4.11 - AI debugging

[Luno13]

Originally Posted by Jumoschwanz

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.

[Jumoschwanz]

Originally Posted by Luno13

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]

Originally Posted by IceFire

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 ..

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

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...

Originally Posted by K_Freddie

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

Originally Posted by 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!

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..

[RegRag1977]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

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]

Originally Posted by RegRag1977

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]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

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 ?

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by RegRag1977

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.

[Luno13]

Originally Posted by Jumoschwanz

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.