Does the AI ever lose energy?

[skouras]

the AI back in IL 1946 was much better
in its current state here is a mesh
they have to tweak them more
i'm not flying online
i stopped since i bought the expansion from desastersoft
which is awesome very historic and very accurate design
with tons of suprises in every mission
even medals are available with good dynamic campaigns,if you fly online the AI exist
so in my opinion the AI is one of the priorities that they have to fix or tweak ASAP
the AI will always need

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by reflected

I don't think so...Even if I attack from E advantage, they just pull up and up and up, I stall, and spin for ages and thy're still climbing. They have airbrakes and afterburners and this is so ANNOYING!!!

Come on, is it only me? It's not fun, not at all.

It may appear that way but it is not...try throttling back keeping your eye on him, then add throttle as needed to gain a good position advantage on him, take your shot quickly.

[nearmiss]

AI could be as good or better than humans. Just fly the BOB II WOV latest patched version. The AI was worked on continuously for several years by Buddye. Human behavior is not that difficult to predict using probabilities for initiating actions of AI pilots in the software. The AI aircrat must be constrained equally with human pilots. There must be parity in performance of the aircraft of each.

Ai will have to be bound by the same aircraft performance as the human pilots. There can be no "bat turns", exceeding dive speeds, excessive climb speeds, and superior shooting abilities. That is a start to producing a competent programming for AI.

The Online game was always the ticket for more realistic flying, except it becomes boring flying furrballs. Yes, flying against other humans is better compared to AI pilots. Yet, the humans don't want to take the necessary time and make the efforts for building competent mission scenarios. There have always been a few, but mostly just fly and shoot Online servers.

All the additional and complex programming for AI performance and a competent mission builder are too much work for developers. AI performance improvements are a trial and error kind of thing, and it can take years of work like Buddye did on BOB II WOV to really get a superb AI performance programmed.

Sadly, the BOB II WOV is limited by the programming code. It is a sim that is about 15 years old now. Computer technology and software has advanced far beyond those days.

The scripting in the COD mission builder may be the answer, but without a competent AI performance it will just be half done.

Two principal requirements for Offline game are competent AI and Mission Builder. IL2 barely had either.

[CaptainDoggles]

Originally Posted by nearmiss

AI could be as good or better than humans.

In terms of control and game mechanics, yes.

Tactically, no. Not without cheating. Humans can learn and adapt in a way that AI really can't, and air combat is an extremely difficult problem to solve.

You could make an AI that would be able to reliably hit deflection shots at extremely long ranges and fly with 100% control coordination and optimal throttle/prop pitch use etc. There are some games at which humans will always excel.

[nearmiss]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

In terms of control and game mechanics, yes.

Tactically, no. Not without cheating. Humans can learn and adapt in a way that AI really can't, and air combat is an extremely difficult problem to solve.

You could make an AI that would be able to reliably hit deflection shots at extremely long ranges and fly with 100% control coordination and optimal throttle/prop pitch use etc. There are some games at which humans will always excel.

There is one thing I hate about responding on forums. It doesn't matter how you say it someone will find an opening or hole in what you say. Forums are supposed to be informal discussions not comprehensive epistles fully explained to cover everything.

Yes, Humans can adapt in ways AI cannot. However, probability properly coded can handle a very high percentage probable actions.

If AI have full out 100% usage of resources programmed into the AI aircraft the AI can definitely cope with C.E.M. of any human.

Deflection shots can also be coded as well. AI aircraft are just complex math equations that can be balanced against the equations of other aircraft. Deflection range and lead can be calculated as well. It is doubtful any gamer software programming would go to that level of precision.

It may be done one day, but I don't see it in anything as long as people aren't that concerned to demand it.

If we get a reasonably sensible AI performance that is probably as good as can be expected. The tools for most realistic air combat will probably have to come with Online gaming. I am talking about mission builder tools with adjunct ability for things to change on the fly. When everything spins around the Online game, and enough players can be involved simultaneously then we will really enjoy air combat experience.

[smink1701]

Originally Posted by nearmiss

AI could be as good or better than humans. Just fly the BOB II WOV latest patched version. The AI was worked on continuously for several years by Buddye. Human behavior is not that difficult to predict using probabilities for initiating actions of AI pilots in the software. The AI aircrat must be constrained equally with human pilots. There must be parity in performance of the aircraft of each.

Ai will have to be bound by the same aircraft performance as the human pilots. There can be no "bat turns", exceeding dive speeds, excessive climb speeds, and superior shooting abilities. That is a start to producing a competent programming for AI.

The Online game was always the ticket for more realistic flying, except it becomes boring flying furrballs. Yes, flying against other humans is better compared to AI pilots. Yet, the humans don't want to take the necessary time and make the efforts for building competent mission scenarios. There have always been a few, but mostly just fly and shoot Online servers.

All the additional and complex programming for AI performance and a competent mission builder are too much work for developers. AI performance improvements are a trial and error kind of thing, and it can take years of work like Buddye did on BOB II WOV to really get a superb AI performance programmed.

Sadly, the BOB II WOV is limited by the programming code. It is a sim that is about 15 years old now. Computer technology and software has advanced far beyond those days.

The scripting in the COD mission builder may be the answer, but without a competent AI performance it will just be half done.

Two principal requirements for Offline game are competent AI and Mission Builder. IL2 barely had either.

Thanks for this nearmiss. AI has always been my main complaint with CLoD. I hope the dev team will keep working on it because as beautiful as the game looks and now sounds, the game play due largely to the dumb AI is...dumb.

[Codex]

Originally Posted by nearmiss

Yes, Humans can adapt in ways AI cannot. However, probability properly coded can handle a very high percentage probable actions.

Bingo!

This is the one aspect of AI coding that sets the "predictable" apart from the "believable".

My main gripe all these years with IL-2 was the predictability of the AI. If I recall it was one of the patches during the Pacific Battles(?). Flying around in my FW I’d ALWAYS end up with “pilot killed” messages even if the bullets were no where near the pit. Assigning stats and random events to the AI would create a believable playing experience for SP and COOPs imo.

I might give BoB II another go, I’ve had it sitting on the shelf for about 3 or more years now and installed it only once

[adonys]

AI is exactly as it is programmed to be.

If you'll add code for unexpected/random behavior, the AI will behave as so. If you'll program AI to learn from his experience, it will learn.

And it is not even so complicated, some simple neural networks and genetic algorithms, as the empty 3D space which is he air is much simpler to process than on a terrain mesh with dynamic collisions..

CEM code is also straight forward, and not at all so resource-eating as some are presenting it in here (I can elaborate on this, if you really want to understand, but main point is that AI is already watching his airspeed, altitude, position vector of his own aircraft and of the aircrafts around it, and also has visual and audio sensors. do you really believe that also watching RPM and oil/water temperatures and taking simple if/else or switch decisions is sooo resource-eating?!!!)

Stop filling the forum with statements like AI is a huge resource eater nonsense, because most of the uneducated ears will perceive and promote them as truths.

They just haven't got themselves to do it, that's all..

[skouras]

Originally Posted by nearmiss

AI could be as good or better than humans. Just fly the BOB II WOV latest patched version. The AI was worked on continuously for several years by Buddye. Human behavior is not that difficult to predict using probabilities for initiating actions of AI pilots in the software. The AI aircrat must be constrained equally with human pilots. There must be parity in performance of the aircraft of each.

Ai will have to be bound by the same aircraft performance as the human pilots. There can be no "bat turns", exceeding dive speeds, excessive climb speeds, and superior shooting abilities. That is a start to producing a competent programming for AI.

The Online game was always the ticket for more realistic flying, except it becomes boring flying furrballs. Yes, flying against other humans is better compared to AI pilots. Yet, the humans don't want to take the necessary time and make the efforts for building competent mission scenarios. There have always been a few, but mostly just fly and shoot Online servers.

All the additional and complex programming for AI performance and a competent mission builder are too much work for developers. AI performance improvements are a trial and error kind of thing, and it can take years of work like Buddye did on BOB II WOV to really get a superb AI performance programmed.

Sadly, the BOB II WOV is limited by the programming code. It is a sim that is about 15 years old now. Computer technology and software has advanced far beyond those days.

The scripting in the COD mission builder may be the answer, but without a competent AI performance it will just be half done.

Two principal requirements for Offline game are competent AI and Mission Builder. IL2 barely had either.

nice post