4.11 - AI debugging

[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!!


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]

Originally Posted by Stig1207

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.

Originally Posted by 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....

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.

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

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.

Originally Posted by K_Freddie

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.

Originally Posted by 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?

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]

Originally Posted by FC99

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!

[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]

Originally Posted by Stig1207

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]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

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=Stig1207;468559]

Originally Posted by FC99

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]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

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...

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

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.

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

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.

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

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.

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

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).