 

No matter what i do i am always slower even if i close the radiators and put everything to the max i cannot catch G50 in level flight while the G50 is doing barrel rolls at speed that would put 190 in shame. Its more close to extra 300 really.
I end up with destroyed engine and he just flies away.
I end up raging and trying G50 to get revenge on that stupidly slow Hurricane. But what happens? I blow up my engine with Hurri doing exactly what I could not do in last flight.
The AI pilot are bunch of cheating trolls and no fix in sight.
If only there were refunds on steam.
RAAAAAAAAAGE

Dont play against the quick mission AIs - Ais do not follow the same FM as the player.

In the quick missions, their AI skill slider sometimes are set too high for the player to catch up.

It's the man.. not the machine

i recomend you to register at http://www.il2bugtracker.com/

and voting http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/280

lets hope that once devs are finished with the graphical revamp some attention can be given too this issue.

Why do you always have to try to counter what everyone else has to say?

To the OP go and post it in the bug tracker. I was hoping to play the game after the next steam update after I sorted my FPS, but this sounds incredibly bad considering they have employed a guy to fix the AI.

Sure whatever then explain me how it is possible that when i toggle auto pilot it will achieve 70 (dunno what are the units) manifold pressure with 100 % rich mixture 100% prop rpm without engine going kaboom within 60 seconds if I try to do that >> engine dead always

In short, the AI cheat.

They do in original IL2 and they do in CloD.

It was ever thus, and 'ere shall be.

Pity they can't sort that out. It's a real immersion killer for the offline flyer.

Dont fly Hurricane until it would be fixed. Its maximum speed is way too slow even for 87 octan version. It is now even slowier then G50.

So until FM patch stay away from Hurricane MK1 and Spitfire MK1. Only sensible fighter in british side actually Spitfire Mark II.

So the question that needs answering is why do they want it this way? Is it something that cannot be fixed, or something they want to keep in the game?

My problem is with AI not FM. Hurricane being slower after the patch is the reason why i though that flying G50 against them would be fun and i could test the effectiveness of its 0,50 cal MGs but i could not enough to hit them. They were outdiving me with me with extended flaps!!!

Simple.. based on IL-2 experience, the AI always knows the optimal settings for the best performance.. Which is why most real sim pilots have trouble obtaining the values displayed by IL2Comp, i.e.

http://www.flightsimtesting.com/

But it is too soon to tell if that is what is going on here in CoD or if it is a bug.. In that this is an 'alpha' patch, so there is the chance that what you are experiencing is a bug. But statisticly speaking, it is typically something the user is doing wrong and not a bug in the FM

@palker4 - Did you report it in the bug tracker because it won't get fix by just talking about it here?

Luthier did says that the AI uses a simplified model of engine management.

This was in reference to a wish for AI to have to warm up engines on the bug tracker.

Which explains why the AI would be able to obtain the peek performace with ease, where as a real user would have to 'do more' to obtain the same performance..

Put another way, just because it is simplitied does not mean the AI should be able to obtain 'more' performance than a real user can, only that the real user would have to do more (settings wise) to obtain the same level of performance.

AI was cheating from long time since Il2 was introduced.

But here there is also problem with accurate FM and performacne of some planes.

Hurricane was cuted in maximum speed in beta patch:


Hurricane MK 1 Rotol

238 mph /383 kph at the deck at +6 1/2 boost ------ should be 262-265 mph /420-426 kph !!!!

So it is 24-27mph/ 38-43 kph too slow at + 6 1/2 boost power !!!!

There is no WEP - so no 100 octan fuel performacne - which should give ab. 25 mph/ 40 kph extra speed at low alts


Truly speaking now it is slowier then G50 when it suppose to be faster plane. Now Hurricane sea level speed is even below 400 km/h - 383 km/h where G50 reach ab. 410 km/h as some raported.

^What Ace said.

The AI can change settings as fast as, and as well as a computer. It's what they are after all... :grin:

In essence the AIs are flying with a modern engine management system, ala any modern automobile. Light years ahead of WW2 technology.

Are you using manual prop pitch and going course prop pitch to keep revs down and increase speed in level flight? You need to use it to get the most out of any plane with complex engine management enabled?!?!?

AoA, the problem is not that AI always flies their planes flawless, the problem is not that they get the best out of their engines, the problem is, that due to a simplified fm/dm, they can achieve and hold their best settings indefinetely without ever(!) overheating or damaging their engine. Just fire up a quick mission in a spit or hurri, engage autopilot and watch the boost/rpm gauges closely and watch your temps never exceeding 80° Oil/105° Water at revs around 2800 to 3000 with rads fully closed!!!

I have found that adjusting the AI with a little file called AITweak by a clever programmer (found it on here I believe) has helped me alot with this. I don't know about top-speeds but it does reduce the barrel-rolling behavior and makes off-line flying much more fun for me.

Septic.

Where is the link to that tool because I want to play offline first and if it's that good why don't they introduce it to the game.

because its already in the game in essence, this just changes existing missions by editing the .mis file, but you could do it yourself in the FMB.

anyway, here it is.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=31573

And that is what most are talking about when they say the AI cheat..

In essance the AI can run the engine longer at peek settings than the real user.. I take that to mean that at the time of IL-2 (10 years ago) dev, they didnt think they had the resorses or smart enough AI to manage all those things.

On that note, prior to reaching the point where the real user's plane overheats, I don't recal 1C ever stating that the AI was able to obtain more performance than the real user.

With that said

That was all true of IL-2, I have yet to see 1C come out and say that is still the case with CoD

It feels like they obtain more performance, but then again, AI always flies flawless and that alone accounts for a few mph here and there.

The short answer is that CEM is very complicated and takes away a lot of resources.

Going into more detail, i have had the sim since the EU release and early tests back then showed that enabling CEM would cost about 10 FPS. And that's just for the player aircraft.

So, the player aircraft flies on CEM, but the AI fly on simplified rules.

For example, while in your plane there is a complex set of rules in the code that governs engine behaviour ("if paramater X rises to value Y then Z is affected, which in turn changes parameter A to value B and so on), the AI planes fly with a simplified rule set (to the effect of "don't exceed this value for that parameter"). This AI rule set is then affected by certain modifiers, depending on the AI skill levels.

Online it's not a problem because the parameters for each player controlled aircraft are calculated on their own PCs and (probably) only positional and speed (vector) data are exchanged with the server along with certain event flags.

Eg, if i blow my engine the server doesn't need to know the whole story behind how it happened. It only needs to know that the rest of the players need to see me streaking black smoke and how my speed and position are changing over time, which is probably exactly what is transmitted over the network.

Offline however, or online against AI, to have full CEM would place too much of a burden on our PCs or the servers hosting missions with AI.

In short, the compromise is very reasonable and necessary. What needs tweaking is the rule set under which the AI fly.

I think this is doable, since it's working under simplified rules to begin with. All the AI needs is to tone down some of their parameters (like their roll performance), place a timer on certain capabilities (so that they follow engine limits), place an upper limit that can't be exceeded by skill modifiers (so that AI skill doesn't exceed aircraft capabilities) and upgrade some others (so that even if surprised and being inactive at low skill levels, which i like, they should eventually start taking evasive action and not sit still indefinitely).

The real delay in such a process wouldn't come so much from the actual task of changing parameters in the code, but mostly from identifying what to change and how, as well as testing the results.

But can/will this be done? Was it planned, and there was just no time to implement, or is it not even on anyone's radar to do this?

As an offliner, even after tweaking the sliders and such in the fmb it's still too frustrating for me to play for any length of time.

Well why don't they do it then. Sounds simple, I mean
http://nandovanberlo.com/nando/wp-co...can-it-be1.jpg

Well there is an easy way to find out..

How about you go make a flight sim, and than get back to us and tell us how simple that ONE of a THOUSANDS of things being done in a flight sim was

The fact that i cannot build a flight sim does not mean that i have no right to complain about a product that i bought with money and that i expected to work properly a YEAR ago when i bought it.

Where you complaing?

Sorry I didn't notice your complaing..

All I noticed was you asking 'how hard can it be' followed by you answering your own question by saying 'sounds simple'.

At which point I just assumed your had a software background in AI development..

But now based on your most resent post, I see that your statment of 'sounds simple' did not stem from someone with a software background and is thus meaningless

That was meant ironically hence a Jeremy Clarkson picture. I guess your just not Top Gear fan then.

Actually the G-50 is not that hard to catch. I fly the Hurricane very often and G-50 is the only opponent that can makes fun. German aircrafts are just too fast. Problem is: Hurricane has miserable acceleration and takes forever to get to top speed. Lower the RPM to about 2800 and flat dive should be useful. In term of speed, CloD is not as bad as IL-2, where AI just laughs at you and flies away.
Sadly the same cannot be said for AI maneuver. They can do insanely fast roll, and use it for effect. There is nothing which ruins the gameplay more than an AI rolling literally around your gunsight. You just give up all of your hard-built speed to place the pipper over this SOB for just a bit longer than an eyeblink. The new alpha patch makes it worse. My inner conspiracy Keanu Reeves told me that Luthier used old IL-2 code to update his AI.
Enough complaining. Good news is: with the AI scales, you can dumb down AI practically to the level of grandma-driven car: They are slow, unresponsive and useless. Perhaps with enough testing, one will find out the optimal setting. I just do not have enough time.
AI does not need to be realistic. It just has to be believable.

A good thread on modifying AI here:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=31193

From bombers barrel rolls I can guess they made a model of a generic human pilot which flies every aircraft in the same way. This pilot has a very wide range of skill levels from rookie up to "the best ace in history of aircombat".

Problem comes when a mission maker does not adjust skills levels to the mission needs and aircraft types as explained here http://www.bobgamehub.blogspot.com/2...-of-dover.html

If all 8 skills of all AI in a mission are set to "the best ace in history of aircombat" they fly like those aces of cause.

The devs did not have a dedicated mission maker when they released CloD. Now they hired B6 to make missions for BoM. I hope he does the job better. For CloD it is easy to adjust AI skills in FMB as described in above link or using the AItweak program http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=31573

Feel free to create a new entry in the bugtracker asking to correct AI skills levels in stock missions and campaigns specifically.

QMB missions with corrected skills can be downloaded here http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=31193

Emmm never heard of him.. That and I am more of a Top Shot fan! ;)

Well, maybe they are doing it, we don't know. What we do know is they hired an AI programmer some months ago but he was also involved in fixing other aspects of the sim so he couldn't focus 100% on AI.

For all we know, this guy could be bug hunting just like the rest of the team and not working on AI until performance is optimzied, or he might be slaving away in his basement testing and retesting a really great AI.

The reason we don't know is that they don't usually announce features unless they believe they are on a good track to be released in future patches.


Generally speaking though, Ataros has it nailed down:

You can see this in quick missions if you go into a dogfight mission and replace the fighters with bombers: the AI in the mission is fighter AI and the bombers start acting funny.

In any case, the AI can be adjusted by the players and now that we have some tools to do it automatically and information about what each setting does (in case we want to do it manually and experiment), things are much more manageable until we see an official solution.

The moral of the story is "don't be afraid to get your hands dirty". We didn't buy a game so much as we bought a "simulator operating system" and i had a feeling it would be like this right from the start. There's tons of things possible even now (look at the custom menu screens and campaigns made by community members or 3rd party mission designers).

I know sometimes we just want to fly, i know that tinkering is not everyone's cup of tea and i know that even tinkerers some times just want to come back from work and unwind by flying a quick furball.

What i also know however is that it was community involvement that made the previous series a success. It was rock stable upon its release compared to CoD, but it too had a host of limitations: static campaigns, AI, certain FMs, high PC requirements to really enjoy it, limited flyables, etc.

I've been there since 2001, i saw it transform into a multi-theater sim with 200+ flyable aircraft and i think i know why it managed to do it: a lot of people were creating content by themselves and making it available to the community, whether that content was freeware campaigns, missions and skins and new aircraft models, payware 3rd party add-ons or simply tips, tricks and walkthroughs (never underestimate the value of having the right information :D)

So my advice to everyone is: don't just sit by. Pick ONE thing you are curious about in WWII aviation ("hmm, i wonder how they would navigate back then?"), google up some information, go try it in the sim and come tell us about it.

You'll be surprised at how much you will learn, how much you can teach others and how much of it actually is applicable in the sim, all at the same time. Plus, the better you become at something the more you will enjoy it and it's something to keep busy with until other aspects of the sim are fixed ;)

What i mean is, sure, CoD has problems. But there are perfectly working parts of it that a lot don't ever see because we don't even scratch the surface. Cheers :cool:

Well Said! :D

OK here I go.......

AI does some strange things! Part of the problem it that the mission builder defaults to generic stats for the different skill levels (rookie, average, veteran, ace) if you open up a mission file the stats will read (something like) 'Skill 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3' where all the varying skill attributes are set uniformly. Unfortunately this seems to be contributing to the odd AI behavior as the attributes in question are (in order): BASIC FLYING, ADVANCED FLYING, AWARENESS, AERIAL GUNNERY, TACTICS, VISION, BRAVERY, and DISCIPLINE.

By experimentation (mostly by others) it seems that some values work better if they are higher or lower and depending on the aircraft type (fighter, bomber, dive bomber) this kind of generic implimentation of the AI skill attributes is leading to some funky behavior (bombers behaving as fighters and insane snap rolls are my favorites). Values that seem to lead to more sane behavior (but these are not yet perfect!) are:

// Fighter
rookie = 0.30 0.21 0.78 0.40 0.64 0.85 0.85 0.43
average = 0.32 0.21 0.87 0.60 0.74 0.95 0.90 0.53
veteran = 0.73 0.21 0.92 0.80 0.74 1 0.95 0.63
ace = 0.93 0.21 0.96 0.92 0.84 1 1 0.63


// Fighter Bomber
rookie = 0.30 0.21 0.78 0.30 0.74 0.85 0.90 0.70
average = 0.32 0.21 0.87 0.35 0.74 0.95 0.95 0.72
veteran = 0.73 0.21 0.92 0.40 0.74 0.95 0.95 0.75
ace = 0.93 0.21 0.96 0.45 0.74 1 1 0.75


// Bomber
rookie = 0.30 0.21 0.78 0.20 0.74 0.85 0.90 0.90
average = 0.32 0.21 0.87 0.25 0.74 0.90 0.95 0.93
veteran = 0.73 0.21 0.92 0.30 0.74 0.95 0.95 0.95
ace = 0.93 0.21 0.96 0.35 0.74 1 1 0.97

I know many of you are experimenting and fine-tuning these values and I would appreciate more feedback (preferably in this thread: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=31573) on what values to tweak in what circumstances (bomber, fighter, etc...). Perhaps we (the CloD community) can find some good AI values and get Luthier and Co. to incorporate these into the full mission builder... This would require a slight modification to the FMB as it would need to define the values differently based on plane type. I know this is not difficult to do in C++ so I imagine they could do it to their code base in hours (not days - but we need to wait and see what the AI improvements bring as they may already have solved many AI issues in the next few months and if not we want to supply them the best settings we can come up with). :D

An other problem is that the mission builder will (by default) set the whole flight to 1 skill level so they all behave similarly... When building a mission I suggest setting the planes to individual skill settings rather than make the whole flight one skill level this leads to some variation in AI and if you use the default skill attribute settings (rookie, average, etc...) you can still use AITweak on your mission to tweak the values for you.

I don't know about you guys but no matter what I set BASIC FLYING and ADVANCED FLYING to, they are still doing the same ridiculous f16 barrel roles.

Anyone find this? Aerial gunnery and awareness makes a difference but the others don't seem to do anything.

Don't try to have the advanced flying past the half-way mark, and they'll quit the barrel roll ballet. I find a good balance between 30% and 70% max for most of the skills (especially gunnery).

Please vote for AI fix on the bugtracker http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/280

Check out other reported issues too and vote please. The devs need feedback from more people.

With all due respect to the OP, CoD is a combat flight simulator. To expect everything to be 100% accurate or that every plane is modeled exactly as the real thing is just asking too much. Same goes for AI, I've realized as of late that to model a complex AI with true CEM handling in CoD would simply destroy any PC rig out there, also I don't think MG could pull it off anyway. The CEM in CoD is almost as simplified as in IL-2 1946, only difference is click-able cockpits. This is no critique to CoD, it's just the way things are. As long as they keep tweaking those FM's as close as possible to real life I'm a happy camper. It would be cool seeing the AI overheat and burn their engines though, really cool.

It's not that the AI in CloD isn't perfect. It's that it blatantly cheats, completely disregarding the aircrafts' flight models, especially the roll rate. The only solution so far is crippling the AI to the point where it doesn't fly ANY rolls at all anymore. Which just sucks.

Of course you have to cut corners in AI programming, but even the AI in IL2 4.11 overheats their engines and can't see through clouds now. Why shouldn't that be possible in the CloD engine?

Don't ask me, I'm not a game developer but my guess is that CoD is a far more complex game to alter stuff in than 1946. It's probably not just "cut-n-paste" coding that can be done with CoD. Also there are most likely a whole lot more "parameters" and stuff in play which makes it extra hard to code a "realistic" AI. It probably won't happen in the near future but someday CoD is probably gonna have spectacular AI. As with anything to do with the new IL-2 series I guess patience is the keyword. I'm not flying CoD anymore but it's always interesting to stop by here and see the progress being made, let's see how BoM pans out.:)

then stop babling nonse. IL2CoD's AI is NOT more complicate than the AI of Skyrim. Actually, it's even simpler. And that without even counting the AI manager, and the number of actors from a free world like Skyrim, which are very complex respectively huge, and the ones from IL2CoD.

AI in CLoD has perfect trim all the time as in old IL-2 to compensate for the lack of wit, from the AI

I'm sorry adonys but why are you bringing up Skyrim again? Complex NPC AI? In Skyrim the AI is either just walking around or standing around script-spurting out the same old lines over and over and over and over again. When they are not doing that they randomly spawn in outside areas and sometimes attack you or sometimes attack each other, totally random. There is no depth to the Skyrim AI, they are just scripted to do a few basic things.

For example, do you ever see NPC characters gathering together, talking about going on a quest or do you ever see them smithing a sword or armor? No you don't because they have no deeper purpose. Skyrim does not have advanced AI, it only has good scripting which is good for a game like that. They are just empty shells walking around with a tape recorder stuck on replay inside of their mouths. If all those NPC's in Skyrim would've had really advanced AI, I'm talking about sense of self purpose stuff here, then the game would run at 1 FPS...on a very powerful PC.

The characters in Skyrim are basically made from a simple template, there is no advanced flight modeling to take in account, very basic hit detection. Not at all comparable to a simulated aircraft.

if you want cool AI
just fly BOB wings of victory 2
they use real tactics:grin:
i'm thinking to reinstall it again

Clearly you have not played STALKER. One of the greatest things about that game is that everybody is doing something even the animals have routines to search for food and hunt and whatever animals do. AI in Call of Pripyat is incredible and believable outside combat or during does not matter. And all that runs very well on my PC.

No I haven't and I was not talking about it either. Are the animals digestion system simulated? Like that of a fuel system. Does the animals take shelter from the cold or bad weather? Like an engine requiring cooling/heating? No, because they are only using simple scripts with a few basic AI routines. Also, isn't Stalker notorious for having poor frame-rates? They use the game for benchmarking CPU's and graphics cards still I think.

I'm not defending CoD here I'm just saying that a lot of "modern" games use tricks to seem more complex than they really are. A lot of developers burn all their resources on high fidelity graphics, sound and good gameplay mechanics these days. AI programming has taken the back seat for quite a while even though we have more capable hardware then ever before. AI programming is complicated and takes resources. In a game where you shoot down droves of enemies you don't need super advanced AI, just something that shoots at you and jumps to cover now and then. It's a shame but people buy the games anyway so, you get what you deserve, PONG level AI.:grin:

Yes, it is different situations really. The movement around the map is done by scripts and routines to give the semblence of "life" on the map. To compare it with CloD you would have to only look at the part where they interact with the player (as the movement around the map without player input in CloD is one by waypoints and scripts/triggers and is manually done).

Therefore what does the AI of STALKER or Skyrim have to take into account? Position of the player and their position, perhaps in Stalker there is the use of cover and ammunition- I dont recall if they can run out of weapon ammo etc.

In CloD there are far more variables- multiple enemies, engine situation etc once the enemy has "seen" the player and decided to enter or flee combat. Therefore a simplified routine is used. It needs developing but it is not a system that is less complex than the AI of FPS shooters, especially when you consider the other systems being modelled concurrently- engine states, flight models, damage models etc which aren't present in games like Skyrim.

Guys, you are NOT programmers, and you DO NOT have any idea how or even what AI programming really is.

You are keep talking about internal systems, but that has NOTHING to do with the AI system. they are two different things. AI system can use input from the internal systems of a plane, but that's it.

Do you have any idea how many states, or parameters has a human NPC agent from Skyrim?!! Obviously you don't!

STOP embarrassing yourselves, and listen to what someone who knows this stuff is saying about.

IL2CLOD's AI IT IS NOT MORE COMPLICATED THAN MOST OF THE AI's OF OTHER GAMES! PERIOD!

PS: ANY decent game has AI agents having multiple states, tens of parameters, account multiple enemies, know and use the terrain (Il2CoD doesn't), know and use dynamic collision objects (a thing which actually IL2COD is not doing, as they don't care about the clouds), has to decide when to switch from a finite machine state to another, has to account ammunition, work in team, know the state of a mount/pet/companion (IL2CoD's pilot/plane relation), etc, etc.

First STALKER Shadow of Chernobyl was a lot like CloD when it was released back in 2007. Developed by Ukrainian studio it was delayed several times. It was an incredibly ambitious project and management had to force developer to cut plenty of content only to get the game into releaseable state. On release Stalker was plagued by bugs and poor framerates but after several patches and with community made mods it is easily one of the best games i have ever played. I do not know how things will turn up with CloD but i hope it will become the best flight sim ever.
On topic now from wikipedia
So no scripts my friend STALKER AI is an achievement and also probably one of the things that delayed development.
I believe that Maddox Games had the same problem as STALKER devs. They set way to ambitious goals and they could not do it everything. Resulting in publisher pressuring them to release unfinished game in hope to get back their investment.