Another question for TD..

[JtD]

The Pe-8 and TB-7 are basically two designations for the same aircraft, as are DB-3 and Il-4. Essentially TB-7 and DB-3 are early designations, Pe-8 and Il-4 late ones.

However, there were subversions that differed from one another. In game we have a Pe-8 with AM-35 engines, and a TB-7 with M-40F diesel engines, which is the key difference here. The main differences between the Il-4 and the DB-3F are the fourth crew member and the upper turret, mounting a 12.7mm gun instead of the 7.62mm gun.

[majorfailure]

Originally Posted by IceFire

I definitely understand this and how it doesn't make any sense at all to shoot at a burning bomber. I curse the AI while I'm offline... and then I take a step online and what do I see? Three guys all jockeying for position shooting at a burning bomber.

I do think the AI targeting could be more teamwork oriented... but I'd argue against it being too logical or absolute. Humans aren't all that logical

Yeah but that's point-whoring - and because some human ONLINE pilots do it does not excuse the AI. I'd bet that in real life a pilot shooting at a burning plane while there were still plenty of undamaged targets would have had to explain his behaviour to his commander. AI targeting could be at least improved for veteran and ace level. They should know better. There is some more odd behaviour with AI targeting. A nearly undamaged plane with only a dead pilot flying straight and level will not be engaged by anyone -not even FlaK. The AI shouldn't be able to "see" a dead pilot until very close - and maybe even shoot at the plane.

[ElAurens]

All this is why I almost never fly offline.

The AI cheat, cheat all the time, and do nothing but cheat.

I'd rather be shot down by a human that had to actually work for it that by my own computer, which is what the AI are.

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

AI does not cheat. I'd rather say, AI is naive and pragmatic.

[shelby]

Originally Posted by IceFire

I definitely understand this and how it doesn't make any sense at all to shoot at a burning bomber. I curse the AI while I'm offline... and then I take a step online and what do I see? Three guys all jockeying for position shooting at a burning bomber.

Yes but here is a reason. the number of kills

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by ejgr.ost_caspar

ai does not cheat. I'd rather say, ai is naive and pragmatic. :d

lol!!

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by IceFire

I definitely understand this and how it doesn't make any sense at all to shoot at a burning bomber. I curse the AI while I'm offline... and then I take a step online and what do I see? Three guys all jockeying for position shooting at a burning bomber.

Offline, I think that this problem has more to do with how the game recognizes kills than AI. For example, sometimes the game doesn't credit you with a kill even when you've set a plane on fire and seen the crew bail out.

Online, it has more to do with "vulching" and the natural tendency to fixate on a single target. That, plus the fact that the game doesn't credit your team with a kill until the plane blows up or crashes.

But, even so, target fixation is a rookie/average pilot mistake. Veteran and ace pilots shouldn't just chase a single plane while ignoring every other bandit in sight. Instead, they should choose their targets more carefully.

A very simple algorithm which would aid AI team behavior immensely would be "lead pair takes nearest appropriate target, next pair takes next closest appropriate target, etc."

And, even if they are trying to take out a single plane, veteran or ace AI should use section, flight or squadron tactics. I have yet to see even Ace AI use a simple "drag and bag" technique where the lead plane in a section breaks to give his wingman a shot at an enemy plane on the leader's tail.

In a 4-1 fight one section should try to "box" the enemy plane to "herd" it into the other section's guns. In a 6-1 or 8-1 fight, veteran or ace AI should "envelope" the plane attacking from multiple angles at once.

Against heavy bombers, Average or better AI should always try high-side or head-on attacks if possible (using some algorithm which measures relative time required to get into position for the shot). Failing that, they should try level or low beam attacks - from the front quarter if possible, otherwise from the side and then from the rear if nothing else is possible. If only stern chase attacks are possible, they should target the tail gunner first.

When a flight of average or better AI planes attacks a formation of heavies (or a single heavy bomber), they should all attack at once with different sections attacking from different angles in order to split the defensive firepower.

OTOH, Rookie AI will do stupid things like attack one at a time vs. a formation of heavies. Yes, that really happened. A friend of mine's father was a B-24 pilot and told a story about how his flight was bounced by Zeroes. The Americans thought they were dead for sure, but the Japanese peeled off and attacked one at a time.

[Lagarto]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

For example, sometimes the game doesn't credit you with a kill even when you've set a plane on fire and seen the crew bail out.

By the way, I always found it strange that this game - a Russian game! - doesn't credit you with a ramming kill (intentional or not), unless the victim of your 'taran' crashed first. I remember my disappointment years ago when I tried reenacting those famous ramming attacks by VVS pilots, and wasn't getting victory credits for them.

[majorfailure]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

And, even if they are trying to take out a single plane, veteran or ace AI should use section, flight or squadron tactics. I have yet to see even Ace AI use a simple "drag and bag" technique where the lead plane in a section breaks to give his wingman a shot at an enemy plane on the leader's tail.

They do sort of do that. At least rookie AI does. They almost always exclusivley do guns defence turns in a direction that leads you towards their wingman.

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

Offline, I think that this problem has more to do with how the game recognizes kills than AI. For example, sometimes the game doesn't credit you with a kill even when you've set a plane on fire and seen the crew bail out.

I think AI can not acknowledge the difference between a perfectly good plane and a severly damaged one that is still afloat - but will highly likely not make it far.
As for personal score, I loathed the AI for killstealing, and I tended to finish off my kills so they were unstealable. Nowadays I think of it as a team sport, as long as my team scores, I don't care who shot the goal. In the end I do think I even get more personal kills by that...

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by majorfailure

Yeah but that's point-whoring - and because some human ONLINE pilots do it does not excuse the AI. I'd bet that in real life a pilot shooting at a burning plane while there were still plenty of undamaged targets would have had to explain his behaviour to his commander. AI targeting could be at least improved for veteran and ace level. They should know better. There is some more odd behaviour with AI targeting. A nearly undamaged plane with only a dead pilot flying straight and level will not be engaged by anyone -not even FlaK. The AI shouldn't be able to "see" a dead pilot until very close - and maybe even shoot at the plane.

My hypothesis is that humans are humans regardless of the situation be it real life or simulation. When presented with the same basic parameters they will do the same basic things on aggregate. In the heat of combat, target fixation becomes a concern and two guys shooting at the same burning plane can (and did) happen. There's even a gun camera shot that I saw where one Hellcat's gun camera captures another Hellcat fly in front of him while what appears to be a Zero is getting shot at by both. So, while it's less likely that point whoring would go on in real life (at least not like we see it)... target fixation looks fairly similar. At least some of the notorious kill stealing and shoulder shooting is caused by total target fixation. You can watch it happen. They are oblivious to all around them.

The problem with the AI right now is that they have a switch. If the target has bailed out or lost a wing then the aircraft is considered dead. If the plane is burning but still flying then it's considered a viable target. What needs to be programmed is a a greater range of recognition.

For example, the AI should keep firing if it's a plane that they lit on fire because just because it's flaming doesn't mean that it's going down. Maybe it should only do this 75% of the time (roll the dice) and sometimes leave a flaming aircraft alone. The AI should check and see if they lit it on fire... if not then leave it. Perhaps that happens 75% of the time. Or variable ranges depending on Rookie or Ace level.

The biggest problem I have with AI and AI programming, and I know exactly why it happens (CPU resources), is that it's too mechanical. Humans make all kinds of snap micro decisions and they aren't all logical or predictable. The AI, with a basic level of programming, is entirely logical and predictable and obviously that's less desirable.