Mitsubishi Stuka and Thunderbolt

ElAurens · #1 08-23-2013, 11:28 AM

OK, let's stop speaking about the AI as if they are beings. OK?

The AI is the computer program that runs the sim. It doesn't have to "calculate" anything. It already "knows" evey parameter of your aircraft's performance, and it knows how you have set your gun convergence. It "knows" where you are at all times, it knows when you make a control input, and has a perfect solution for hitting you at all times.

All that the settings can do is either slow this process down or limit the range that it picks you up as a target.

MaxGunz · #2 08-23-2013, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElAurens

OK, let's stop speaking about the AI as if they are beings. OK?

The AI is the computer program that runs the sim. It doesn't have to "calculate" anything. It already "knows" evey parameter of your aircraft's performance, and it knows how you have set your gun convergence. It "knows" where you are at all times, it knows when you make a control input, and has a perfect solution for hitting you at all times.

All that the settings can do is either slow this process down or limit the range that it picks you up as a target.

I don't know how much of that goes into the AI calculations. What can be is not necessarily what is. But I can say that the AI is only predictive to a simple level and that a constantly changing path is beyond any AI in-game.

Janosch · #3 08-23-2013, 04:17 PM

I find that in most cases, the AI gunners have more difficulty in shooting an attacking fighter if the speed difference is indeed great. Try, now, a Me-163B against B-17s, it's wonderful! They might score a lucky hit, though, but it's acceptable imho.
I understand that 9 cases out of 10, one won't have such a huge speed advantage, but then it's better to go against the escort fighters instead. Who's to say it's not important to shoot them down over hostile territory (to them)? Carrier ops are another matter, of course.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElAurens

OK, let's stop speaking about the AI as if they are beings. OK?

I don't think we should do that... at least it's ok to speak as if they are in fact beings. As technology advances, AIs become more and more "beings" with real emotions, ambitions and dreams. As such, they should have the same rights as human players do. For now, however, they don't even get to decide whether or not to play in the first place, so they should in fact have some advantages over Joe Regular Player.

What we say here and how we say it will set a precedent on how we treat artificial intelligence beings, and our words will echo untold centuries into the future.

ElAurens · #4 08-23-2013, 04:47 PM

Quash the robots now!!!!!

MaxGunz · #5 08-23-2013, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janosch

As technology advances, AIs become more and more "beings" with real emotions, ambitions and dreams. As such, they should have the same rights as human players do. For now, however, they don't even get to decide whether or not to play in the first place, so they should in fact have some advantages over Joe Regular Player.

What fantasy do you live in? Does it cost extra to send mail that far?

There is no such AI as you describe except in fantasy. There is nothing that can fake it well enough to pass a Turing test.

MiloMorai · #6 08-24-2013, 12:31 AM

A Japanese robot got emotionally attached to a female tech and wouldn't let her out the room. Engineers had to shut the robot down so she could leave the room.

MaxGunz · #7 08-24-2013, 04:44 AM

If that actually happened then someone put a label on a simulated behavior. Nice machine.

Now how about fooling an intelligent adult human in an extended phone conversation?

Pursuivant · #8 08-24-2013, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElAurens

All that the settings can do is either slow this process down or limit the range that it picks you up as a target.

Maybe it's a subset of "slowing the process down," but the AI can also introduce random errors and do other things that reduce the probability of an accurate targeting solution.

Igo kyu · #9 08-25-2013, 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElAurens

OK, let's stop speaking about the AI as if they are beings. OK?

The AI is the computer program that runs the sim. It doesn't have to "calculate" anything. It already "knows" evey parameter of your aircraft's performance, and it knows how you have set your gun convergence. It "knows" where you are at all times, it knows when you make a control input, and has a perfect solution for hitting you at all times.

All that the settings can do is either slow this process down or limit the range that it picks you up as a target.

That is more or less correct in my opinion, but you don't have to mess with the AI at all. What you have to do is make any round fired not along the exact bore of the gun, but an random point in a circle around that boresight. This is called a circular area of probability, usually it's given as the radius that 50% of the shots fall within, but as a simplification in a sim one could plausibly use a circle within which 99% of the shots would naturally fall and make all of the shots occur at random points within that. Then the AI could be as accurate as they like, but they wouldn't be pulling off 100% headshot kills at 750 metres, because there would be a random element in there, which would counter their unnatural non-randomness and make the whole game a lot fairer overall. It wouldn't affect the scores of humans, because we're not accurate enough to get headshot kills by other than random chance anyway.

MaxGunz · #10 08-25-2013, 04:52 AM

Or you could simply round off the aiming angle values (3D takes 2 angles) to say 0 decimal places for a rookie, 1 place for the next level, 2 for the next and so on. If the shot is close, even a rookie won't miss though the rookie may not hit the exact aiming point.

I passed that one on to Oleg well before 4.07, btw.