Yes, I am sure that the more testers the better. I just want to look at the different AI performance per skill level.

I like the SpitII VS the 109 (E , I think).

Head-on would do but most any one-on-one mission would do. I guess we would need one mission per AI skill level to try and keep the testing simple.

Thanks for your very kind offer.

Farber since you seem to be able to make these things how do you actually get the AI to engage offensively say on a head on merge ? Every time I make a simple setup the ACE AI just flies right on bye. He will only start some defensive stuff if you wizz a few rounds past him. Even flying directly in front of him has no affect.

you can safely bet that the people who worked on IL2 AI's went away, and were not in there anymore to work on IL2CoD's AI.

you can also bet that the new people haven't worked on IL2 CoD more than half-a-year - a year (and most probably there was only one assigned to this).

that's what my almost 10 years game-developing experience tells me when I am looking at the launch/current state of IL2 CoD's AI.

Yes, I agree with your opinion based on my experience. The manpower, skill, and focus were not spent on the AI.

Love the new patch and really appreciate the effort but the AI is still porked.

~S~

You have to set up type of waypoint properly. Lets say You are trying to merge flight of 2*109`s against 2*Huricanes at 3kfeet, paths are meeting head on. You have a few waypoints before merge, create two close waypoints to this merge and set theme for "free hunt" and make sure that its done couple of minnutes before merge.

i know what we need
we need the guy from Wings of Victory II
This sim had the most excellent AI that i.ve seen with true offensive and defensive manouvers based on RL back in 40's
actually i'm thinking to reinstall it again...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNYm8kBmecQ

The last beta seems to have made a small improvement ...but it may be my imagination...When I go back to Il-2 it still looks quite a bit better...
I do remember Wing of Victory II- I must have been one of the first to buy it & it was terrible for quite a while esp the AI...bomber formations that turned as if cables were attached to their wings & fighters that did maneuvers that StarWar fighters would have been green with envy. Slowly it got sorted out,if I remember properly it had alot to do with third party volunteers...?
The initial version of CloD really reminded me of WoVII,in so many ways...but I've been along for the ride & ( even with low 14-25.FPS) I really love it - the eye candy of the cockpits & shadows is just too much & I find going back to Il-2 mildly difficult , inspite of its much higher, better performance.It still has alot of issues to work on before it grows to a bigger sim ,but Il-2 took a while too...
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d1...010_211319.jpg

The 3rd party devs are doing a work on the AI for IL2 1946 with UP as I understand.

In fact, constant improvements in AI are being mentioned.

If that is true, the fruit may not be falling too far from the tree.

Skouras...

Buddye is main stay on the AI performance package for BOB II WOV. He has posted several times in this thread, and might be persuaded at some point to help improve the COD AI performance.

You can't get better help than the man that made the BOB II WOV the best AI of any WW2 air combat simulator in my experience.

Also, your video is for 2.08 version. There have been an additional 3 patch releases since then.

The AI performance was a prominent feature of those releases.

http://a2asimulations.com/forum/view...p?f=10&t=21865

I recently reinstalled the BOB II WOV. I was always put off by the lack of a competent mission builder and no multiplayer online game.

I think some enthusiasm for the BOB WOV died off a bit with the release of BOB COD, because everyone's expectations are high for the COD.

Luthier is staying with it hot and heavy, so those expectations may not be misplaced.

This whole scene is very excellent graphics. The problem is.. the distortions are just not acceptable (to me).

I think most of the destortion is caused by the point of view or FOV being to far back in the cockpit.

The distortion, how can anyone put up with it?

I enjoy the cockpits and graphics for the depth of my involvement in the simulation. I realize enlarged POV may help see more, but it doesn't mate up with the way I like to enjoy air combat simulation.

So, yeah... I just go with the most realistic visuals all the time, and workaround the lack of peripheral vision and such.

What do you mean by distortion, what would need to be changed to get it looking like you want dude?

aa and correct fm's all the way to service ceiling.

everything else can wait imo.

This is a very long thread and I have not read it all...so I hope I'm not repeating an idea.

But, I would LOVE any, and all, of the effort that the team will put into the "AI". And "off line" play...

I could make a long list of behavior that I would love to see the "AI" exhibit, but the bottom line is...I would love to be surprised by the "AI". I would love to have the "AI" behave in unpredictable (sometimes), and yet understandable ways. People have already commented on improving the mechanics of "AI" flight...some feel that the "Sturmovik 1946" "AI" is smoother.

I'm intrigued by the idea of, "AI" that can "learn" from its opponent. Imagine flying against "AI" pilots that remember you...and (maybe) remember your favorite tactics.

1++

After making the game look and sound great, the real flight simulation and immersion comes from the way the combat is simulated. The dev team really needs to fine tune this aspect you feel like you are flying against a person rather than a robot on acid and red bull.:grin:

I agree with the above.

Would it be too much to ask for an AI that abides by the laws of physics? Now the game might as well be called "Spitfires vs Aliens", or "Messerschmitts vs Aliens".

That would be the first step towards an enjoyable single player mode.

2) make radio commands work.

3) add some content. a dynamic campaign and/ or a more complex mission builder.

what is the most realistic FOV in your view?

Oh, another thing about the AI. When they don't start to roll liek an Xwing, they fly straight and hit their imaginary airbrakes. They accelerate and deccelerate like UFOs. Bwah..

All of us who have been around for awhile and flown online realize that people do have patterns of behavior that occurs in air combat regularly.

There are just things you learn from your experience that can be programmed into AI performance. Probability hasn't been discussed much, but human behavior can be predicted in many air combat situations with high probability.

An example might be you are low and see a fast moving enemy dropping on you from above onto your 90. You know when he starts to pull up out of this dive your best course of action may be to nose down pulling towards him, but definitely not to pull up going away. These kinds of behavior can be programmed, but a probability of what the low pilot will actually do should be considered. Panic or pressure of the engagement may actually convert to the absolute worst thing to do or the smart thing to do.

I realize most AI performance is based on pilot experience, but still the best most experienced pilots made mistakes. Probability calculations should be part of the AI performance.

Programming AI is difficult. It cannot be ignored... just like in baseball, the probability statistics do mean something. Psychologists have studied proability as it relates to human behavior for years, and it is an ongoing study. No, the extremes and radicalized parts of behavior may not be determined by probability... but for most of us grunts in the world the statistics are pretty well on target.

I'm not trying to throw something new into the mix. The AI performance for a COD will take time and testing to arrive at a passable performance, that most of us can accept.

As it is now... the arcade is open

Programming AI is difficult ?? yes .. but what were pilots taught to do during a dog-fight? if they were novice .. stick to leader like glue! .. never fly straight for more than <x> seconds in the battle zone .. avoid battle etc

Average Pilots

Spit & Hurricane pilots Attacked 6 oclock - strong bank left or right
109 pilots attacked 6 oclock - nose over, DIVE!
110 pilots attacked 6 oclock - nose over, dive ?? defensive circle?
Defiant pilots attacked 6 oclock low - bank left or right, give gunner view below
Bombers attacked 6 oclock - steady course, slight climb / falls (this is already being done), yaw tail to allow gunners full view (?)

Veteran / ace pilots

Would have their own specialisd tactics that they found work ,as you stated.

The above would make the game realistic.
.

I have been asked the following question many times, Can you just pull out the BOBII AI and use it in another Flight Sim?

The BOBII AI could “not” be easily be made into a separate program and used in another Flight Sim as it is tightly integrated with the BOBII design and data. Of course, the BOBII AI design and approach could be implemented in another Flight Sim but the cost would be high in development and testing.

The Game Industry has so many issues trying to make a profit that I some times worry that most all people who do this type of work do it out of love and not profit (I am a retired Executive Business Manager for 25 years in the software business so I understand and always focused on profit/loss). Just consider for a moment how risky the business of investing in games actually is. Geoffrey Zatkin of Electronic Entertainment Design and Research is quoted in this article as saying:

"Only 20% of games that begin production will ever finish. Of those 20% that are finished and released to the market, only 20% of them will ever realize a significant profit... that equals 4% of games that start production return a significant profit."

Talk about long odds and I bet the odds for Flight Sims are even lower.

BTW, the BOBII approach to AI performance has players who do not agree. The following is a statement by a good BOBII player:

"The AI having acrobatic style evasive maneuver are great for testing your skills in quick combat flights, but in real combat there were relatively few extended dogfights. Most fights usually ended very quickly with the first burst, and the loser seldom seeing his counterpart."

I am sure that everyone has read these words many times. This may be the real way air combat was fought but I am not sure it was the case all the time. This approach for the AI would be very "boring" for a player, IMHO, but it would be easy to implement (fire, run and hide, then repeat). IMHO, a combat Flight Sim developer must always factor in the Player's "Fun Factor" so the air combat dog fights are enjoyable and fun.

LOL

The sim world is not the real world. You don't die in the game, and players want to enjoy all the air combat.

Even online you play different than you do offline. When you fly against good flyers in the air online you can get your head handed to you very quickly.

I would say online is closer to actual combat, but the element of gambling your life on a possible bad move doesn't mean anything. The most capable online players are careful not to waste their E and expose themselves anymore than possible. They want to get kills, and staying in the game is important.

Real world pilots flew and fought to stay alive, and reckless abandonment of caution wouldn't keep them alive for very long.

The AI performance makes the most difference to Offline players, and can make it or break it for a good air combat experience. So you want as competent AI as possible offline, especially since your wingman is a package of binary coding.

A competent AI is important with the COD, because there is no way to put large numbers of aircraft into the air in combat with human players. You could sit for hours waiting for enough players to join the server. AI performance is going to be very important to Online and Offline players in the COD, no way around it.

It's nothing like the IL2 with a small number of Online players pitted against each other. AI performance was ignored in the IL2, because there just was no capacity to put a large number of players into the fray at one time. Many of the players in those air combat situations will have to be AI players. AI performance cannot be ignored, it will have to be competently dealt with or all enthusiasm for the COD will be dead very shortly.

Well my fun factor as a SIMER, not a gamer, is for my sims to act real life .. the reason why I bought COD and not many other flight sim games. I love the detailed models, and especially the destruction models etc

If I'm closing in on a enemy’s 6, and he see me all the time ?? hmmm (when did single-seater fighters get an observer? defiant excluded) and starts barrel rolling continuous .. as if that doesn't affect the pilot then that's a detraction from the gam .. SIM! I expect to see my enemy spit / hurri do nothing (novice), banking hard left or right (average / veteran) or something new and surprising (ace)

As to games making money, there's nothing more certain to lose money than if you don't give gam ..simers what they want. The most successful games/sims are the ones that r bug free, easy to understand to operate, and have rich addictive tactical / strategic game play .. with the emphasis on addictive, players want to come back again and again .. for me, addictive means, quality - real-life sims - empire building (growth) - wargaming etc. Others would be different

You are still playing a 'flight sim game'.. don't kid yourself.
There will never be any game that can be called 'full real', it's a catch phrase grown up men give to the genre to convince themselves they are not gaming, but are now 'simming'.. :)
Get over it mate,
Being 'immersed' in your game is another matter, as for some, me included, you can suspend belief for a brief moment and get lost in it. (highly enjoyable)..
Lots of faults still to be put right, but as a grown up I can except what the devs are trying to do to rectify them, until then its a matter of playing the game as it stands, which is still pretty enjoyable regardless of the problems.

Alot of people are gripping that Merlins don't sound like Merlins .. and Daimlers don't sound like Daimlers etc .. people want reality.

On a unrelated issue, here's a determined guy trying to takeoff! so determined .. and he nearly made it! :)


.

Good pic!.. That is one aircraft many will want to see flyable.. hopefully in the future eh?
As to the sounds, well, don't think they will please everyone, but what we have is a vast improvement over the original ones.
Plus, as stated by the devs, the sound is still a work in progress and has a ways to go yet.
Don't get me wrong mate, there is a shed load of stuff to improve for sure. :)

Played a few SM's last night and I am so glad that FMs/AI is on the dev To Do list. At the present time it really makes the game unplayable in SP. Great to look at, fly around, take in the fly-by sounds, but engaging enemy planes and watching them flounder around like the pilot just had a seizure is a JOKE.

few more AI bugs ;

(1) When a plane is being attacked while landing, will try to barrel roll .. not advisable with flaps & gear down .. BOOM!

(2) Planes don't lower flaps when taking off, meaning they fly through trees etc to gain height.


Plus, why is the lights all on in this town (see picture) ?

.

The problems with the AI, like doing a maneuver while takingoff or landing and the correct takeoff settings (flaps, throttle, etc.) should be rather easy to fix and test, IMHO.

The issues with selecting and performing the best combat maneuvers (both aggressive and defensive, vertical, dive, level) are the hardest if making human like maneuvers based on skill level is a top priority.

Buddye,

Are you the Buddye who created the most realistic AI ever, that is, the noe in BoB2? If so, why hasn't Luthier hired you yet? This game could really use your talents!

+1 in my opinion that is the most annoying AI bug.i crashed a lot of times into them, because i was not able to break away fast enough.now since i became aware of that problem i tend to realize this "manouver" more quicky, so i escape the crash more often, but its still really distracting.

btw, i think this thread could be really important for the future of clod's AI...since the last update by luthier, im pretty confident that the devs look into it, and maybe we will have an improved ai to our likings soon.or at least acceptable.

Yes, I am the Buddye who has worked on the BOBII AI and other BOBII applications over the last 6 years. This is a long thread but I have posted some of my experiences and the BOBII approach and conceptual design if interested.

I love COD's graphics and damage model but the AI and game play has a long road ahead to achieve excellence IMHO.

You would think that one of the most important aspects of creating any flight sim...combat or otherwise...would be the modeling of flight simulation...yours and the AI's. HOW could the CLoD team work so hard on getting the cockpit shadows and gauge reflections so amazingly right and the FMs and AI so unbelievably wrong. And why has it taken them so long to address the problem. Don't they play the game???

I don't think they have time to play the game, they are working on it!
And don't exagerate, the faults are relatively minuscule regarding the whole packet!

I remember BOB 1 .. it's AI was so great, experienced Stuka pilots were almost impossible to hit, they'd turn into you, use their slow speed to frustrate and confuse! .. i loved it! :grin:

But I also remember defiants rolling like barrels downhill, surely that's not historic! .. gunner would be sick all over their turrets! LOL!

Hopefully COD will allow each user to create their own scripted AI ? .. hopefully ..

.

That was BoB1. BoB2 is different. Buddye created an AI that flies like a human, one that is challenging even for experienced pilots, still they are subject to the same laws of physics. One that has restricted vision, and can be surprised (depending on the level), one that tries to fly home when they feel they're losing the battle (damaged, too many wingmen lost, etc...), but still puts up a fight if you don't let them do that. All this is jsut the tip of the iceberg. If it could be done in BoB2, why on Earth can't it be done in what's supposed to be the best sim of the future?

OK...I probably should have said "Test" the game. Five minutes of playing in SP mode and anyone can see with the AI jumping, juking, waggling, doing multiple rolls at ground level, etc, etc, etc...the combat simulation is not very well simulated. You get behind a bogey and see some of this nonsense and say "Why bother." It's better to just fly around alone in the sky and take in the scenery.

I agree that a focused priority approach must be used by the COD developers so progress is maintained with their skills and manpower but if the AI is not addressed the game will only be excellent for the on-line players vs player dog fights. IMHO, COD will never reach its full potiental if player vs AI dog fighting is poor.

I agree that AI should be improved and particularly the FM available to the AI (instant full rudder or ailerons should be eliminated and the max roll speed and other performance parameters should be the same as for the player plane including overheating etc.)

It also needs to get smarter in terms of when to break a fight or a pursuit and when to continue. While in old IL2 they stuck to one's tail forever this is fortunately no longer the case and they break off smarter than in the previous game. However, they lack bite considerably. After a few minutes they just form up and fly home and you can just shoot them down without reaction from them.

Also we need to have the command "cover this flight" (including the task in fmb) better implemented as usually the fighter cover attacks the fighters and drops with them to the deck while actually they should just deter the enemy from attacking the bombers.

But otherwise I think there are also some already good features implemented in the AI. I just had a rolling scissor fight with an AI and it did it quite smartly. So there is hope :)

"It also needs to get smarter in terms of when to break a fight or a pursuit and when to continue. While in old IL2 they stuck to one's tail forever this is fortunately no longer the case and they break off smarter than in the previous game. However, they lack bite considerably. After a few minutes they just form up and fly home and you can just shoot them down without reaction from them."

This is way too true..its much like the AI in BoBII when it first came out: you just wait til they turn for home for sausage & mash ( or frites) and pick them off one by one. They only seem mildly annoyed when one of their fellows falls away into the Channel & then resume their happy droning home,This is the time to hit them instead of the dogfight when both them & their aircraft are able to do crazy StarWars manuevers that I cannot possibly follow at 14-24 FPS!!!
It does create bad habits tho ,when going back to Il-2 where the AI are way more intelligent while their aircraft are limited to the rule of physics in the real world.

One thing that's very annoying is the eyes in the back. I want to surprise a fighter from behind and not that he's always evaiding as soon as I'm less than 300 yards away.

I Agree, but to some degree some improvements have already been made. I mean, they now know when to disengage and fly home. They report when they're empty (which is good) and I like the waiting pattern they fly when the last plane of a flight takes off. These are good improvements I think. Also good is the behavior when they need to fly cover and manouvres they fly (slow spirals and zig zags) when they need to accompany the bombers.

Less favourable are the sudden and very rapid directional changes when it comes to air combat and formation changes. They're too sudden and too much ufo-like, bombers included. When wingmen joining their leader it seems like they're trying to commit suicide. They fly straight at you and at the very last moment do a loop-di-loop and join you at your wing ;-) This should be improved a bit I guess.

I do enjoy playing the game however, but really wish to see some AI and AI commands improvements in the next patch. Some ground vectoring would be nice as well.

Rgs,
FP

Actually I have the feeling that it always breaks as soon as I am about to get a good shot at it, sometimes it even breaks in the instant I push the trigger. It's one of the things that's killing the offline gaming part for me (toghether with performances).

I noticed that too. They break as soon as I press the trigger. :(

Also, yesterday I was flying a 109 E4 against Defiants, and I was seriously outpaced by them. There's not much CEM to do in the 109 with its automatic pp, so I don't know why full throttle wasn't enough...
It seems that the AI doesn't even use the FM of the actual plane. They always climb away, or run away, never lose E, etc...if you still get behind them tehy start rolling and rolling and rolling, in a screaming dive of 400 mph, your plane barely moves and the metal squeaks, but the AI still rolls like an F16.

So:
1) give the AI the same FM a human would use, and don't let them manage their plane perfectly either.

2) restrict their visibility and reflexes. (like in BoB2 WoV)

3) make them act human, i.e. more variety of maneuvers, trying to use their plane's strenghts, not only barrel rolls and occasional scissors. (like in BoB2 WoV)

1+, 1+, 1+. That's what I'm talkin' about.

Little OT. How is that game, is it still worth it? How does it compare to Il-2 1946?

In BOBII the AI and the player use the same FM and code so they are equal with only two exceptions (1) the AI do not black out or white out and (2) the AI can see through clouds (the AI do have blind spots as they can not see through the solid A/C parts [wings, rear, nose, etc] or see into the sun). Customers do sometimes complain that the AI can pull more G's and does not black out but in my opinion the advantage is small against a human pilot.

In BobII the AI can stall, spin, crash, and do stupid things. The AI ability to fly effectively is controlled with "skill level" which the player can select in Instant Action Missions and skill level is assign or user controlled in the Dynamic Campaign (both commander and Single Pilot). The higher skill level AI are more effective in Air Combat as they have the ability to fly more maneuvers and they fly each maneuver more effectively and efficiently.

In BOBII we have over 80 complex maneuvers for selection (both the aggressive and defensive maneuvers) for the fighters (Spit,Hurri,109.110) and over 50 simple maneuvers for selection for the JU87 and Defiant

I'm not so sure about that. To me it seems more likely they focused on certain area's (ground details, FM, DM, cockpits, AI and so on), but when they all tried to glue it together in their game engine they hit a wall. It stopped any further progress and they were pressed to release it anyway (lack of money, whatever).

Today, even after many patches, even with just 1 plane in the air and a few ground objects, the terrain still does not load smoothly on a very high end system. Adding more ram and more cpu power hardly makes a difference because the game is unable to use it.

To me it seems the real root cause is the game engine itself. Only when they've managed to fix this they will have time to look into the AI.

We can only hope - and Luthier mentioned a ~ 50% improvement - they'll find what the real trouble with the current CoD game engine is. Right now, it's still not running smoothly, especially when compared to IL2 10 years ago.

Rgs,
FP

buddye,

Just out of curiosity, but what if you 'commercialize' this knowledge you have on flight sim AI? How hard would it be and how much time would be needed?

Now every game has it's own AI (mostly flawed and buggy at first) and each developer seems to make the same mistakes over and over again. First person shooter AI is different from flight sim AI, I understand that, but BoB2 and Cod are essentially the same: ww2 flight sims. They have the same number of planes in the air, same type of fighters and bombers.

Even more modern flight sims would be able to make use of the AI tables/matrices and set of maneuvers you made for bob2, right? AI pilots remain AI pilots, whatever the time period, so mimicking human behavior is the constant here. It's just the capabilities and tactics that change when new weapons platforms emerge.

It would be really nice to see some real progress in this field, that's all ;-)

Rgs,
FP

Just my opinion,

BOBII best at, AI and dynamic campaign

IL2 best at , MP, and Mission Build Tool

Everything else really depends on the players personal view so really not very consistent.

Bottom line for me is both games are good and are fun to play.

The AI maneuvers are flown in BOBII using commands (AI do not use a joystick to fly). I would expect that the commands are tailored for BOBII (of course I have no knowledge of the COD AI design and data base). The data base for the AI is also BOBII specific as well as all the many support programs.

The basic design and approach to AI could be transferred/reused but the new code, integration, and testing would be very significant, IMHO. It would take one person years to complete (if they understood the BOBII AI) and it also assumes a good Player test team to test the AI maneuvers so the project could be coded and tested in small increments.

Buddye,

Maybe naive thinking here, but I'd expected a more exchangable and compatible AI, for example a set of dll's and a SDK ;-) I wasn't really thinking of adding it all quickly in CoD; that's not going to happen.

A package that could be marketed and sold to flight sim makers and expanded into other AI areas as well. Unsure if there's a market for it, but given the state much of the AI is in today, I'd say "yes".

Rgs,
FP

The dynamic campaign works well enough for BOB II. Most of the battle was air combat and the campaign manages that well enough. I'm not sure with the one map a mission builder tool would have made that much difference. There was a time I worked very closely with one of the A2A contract programmers to build a mission builder tool. The project was cancelled, after one minor beta release.

The IL2 Online MP was the salvation of the game. The FMB is a tedious tool to work with and made the process of building missions very time consuming. I could spend hours explaining things that need fixing in the FMB. LOL

It is nice you are spending some time on the forums. Hopefully, you will be a catalyst for a constantly improving AI performance in COD.

I recently reinstalled the BOB II and renewed knowledge of what a competent AI Performance really means.

Do you know if there will be continued work on the BOB II? The latest update is 2010 as I read from the A2A forums.

The BOBII 2.11 Code , Landscape, and MultiSkin Update is the Latest.

The landscape and object guys have been working on improving the BOBII landscape with new objects, trees, trains, and ships.The MultiSkin has been improved to include German Bombers and the fighters have also been improved to include the German Ju87 and BF110.

We have a new programmer working on the BOBII Campaign issues and problems. This will be a long term project to enhance the Dynamic campaign.

BOBII progress is painfully slow as the BDG is a small part time all volunteer workforce and one of key members has been unaviable due to very serious family issues.

The list of data interfaces (flight and FM data) required from the Simulator is so large and time critical that unless the simulator is written like FSX (which is not the case for todays Combat Flight Sims) where the flight and FM data is made available to a external application then an external AI application can not be implemented (at least that is where my current analysis of the possibility of implememting an external AI maneuver stands).

I need to look at the possibility of implementing smaller functions of the AI to see if it is cost-effective.

The dev's are now asking for specific examples to improve the Ai. See HERE

AI?
 

Why pc pilots would prefer artificial intelegence over a real dynamic human is beyond me:confused::confused::confused: they will never get better, I take that back, they will get better then the AI (which will probably suck durring our lifetimes)....unless they cant get internet maybe.

Because AI doesn't have what soured any kind of enjoyment I could derive from online gameplay? That little negligable thing called a human ego (which continuously had to be stroked)? I've seen enough kindergarten behavior to cure me for good from going online ever again. Simply put I prefer a style of gameplay focused on history as opposed to the everlasting gangbang that the great majority of the players favor. The human factor is grossly overrated ... in fact a human is more likely to be even more predictable than any AI: Shoot one down and he'll whine on some message board about unrealistic FMs, DMs, weapons or anything else that lets him mask his own inaptitude by pointing fingers at other somewhat "esotheric" factors. :roll:

Ai?
 

Man those are some sour grapes;) csThor, you should give the ATAG coms just one chance, Im sure you will see ten times the teamwork, comaradery and fun in general, the group of guys on there are passionate and always trying to help each other improve. Whining? rather rare realy as most of the whiners post on the forums much more then fly. As far as the human factor being over rated, I disagree whole heartedly as this sim is realy geared towards online play. Any way, Im sure if you show up the pilots will be very happy to have you as a wing"man".

Geared toward online play...
If you mean that everything necessary for a good offline campaign is broken, well then I suppose it is.

+1 lone wolfing is not good in ATAG it's a quick death, u always hear ppl warning each other on ts3 you don't get that so much in offline.

Not sour grapes as you put it, just the result of several years worth of either playing online (going back over ten years and old Warbirds 2.01) and even more years reading various message boards of various servers. And all this time has finally convinced me that my own high standards of simulating air war cannot be achieved online simply for the face that too many people want a sportive contest (aka gangbang) instead of a serious simulation.
With AI support realistic missions would be possible, but let's face it - ATM CloD doesn't offer more than pointless fighter combat with a few scarce other types thrown in. Nothing that even remotely resembles historical plane rates and mission profiles. And even if the darn engine worked as it should I know people would whine about AI involvement simply because of their own little superiority complex - as if engaging other players over the Internet was any grand achievement that sets them apart. :roll:

I have no probs with people liking online, tastes are different after all, but I am extremely allergic to that patronizing tone of "Why pc pilots would prefer artificial intelegence over a real dynamic human is beyond me". I don't meekly accept when people belittle me and my views simply from their own POV.

There are many many things that have made me move on to mainly online flying one of these is the added immersion that teamspeak/vent etc give you me and SEE where busy covering the last red target the other night and we spent 30 mins covering the target shooting down (or trying to shoot down) 109s and 110s coming to pound the target, which is far in land by the way, if I am not doing that then I am Borris AKA Ju88 hunting ;)

Nothing beats finding a few ATAG guys bunched up and probably having a good chin wag on the way to bomb a target in a BR20 only to be jumped 2 mins away from the target by me in a spit :D, man I wish I was on blue comms so I could hear there bleating as they tired to get there sights on me :lol:.

But I know what you mean about the problems with multiplayer but so far ATAG is ticking all the right boxes, if only they could get skins to work well :evil:

I don't see any reason why a modern sim can't do both. In IL2, FB, PT etc I enjoyed great offline campaigns and online play.

Why does it have to one or the other with Clod ? personally I always thought Hyperlobby elevated IL2's MP to the stage that it reached with hundreds of players online. If Clod is developed with its SP element in mind but its on HL as well it should satisfy both preferences.

Well said, single player can be quite fun (well, once the obvious stuff is fixed).

Ai vs Organic
 

Sorry csThor, not my intention to belittle you or your views Its just that the guys I fly with are half the fun so its hard for me to think of flying against or with only my pc. I just hoped I might be able to show you our version of online play with coms as it stands today(sure to improve!)

Oh by the way, thanks for your early interest in the gtx580 3gb, I ended up getting one and last night I saw 2.47gb of usage as the gunner for ATAG_DOC in a 110:eek: <<<<<<<<EDIT* Wrong it was T}{or oops....

Are you me?

I get this sudden feeling reading your post that either you are me or that I'm having some kind of Tyler Durdenesque psychotic break here.

Everyone pimps their server as being the exception but it's a clique thing, you're in the clique or your not.

The big difference is not the people themselves, they're only human. It's the environment that favours balance over realism. People go on about how they are team players and whatever but few really are, they think that being in the server with the same letters in front of their name makes them a team. In the real deal you don't get a choice, you have to work as a team in order to survive and, until this idiotic notion of things having to be balanced gets knocked out of people, this culture will endure. People mistakenly believe that flight simulations exist to be gratifying, fair or fun, they do not, they exist to simulate flying which is inherently gratifying, often unfair but always fun.

In flightsims and Arma I'm interested in online play, but not versus humans but coops against the AI. For that a working enemy and friendly AI is paramount as it is for single player.

And so CloD sleeps on the harddrive until this is fixed alongside the radio comms.

Realistic AI will be necessary if we ever want to recreate things like Eagle Day, which could work as a nice coop mission.

Isn't there a possibility to ask the guys and ladies?, which developed WOV for AI assistance?

Easily misunderstood if you haven't experienced the correctly set up AI in FMB. Although human players can be much more satisfying in dog fights (x 10), The AI pilots and gunners in il2:1946 can be simply incredible and realistic.

The AI will smoke you if you set up your mission correctly in FMB. My group has made over 100 and flown over 300 coop missions vs. only AI. Its a great experience. I'd love to see you in a wildcat against some AI ace zeros, or in a p40 in the desert against some AI 109s in an "end of an era" mission. You'll be going down. AI very realistic and can be almost as good as human in the right scenarios. This awesome AI was here 5 years ago!

Some simmers want to fly historical missions with 50 or more planes in formations. the only way to do that is with AI. So yes if I want to fly a historic mission, I prefer the AI in Il21946. I haven't attempted any AI missions in CloD as the ATAG human and AI server, as you say, is very satisfying. The combination of human and AI is as sweet as it gets...and it will only get better with time

The new ai in the latest 4.11 patch is a big improvement in classic IL2. Objectively I still don't think it is as unpredictable or engaging as BoB WoV's ai but it is still good and to me far superior to what we currently have in CloD. As these are both Maddox games 1C products (and if they haven't done so already) couldn't the dev's speak to the TD people who did the new 46 ai ?

Yes I agree, the hope is to have realistic formations of bombers in the server as soon as the engine is optimised or the hardware allows. I cant wait till we have a ton of bombers all together heading to some critical target escorted by fighters going against determined and organized allies....heck ya

SP Missions etc...
 

I found this site for BoB missions etc, dont know if you all have seen it allready but if not enjoy!

http://bobgamehub.blogspot.com/

Regarding P.3 of your wishes, here Skatech - Air Warfare (unofficial addin).
This is still pre-alpha test, the discussion in Russian, but the Addin in English.

I agree that the IL2 4.11 patch and radio messages would be a improvement for COD but maybe the interfaces or databases have changed.

Luthier - I understand if you cannot post a patch immediately fixing the graphics engine, but surely you can make a patch fixing the terrible AI of this game.

I haven't fired up CloD for months and have been spending all my stick time with ROF. I thought I'd see what I've been missing and tried a QM with Advantage Axis. Got on the six of a Hurricane and gave him a quick burst and he just continued on like he was sight seeing. Gave him another short burst and the same reaction...which means no reaction. One more burst and down he went. What a waste of beautiful graphics. Whoever made the decision to release this non-simullator in its current state should get out of the busienss. Back on the shelf this dust collector goes...:(

I don't have COD code(don't even have the game either :grin:) so I don't know what issues they have with AI but it is virtually impossible that Il2 AI could be directly transfered to COD. OTOH no matter the current AI structure in COD lot of features from Il2 could be adjusted for COD relatively easy (or for any other combat flight sim). Whole decision making is sim independent and all you really need is bunch of variables which can be easily acquired from any game engine.


If AI is that easy, everybody would get it right in the first try.:grin: Main reason why AI sucks in most games is because developers underestimate its complexity and time required for AI development.

I may be the only one here that enjoys the AI...I think the team did a great job on them.:)

That particular mission is a great example of just how bad the AI is at the moment I agree!!

That scenario reproduces exactly how I feel every time I decide to give this another crack after a couple months away, instant disappointment, then back on the shelf through frustration.

CS. :)

When I see Defiants banking left or right, allowing the gunner full view of the attacker @ 6 o'clock low, then I'll know reality has returned.

.

Do you enjoy your mates crashing in the airfield because they like so much fly close to you even when you are landing? And that it´s only an example.

Have you tried radioing to your squadron - "head for home .. tea & biccies" ? otherwise they think your doing low level arcobatics ?

R

Artificial idiocy, it's the only explanation as to why somebody would willingly crash because you are landing regardless of having been told to go home and make sure the kippers are smoked properly.

So... the IA is not that good, if they "think" that way and crash their planes because them want to make underground aerobatics with me, right?.

No, Luthier likes it too.;)

I'm not saying that they don't need some tweeking, but they are no longer crack shots.:)

Dogfighting bombers, crashing wingmen and suicidal enemy sqds that dont want to fight back.
The AI still needs alot of work, though the "community help with AI" thread, the new AI guy plus 4 months work should mean we progress with this patch.

There really are not that many things wrong with the ai, but the few errors are really prominent.
The dogfighting bombers should be traced back to the mission builder, afaik.

That the ai doesn't defend itself could be only a missing trigger.

Same with separating from the leader when he lands, the ai just doesnt get the information and stays in formation.

Annoying, but really nothing to open a cask for.

I guess everyone has opinion about good AI but for me the true test is how the AI perform maneuvers during a dog fight trying to both kill the enemy and being defensive and not getting killed. I have never been killed and only been shot by friendly fire in my COD dog fights.

I find the current COD AI to be a weak dog fighter. Developing good AI dog fighting maneuvers will be a significent effort, IMHO. The other problems (Dogfighting bombers, using up the ammo too fast and not hitting anything, crashing wingmen, and AI that will not engage) should be easier to fix

I agree. The only thing COD (Collector of Dust) is good for in its present tune is just flying around and doing a bit of sight seeing. After game crashes and other issues that make the game unplayable...ai is on the top of my list;)

Robtek, for me its EVERY offline mission.

Your system seems stronger than mine but yet I do not ever have crashes...really makes me wonder the why:)


I find that interesting too, one on one I rate AI at a 9 or so. I have him set at normal flight in the action page...it all just makes me wonder how so many others have problems. They do get hits on me, but nothing like the old Il-2 marksmen:)

If you circle the base, let the ground operator give you permission to land. You'll notice they invariably call out the planes that should join the circuit, and start from last position in the flight to the lead being last. If you jump the gun, and land before you are cleared, with the rest of your flight still following you, no wonder they are crashing into the ground.

As the ground control calls for each plane, you'll see them leave your formation, and begin their final approach. After they have been given their final clearance, they will land, and the controller will call out the next aircraft to join the pattern. If they are members of your flight, then you will be the #1, and you should be landing last. Following these procedures, the landing rate of the AI is nearly 100% if they aren't badly damaged.

Yes this is true!...user error:-P

It isn't just a problem of weak mission building imho.
I built a mission myself in which I comand the AI 109 to escort Do17 to their targets. I repeat the escort command for every following waypoint, but as soon as some Hurricanes attacking the bombers, the 109 are engaging..... fighting for some poor minutes and then heading home, leaving the whole bomber group alone on the whole upcoming flight and ignored the next waypoints totally.
One time the whole bomber group on the other side began to dive randomly after being attacked by the Hurris and made a huge right turn, allthough only 1-3 bombers were damaged a little.

It shows that there are some general (and I won't say minor) problems with the AI behaviour.

Ive never lost a 1 on 1 dogfight with the AI, and i dont expect any body else has.

Ummmm that's great if you're not damaged and need to land immediately, not neccessarily at an airport.