Another for me unpleasant behaviour comes with the new starting positions.
Even if I set myself als flight leader, AI starts up engines and immediately give full throttle for a liftoff. My assigned wingman should be so polite to wait until I give full throttle.
Within this theme Complex I made another oservation about the accelerating behaviour of AI.
First thes accelerate like living hell then just sleep away so I can overtake them easily on the runway.
Also I could not manage to place a spawning object for me on the airfield compex. I allways start at the usual starting point, while my flight uses their spawning planes.

Here is an example of how to set up a 2-plane flight:

-Set your Takeoff Type to Pairs or Line. (See screenshot 1)

-Set your Spawn Point for each plane in the flight. (See screenshots 2 and 3)

Now any human taking a plane in that flight will spawn where you see the Stationary P-38's. If a plane is AI controlled, it will spawn at the Takeoff waypoint, so be careful where you place it.

Aviar

Tried it, did not work. Is this only für Multiplayer Mode? I assign my spawn point to an Avatar plane on the Field, but spawn at the regular starting point on the runway.
And while I sat up a mission to try it again, i found another light flaw, as it seems to me.
If trying to land the FW190 there is a real hardship getting out speed and height our of this slick AC. Cuting the throttle means reduction in sound. With engine idle, it takes about two minutes to reduce speed from 400kph to 300kph while remaining on the same level. Even skidding does not work to well. Pulling hard up setting all flaps and gear out adds several hundret meters on level and pointing the nose towards the airfield means a real hardship staying below 250kph. with 4.10 I could land this AC with 170kph, now its nearly impossible to bleed speed below 220kph. Forcing a landing with damaged machine in vicinity of the airfield is nearly impossible because you have to stay so long in the line of fire when reducing speed. Historical correct? Or is it just me?

SPAD-1949,

You didn't mention if you were asking about single or Coop missions. I assumed you were making a coop.

If the 'Pairs' or 'Line' setting is not working, try the Normal setting. It's strange because this feature seems to work differently in Single and Coop missions.

*If you post the mission here and tell me exactly what you are trying to do, it would be much easier to show you.

Aviar

You can criticize us, why not?:grin: As long as critic is polite and constructive it helps us to make the game better. AI is complex and it's impossible for a single person to try and experience everything that is possible in game.That's why users input and opinions means a lot for us.

We have already made a lot of changes for 4.11.1 that have been initiated in this thread and we will continue to do that.

FC

Something should be done about the unrealistically high losses among the AI. I see several solutions:

1) a/c with damaged engine(s) should immediately break off / turn back and try to reach friendly lines; now they press on until it’s too late.
2) AI is no good at finding a suitable place for emergency landings, I often see them crash into forests.
3) Their strafing technique is suicidal – when attacking target they actually throttle back (!), then slowly pull up and orbit their target, instead of speeding away at full bore just above the ground, like all real-life strafers did.

DT have mentioned that ground attack patterns will be re-worked. You make a good point with the rest. Furthermore, some AI should chose to break off, even without receiving damage (hit and run tactics or when losing the initial advantage, etc).

I beg you pardon, single missions
Now that you mention it, I reconfigured the set and it works. Even to start out of the camo net boxes which usually result in a collision, when trying to park beneath.
You mean, copy the .mis file text here or is ther a possibility to share files?

Yes, you can simply post the contents of your mis file or you can compress the mission files into a Zip and then attach it to your post.

Aviar

I'm noticing that the Ace AI seems to be too willing to trade head-on shots with well-armed enemy AC, rather than maneuvering for position.

While "playing chicken" makes sense for well-armed and armored planes which aren't very fast or maneuverable, like the IL2, it makes no sense for more vulnerable planes with good maneuverability, such as the A6M2, Bf-109E/F or IK3.

For the next patch would be nice to see some improvement in the AI behavior related to escorts and multi-flight formations. Currently, when you place a bomber flight, and an0ther bomber flight is placed to form up on the first one (assigning the lead flight as a target on the various waypoints) everything is fine. If a fighter flight is to form up on a bomber flight they start a sweep escort over them, this might be ok, but not always convenient (i.e. long escorts over large bomber formations didn't sweeped, often just flew beside). The same applies to fighter tasked to form up on another fighter flight: the start to sweep over the leading flight. To avoid this one have to manually place the waypoints, accuratley timing them so that the various flights loosely fly togheter.
Having a more advanced waypoint option (something like the patrol and take off ones added in 4.11), allowing to specify how to form up on the targeted flight would be really welcome for me, allowing to build more complex large formations without spending A LOT of time testing he missions to ensure the AI fly together and don't collide each other.

Oops!
 

I mistakenly put this in the General Debugging thread. Sorry!

"I've been very well impressed by the improvements in v4.11, and have been enjoying the results of TD hard work. The changes in AI behavior in particular are a real gem. However, after many hours or flying in the sim since the new patch I've come to accept that there is one aspect of AI behavior that seems to have taken a major step backwards; their formation flying.

First, pre 4.11, when flying bombers or ground attack aircraft, with a little bit of practice a human player could maintain a good position within the formation, no matter what he may be flying and where in the formation he was flying, because the AI itself did a good job keeping formation. There was only a little bit of wobble, and the consistency of holding attitude and altitude of the formation was pretty much solid.

Now in 4.11, the AI is all over the place. Formations constantly rise and fall by many tens of meters, like roller coaster rides, all the way to and from the target area. Individual aircraft within the formation constantly make drastic changes in acceleration and deceleration. The lead aircraft will turn over on his back every two minutes or so, again all the way to and from the target area, resulting in even more of the formation's rising and falling.

I understand the point of making the AI turn over like that, but it occurs far too frequently. It looks and feels cheap. Pilots in the real war may have done it, but maybe only a few times while strategically maneuvering for position during an actual combat situation, and perhaps only rarely - if ever - while transiting in formation - especially if it were a formation of bombers or ground attack aircraft.

TD, believe it or not, there are many of us who enjoyed formation flying. There is a sense of progression when you start a campaign as the junior pilot, and move your way up the ranks (and formation) as you complete missions and gain experience, eventually leading a wing, and the squadron itself. However, with the way the AI flies formations now, it is virtually impossible for the player to do that anymore as it has become prohibitively difficult keeping up with the AI as it performs all it's gyrations.

Like many, I've been a huge fan of your work and since TD's involvement have witnessed each successive version of IL-2 go from strength to strength. Unfortunately, this AI formation issue, IMO, is a blot on the copybook. I ernestly hope that others agree with me on this and that this issue gets resolved.

Thanks!"

I tend to agree with this observation. Also, I was wondering why bombers with rear and turret gunners need to be pulling maneuvers to 'check their 6'? Aren't the gunners spotting for enemy planes?

I've even seen bomber flights miss a waypoint pulling these maneuvers. Then they have to circle around so they can 'complete' the missed waypoint. Then they fall way behind the pack.

I know DT put a lot of time and effort into this new feature and some further tweaking may still be needed.

Aviar

I read in a book from Martin Caidin that it was the last plane in a formation the one to keep an eye on the 6 o'clock section. Of course I have no clue if the AI in the game "talk" to each other, so this is just pure speculation.

Having only the last plane in each flight do the "check manouvers" could solve the issue, while still keeping the new AI "blind spots" active.

But then again, I don't know if the code would allow for any of this, just trying to help.

I suppose this is not a bug and is probably in the wrong forum but it is "A/I" so here is my post.

Sorry if this has been covered but i have not read all 12 pages...
I'm trying to get fighters like F4F-4 and P-400 to strafe ground targets and Japanese landing craft. They will not do it. I've tried everything I can think of.

If you add bombs to the Wildcat it will attempt to bomb and the same with P-39D-1 (my substitute for P-400 for ground attacks).
Lots of strafing were done with these on Guadalcanal and I'm just trying to make a good re-enactment of it but it's just not working.
Any suggestions or maybe a fix in the future?

The AI will not attack ships with guns only. As Oleg used to say...this is a 'feature', not a bug. ;)

Aviar

Lot of different techniques were used in RL, we are currently examining our options and we will make some changes to make AI capable to check their six and at the same time to keep their formation.

I'll take a look at it, can't promise anything for 4.11.1 , if we make changes they will be in 4.12 at earliest.

Great! I guess it has been a "feature" and I just never noticed it because i mainly used the Sturmovik for ground attacks and not other fighters.
I do think fighters need to be fixed for strafing to make it more realistic though. Thanks for the reply!

Try using the P39D2 armed with the 37mm.

Hi,
I do not know whether someone has this already observed, but the F4U1A AI behaves during a bombing run from a certain height very strange!
At a height above 1250m, the F4U1A extend his undercarriage and goes into a dive! The bombs will triggered and the undercarriage again retracted!

Saw it in 4.11m plus hotfix patch during a DCG mission and a test mission in FMB!
Payload F4U1A: 2x500

picture: EDIT

Hope it helps!

Lonestar, see 3'40" on:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-PwT...eature=related
It's normal behaviour apparently :)

Oh, interesting!
I've never seen that before, then all back! :shock:
Many thanks for the vid, jameson!

Hi there,

as some people before mentioned, the "stealing" of kills by friendly ai is a real nuissance esp. for offliners.

Otherwise I love the new ai!

Gotta love the white text over the white clouds...:rolleyes:

Two things to add, one a comment and other a behavioral oddity.

First, I've noticed the AI crashing during some dogfights that others have mentioned, it's only been average or below and when they're pulling very hard at very low altitudes. While I'd agree that *some* of this should be "buggy" behavior, I disagree that it should be taken out completely. Historically un/less-well trained pilots often did crash their aircraft while trying to perform acrobatics. I wouldn't expect a veteran or ace to have an accelerated stall, but a rookie definitely could.

Second, I apologize if this has already been reported. I've noticed the AI will sometimes perform some rather odd, extreme maneuvers at low altitude in a turning fight. The main thing I see is them maneuvering wildly while upside down for a good 2 or so seconds while 100 ft or so above the ground. If I had to make a guess, it looks like they're trying to roll inverted to dive and separate, but they can't because the planet earth is in the road.

Interesting. I will look for that behavior on my next several flights.

I have noticed the AI pulling too hard and crashing but it's been on the lower AI levels and I think this is in the realm of feature rather than bug. It's nice to see the AI pull too hard, screw it up and stall out. It looks very natural and realistic.... and it doesn't happen so often as to be regarded as artificial. At least not for me.

Agree. It needs some tweaking but historically there were plenty of deaths and aircraft losses due to pilot error in all aspects of flight. I just read something not too long ago about when they switched from P-47's to P-51's in Europe, there were more than a few deaths right off the bat due to pilots trying to dive like they did in the jugs, which the Mustangs couldn't handle. I don't necessarily expect that level of AI modeling, but stuff like rookie mistakes are a welcome change IMO.

As for the acrobatic weirdness, try it against mainly veteran or above pilots, in airplanes with good roll rates. Bring the fight down the near the ground and get behind them. If they decide they want a turning fight, you should see what I mentioned. There will be lots and lots of hard rolling, and some of that zany upside-down flying. I'll try to get a screenshot, since the track saving and replay seems to be broken as of now (4.11hotfix).

It has been acknowledged that .trks no longer work. DT is unlikely to fix this. Instead, be sure to record an .ntrk. Set a key, or press ESC and click "start recording" or similar.

Well that stinks... What's the difference between a .trk and .ntrk? So you have to decide when a mission starts if you want to record it or not? Seems kinda silly.

TRK was setup to record the inputs from the player (and AI) into the flight model. It's an extremely unreliable format as slight or minor changes to the flight model and AI modeling over the years has made saving anything in TRK a near useless endeavor. The NTRK format is a very different beast in that it records more information including the actual positions of aircraft and damage states so that the playback is virtually identical between versions no matter how much has changed.

It's why the BlackDeath.ntrk or the Kamikazi02.ntrk still work many years after they were created.

I know what you mean about deciding to record later... and perhaps there is a solution using NTRK that would be possible but TRK was always problematic. As soon as IL-2 went from version 1.0 to 1.01 things started to go astray.

Right. And those training tracks? Before, you could actually take control of the aircraft to complete the training. Now, it's just a boring movie that doesn't really teach much at all.

What is nice is that you can make an .ntrk of an .ntrk. So, make a long recording of your flight, and then play back and re-record only the interesting bits. It's useful to add the recording indicator as this shows a timer to tell you how long you've been recording, and at what minute something noteworthy occurred. While pressing the recording hotkey creates file like "00001.ntrk" you can go into the records folder and change it to something more descriptive, like "Il2_pwns_noobs" (no spaces or some symbols allowed).

Add this line to your conf.ini under [Game]:

RecordingIndicator=1

It is not showing off, it is rolling on its side to defend itself against YOU, the german aircraft offender. Having no rudder does not impede you to successfuly roll your plane. Why the AI would be more conservative than any human pilot? This is actually bringing you more human like attitude from the AI.

If the mission writer unckecks the parachute box in the full mission builder for any particular AI flight, there is no parachute, thus no bailing out of the pilot. Besides, if it was a P-38, it can be brought home with a flaming wing for about 20 km. Sometimes yes the AI will continue to fight back, because it is the only valid option it has. Besides, do you always bail the moment you are burning in your crate?

To setup dive bombing, set the waypoint before GAttack to something higher or equal to 1500 meters. The same for the GAttack point. You must use the set button to assing the target. Then just after the GAttack waypoint, set alt to no more than 600 meters. Your dive bombing attacks will always be successful, even with rookies.
Tactical: tactical flights that flies from high above should descend to no more than 500 meters 10 km from target. Put the Gattack point much lower, and always assing a tactical boming attack, about no more than 100 meters, or even less.
Level Bombing: stay high, put the GAttack right over the target, and never assing the target with the set button. If you set the target with the set button, the flight will begin a shallow dive just like tactical bombing, and it will look odd. In level bombing the only thing that should move are the bomb day doors. Aircraft should stay straight and level. 10 km from target, align the path on a direct course to target. You might want to use even more than that, especially if there is a tight turn just before.

Torpedo attack: fly low, between 50-100 meters from sea level, at least for the last 10-20 km, until GAttack point that you assing to the ship you want to destroy. Try to use wenever possible a slight angle in your waypoint toward the stern of the target if the flight is attacking a moving ship. Assign the target by using the set button at the GAttack waypoint. Make sur you put an alt of about 500 meters after the GAttack waypoint, giving 5-10 km for the flight to pull up. Might not always work.

Kamikaze Bombing. This one is the easiest of all to set up. Just make the last waypoint of the flight to Gattack, and assing it to a target. It will ram into it. And since 4.10.1m, the bomb also detonate. Aircraft crashing into ships are actually doing real damage too.

Hope that little tutorial helped.

Hope that helps to set up good bombing tactics for the AI.

Hi DT,

After testing the DGen, it came to my attention that there seems to be a few changes in ground attack. After making an attack, Il-2s will regroup at a very high altitude (1000m) far away from the target, before making another attack. This might be good defense from AAA, but it exposes them to enemy aircraft. Cruising altitude is under 300 meters, sometimes at treetop height, so it's strange to see them climbing so quickly afterwords.

Also, when I asked a flight of Hs-129s to attack a ground target, they passed over the target, then split-S from 300 meters into the ground. The entire flight was destroyed.

Love all the work so far guys, but I can't wait for what's next :cool:

I should have said that as a general rule I use 500 meters... but yes of course the different situations call for different altitudes :)

Problem with He 111 H-6 (home base in Bessarabia)
 

I don't know if this is a problem with the aircraft or with the airfield, but this is what happened to me:

I've set a flight fo two He 111 H-6 to takeoff from Tatar Bunar airfield (Bessarabia AX6) and sink some soviet Hunters offshore. So far, so good, and the're precise on hitting the ships with the torpedoes.

But when they're back and land, they seem to visit every "parking spot" on the airfield, and eventually crash on fixed airfield objects...

Two questions;

-Are the "...fixed airfield objects..." that the planes are crashing into objects that YOU placed on the map?

-Are you using a modded version of IL-2?


Aviar

Have a look in the Bessarabia PDF read me file that came with the map originally, it shows the airfields layouts and restrictions for aircraft.

http://www.gamefront.com/files/21561...bia-Readme.pdf

Link is broken?

Aviar

Just tested ...... working ok

http://www.gamefront.com/files/21561...bia-Readme.pdf

Aviar -

Two questions;

-Are the "...fixed airfield objects..." that the planes are crashing into objects that YOU placed on the map?

-Are you using a modded version of IL-2?


No, those are objects already in the default airefield.
No, I'm using a clean 4.11 install.

I did my own test on that particular airfield but did not get the results you had. I suggest you post the mission if you want me to take a closer look at it.

PS - I still could not get into Gamefront. It might be a security setting on my end. I can't even bring up their front page.

Aviar

Why is it that when I fly in a QM with more than 2 enemy AI they all go after me? I have run 8vs 8 QMs (I can't go any higher because when I do I will have 2 or 3 flights of enemy AI all trying to get to me at once..) WHERE after the initial pass and usuallybefore i can even latch onto another bandit good there are at least 3 planes all on my tail .. even when I tell the friendly AI to attack.. or ask for help.. I still get doyuble and triple teamed and am usually out of the running before any help does anything... Is this just me or what?

Try flying from the rear of the pack and see what happens. AI will usually attack the first enemy it spots. If you are always leading the pack you are putting yourself in that situation.

This is a long-time issue and probably something that DT should look into fixing. (Limiting the number of AI planes attacking a particular enemy plane.) *For instance, in BoB II - Wings of Victory, you can go into the config file and set the limit there.

Aviar

I'll try that..

Aviar, I've just made the following test, and maybe it was my mistake... I've placed the Takeoff and Landing points reversed on the airfield (being the T spot the Takeoff point not the Landing point). I would like to know if this is normal behavior then...

I've started FMB and loaded the Bessarabia map. Placed one default He 111 H-6 on the map (ticked player aircraft). Takeoff from the mentioned airfield, near Tatar Bunar (AX6), straight from west to east. Added two more waypoints to the north and then back to Landing, on the same airfield, coming from west to east. At mission start, turned Auto Pilot on and let it go. The He landed ok, went straight to the T spot, then turned and began its long tour across the airfield, spinning over what seems to be all the supposed parking slots. After the tour, the plane stopped just near the T. It did not crash on any airfield object this time (though on the other mission it did, over a default object). When I've reversed the Waypoints, with Takeoff from east to west, landing over the T spot, everything was fine. That was my mistake then.

I've mentioned another behavior like this by mistake on another topic (4.11 General debugging), should have posted it here... ;)

It was a similar issue, but this time in QMB, which has default mission types to choose from!

Tested with a Fw190 A-4 on the Kuban map.
Just choose a flight of one (or even four) Axis Fw 190 A-4 (Ace) and start a QMB Scramble mission in Kuban Map.
The airfield in question is near Anapa.As soon as the mission starts, let the auto pilot take control. After the flight, when the aircraft reaches its landing pattern, it will land far before the strip on the descending part of a hill. When it finally reaches the airfield strip, it will take a tour there and visit most parking spots before finding the right one and stops. While it's doing that, the other planes in the flight will follow the pattern landing down the hill, but only untill the airstrip is reached, when they just disappear because the first plane is still fooling around the airfield. They will never reach their parking spots.

Make Absolutely Sure it's Destroyed!
 

Just flew a ground attack mission early in a Russian campaign on the L'viv map. Formation of nine I-153s to attack a train. I'm in the second of three 3-ship flights.

The train was totally destroyed during the initial bomb run. Multiple bomb hits were scored. The engine, coal car, and every car was hit and destroyed. However, the AI planes returned to make strafing runs on the wrecked engine and continued doing so until they were out of ammunition.

The AI looks at a train as a single unit/target, even though it has multiple cars hooked up to the locomotive. Even if the train is damaged and has stopped moving, the AI sees it as 'alive'...until every car in the train has been destroyed.

My guess is that you are mistaken. There must have been at least one train car still alive. However, if you can provide a track as proof....

Even better, you could post the campaign mission here and I would be happy to take a look at it.

*I assume you are talking about 4.11.1 unmodded.

Aviar

Yep. v4.11.1 Unmodded. No mods were ever installed.

The entire train was wrecked. I even did a low fly-by and paused just to take a close look and make sure. Any surviving cars tend to stick out in an obvious manner, but there were none. The engine, and it's coal car, was definitely wrecked but the AI planes were continuously targeting it after it was knocked out.

I don't have video but I can send the mission file if you're still interested.

You can compress the mission into a Zip file and then attach it to your post. I can then download it and check it out.

Aviar

Attached.

Had to change the extension from .rar to .zip in order to upload.

I tested the mission. As I was afraid, you were mistaken. Not all the train cars were destroyed in the bombing. (See the first screenshot)

As you can see, the locomotive was still intact. Now of course the 153's try and kill the remaining locomotive. (See second screenshot)

However, the problem seems to be that their weak machine guns are not powerful enough to destroy the locomotive, as I observed many direct hits. (I know in a recent patch the train damage models were changed, so this may be the answer....they may be more harder to destroy.)

After the 153's run out of ammo, they return to base. I would say that it's up to the player to make sure that locomotive gets destroyed. (Maybe bring rockets next time.)

Aviar

No disrespect intended, Aviar, but you explaining very obvious things here regarding the lack power of their machine guns in destroying the engine. I already know the I-153's machine guns aren't powerful enough to destroy an "active" locomotive, moving or not. I already understand that any car destroyed in the train will render the entire train immobile. I don't have a particular beef with successfully destroying the engine, coal car, gun car (if it has one) and all the other cars of the train. If some of the train survives, so be it. Move on and fly the next mission.

I've been playing IL-2 since it's initial release ten years ago; by now I know the visual differences between a destroyed and active engine, coal car, gun car, and regular car of both a Soviet and German train in the game.

The issue I pointed out in my original post is that the ENTIRE TRAIN, i.e. the locomotive, coal car, and all the other cars, was destroyed during the initial bomb run in the mission that I flew, and yet the AI made repeated strafing runs on the already destroyed locomotive. Again, the locomotive, and all the other cars, were destroyed. Period. Understand that. This isn't a point of pride or anything like that, it's just a simple fact.

Now, if you flew the mission once and the locomotive actually survived in your particular bomb run, fine. The AI returns to strafe the locomotive and will continue to do so until A: it is successfully destroyed, or B: they run out of ammo. In the case of the I-153 M62, the latter is very likely to occur. Once again, that is understood. Now, fly the mission again, and if the whole train is knocked out (as happened when I flew the mission) you will see that the AI returns to attack the destroyed locomotive anyway. Don't tell me "Oh, I'm sorry, but you're mistaken. The locomotive must have survived."

I wished I had saved a screen shot or video of the mission when it occured, but with the way the video replays are misbehaving in recent patches, I'll have to fly the mission again, hope the entire train gets knocked out again on the bomb run, and screen-shoot what the AI does after that.

I didn't think this would be such a big deal, but simply being told "Oh, no. You've just mistaken the locomotive as being destroyed" is insulting, frankly, and specific clarification was required.

Fair enough. I certainly didn't mean to insult you in any way. My only excuse is that I was getting ready for work, but I wanted to get back to you as soon as possible and so I was a little rushed.

I went back and tested the mission again. This time the entire train was destroyed (see first screenshot)

After that, the 153's did in fact continue strafing the destroyed locomotive. (See 2nd screenshot) So, you were correct in your report. I would suggest filing an official bug report with TD. You can even use my screenshots if you like, as they usually prefer some sort of 'proof'.

Aviar

Thanks for reporting and confirming. I don't think any further "official" reports are necessary, after all, this is the topic dedicated to AI bug reporting.

Thanks for double-checking Aviar. I haven't had time to play in the last couple days.

BTW, no hard feelings. It was like being called a liar when you know you're telling the truth, and that can be frustrating. I know you were only trying to help.

:cool:

It seems that problem with the trains is the old one, I tried it in 4.05 and it was the same as 4.11.1. Can somebody who have one of the older versions installed double check that.

Unsocial AI wing
 

I too have some strange AI wing behaviour since 4.11.1. I fly offline missions generated by DCG. I order flight #2 to join, leader says OK, then leaves with his mates for home. Same result when I point out the enemy and give order to attack. It seems to me that pre-set wayponts might be "stronger" then the orders of the squad leader. Can anyone confirm?

Hi sniperton, it is always good to record a track and share it, it is the easiest way for TD to look into issues. They may be very specific and hard to reproduce. In case of AI I've also had issues like you describe, but not always and found it very hard to pinpoint the circumstances under which AI will go foolish.

I know that low fuel level may cause AI to head for home, can this be a reason for what you are seeing?

Confirmed. I tried the same scenario (153's bombing an ammo train) in 4.08m and the 153's kept strafing the destroyed locomotive.

Aviar

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

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.

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!

With Murphy I can say that odd things only happen when ntrk recording is off...:confused: Otherwise I completely agree, and, yes, AI is not always foolish: that's the biggest problem -- at least so far as debugging is concerned. ;) As to fuel level, flight #2 left me after some 80-100 kms of flight with G.50 Freccias, so I don't believe it was the reason. Anyway, next time it happens I will check it.

Thanks for checking, fix ready for 4.12.

i'm sorry if somebody already talks about it ...

i notice that TB3 no attacking ground target not by level bombing ...

now they do it like Il2 ... yesterday i watch like two TB3 keep the formation goes down from 2500 meters till 200 meters and drop bombs on the car convoy ...

its not logical for this monster plane ...

I'm going to toss this up here in this thread, even though it might be considered 1. controversial and 2. a feature request, but I personally mostly view it as "buggy".

Simply put, the AI has ESP and can detect you trying to sneak up on them, even if it's from a completely unviewable quadrant.

For example, if I set up a mission in FMB. Identical aircraft, say 109E-4's, theater irrelevant but I like sands of time. I'll start the badguy on a level flight at 1000 meters flying a perfectly straight and level track at say 300 kph. I'll start myself about 2km directly behind and below by about 200 meters. Proceed to "sneak up" on the badguy as best I can, staying directly below and behind, which I know for a fact is within the blind area. With full mouse of trackir movement, visibility in my approach area does not exist. One would have to turn the aircraft several degrees on the horizontal plane to see back directly behind. No matter what, if I execute a perfect approach completely in the blind spot, the badguy will always, always "detect" me and go defensive when I'm close enough. The detection range varies by skill as far as I can determine.

I view this as a bug, there is no possible way one pilot could detect another one sneaking up like that unless they did some active, conscious flight direction change in order to "clear six". One should be able to "sneak up" on another aircraft in blind spots if done correctly.

Also would like to reiterate that I realize AI development is difficult, imperfect science at best with everyone pissing and moaning about his or her particular desires, complaints, etc. Also realize there are other bigger fish to fry, like tweaking the jets a bit or who the heck knows what else.

Is there any way we could get something done to help address this in 4.12?:)

But we already have this in 4.11, that's why the AI is performing manoeuvres to check their six.

When I set up a similar situation in the FMB, I was able to sneak up on the enemy AI 6 without being 'seen'. (Test mission is attached if anyone would like to check it out.)

When I set up a similar mission in the QMB, the AI always knew I was behind him.

I'm not sure why the AI in the QMB seems to be programmed differently.

Aviar

I've managed to sneak up on AI in QMB, too. I've also managed to be spotted, against all odds.

But imho it is better to have AI react to you when it should, then to have it not react when it should. AI programming is not a 0-1 issue, pun intended.

Please check how TB3 attacking ground targets ...
now they do it really wrong ... they acting like il2 Sturmovik... dive on target from 3000m till 500- 200 m ...

I don't know if this has been reported before, but there is something wrong with the strafing behaviour when the leader of a flight is the human player. The AI planes of a flight that is lead by a human player will not attack ground targets, even when an attack command is given. This only happens when the planes are not equipped with bombs or rockets. Bomb or rocket attacks are correctly performed by the AI. When the human player is not leading the flight and is just a wingman, the AI will correctly do the strafing attacks, but the players plane will not take part in the attack when flown on autopilot.

I have upload two test missions (see attachment).
In the first the human player is the wingman and the AI planes will strafe the target, but the players plane will not attack when flown on autopilot. In the second mission the player is the flight leader and the AI will not do a strafing attack.

Depends on the situation, he might have his own problems, be out of ammo or damaged. They were less agressive in 4.11 but in 4.11.1 there should be no difference between all AI flights and mixed flights.

Than just order them to do what you want.

Please, provide the mission and I'll take a look.

AI is the same but lot of AI code depends on random numbers which are not really random. Every mission will always start with the same sequence and unless there have been some events which break the sequence it will always play the same. In QMB type missions fight starts fast and there is no chance for that sequence to be changed.

So if you have a mission where AI decided to look at the area where your plane is they will do it every time you play that mission. For breaking the randoms quickly it's best to fire short burst with your guns.

Tried your mission and AI attacks targets without any command.

Autopilot will not attack if you use unlimited ammo, it attacked correctly with limited ammo when I tried your mission.

FC

For testing self-made missions I am always using the lowest difficult setting. Disabling unlimited ammo fixed the problem. Thanks alot for the advice FC99. :)

FC, sorry i started new company ( exactly same like that in i see this strange acting of TB3) and i think that mission was deleted ...

can give only ntrk records (((( sorry(

My #2 was happily floating around off to one side (watching the show ;) ) while the only 2 enemy AI left were trying to do me

To add to this..
On a career, I was #4 and we attacked and decimated around 6 russki bombers. On looking at the track I found 2 yak escorts about 1000 feet above the bombers, that just went around in circles while we had 'lunch'.

Sorry have no tracks or saved stuff, but will save in future.
:cool:

Enemy AI vs. friendly one
 

I posted a poll at SimHQ and thought could be useful make you aware of its output (at least so far). As you can see, it looks there's still half of user disappointed, mainly for too demanding enemy AI. Honestly, I'm one of these latter. Not a criticism, would be a suggestion. Here follows the link:

http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.ph...ml#Post3599699


Regards,
GB

My squadron flies coops regularly, and the new AI has revitalized this kind of game. Maybe you should try lowering the AI level in the missions you play until you get used to it. Just don't expect to shoot down loads of enemies every miossion as you used to. I myself have had to disengage dogfight and just let them be a lot of times, just like in real life.

In DGen campaigns it's fairly easy to adjust the AI to one's skill level by tweaking the numbers in the [Skill] section of DB file. I usually fly against something like A10,V20,N40 (10 aces, 20 veterans, 40 Normals) and can stay alive long enough to enjoy a given campaign. I also learned to expect a violent counterattack the moment I shoot down one of theirs :)
The only gripe I have about the new AI is their deflection shooting skills, which seems a bit too good in high-G turning fights. Perhaps the AI should have a limiting factor equivalent to human's blacking out.

In my view, it's not that the enemy AI are too good in 4.11, but that the friendly AI aren't up to scratch. The enemy AI may have always been better than the friendly AI but since 4.11 the difference is striking.

/ Stig

Thanks for your comments.

Indeed, I set AI=Easy in DGen Options and still a single error of mine causes my death in game. I don't expect racking up lots of victories in each mission but often just to survive (even if I fail a move...). I linked poll thinking this raises question level from opinion confrontation to statistic.

In the matter of friendly AI having an inferior performance, I agree. Even if I could just tell my Stuka Flight to correctly perform a low level attack on a truck column, and not just drop bombs anywhere with no reason, I would be glad.

Something that would be awesome for 4.12 is that you could tell your attack flight which profile to use (dive, level, shallow dive, skip bomb, etc.). Nowadays the AI attacks correctly only if you stick to the aircraft Java code role (a Stuka won't strafe even if it finds a light truck column, for example). And having your flight identify a target when you don't use padlock is a little hard.

+1

There are still some relatively minor quirks and errors in the AI behavioral routines that are thankfully far-between, but the recent AI overhaul has revitalized the game, offline and online. It changed the way I play the game. Often times I find myself now thinking and behaving as though my backside is really inside that aircraft (as opposed to feeling totally invincible and fearless, and being other-worldly aggressive in an artificially predictable environment). I've seen the AI do totally human things, like stall and/or crash in a panic, and I've seen some AI fighter flights actually turn around and run away from a fight.

In high G fights it is inevitable that the only shots AI will have are those "under the nose" blind shots and AI is limited in that regard. They anticipate your future point and shoot there. If you pull hard and than change your path a little you are pretty safe. That's basic evasive maneuver which you have to do against humans too.

Nevertheless I'll try to improve their behavior, it is funny though that since the introduction of new shooting model into the development version, about year ago, I'm constantly decreasing AI shooting ability. :grin:

There was a bug in 4.11 which resulted in AI planes under the player command to be less aggressive than the enemy and friendly AI which are not under player command. That's fixed in 4.11.1 and there should be no difference in behavior between friendly and enemy AI.

But there is a one other important difference, AI guys understand each other and they do their thing. It is different with human leader, players should ,in general, communicate with their AI friends more. If player is a leader he should act as one and tell AI what to do but at the same time he should take care to put his AI friends in the position where they can execute given orders.

Few weeks ago I played some coops with Microwave and in one of the missions I was in the FW190 with Spit on my tail. I called my AI wingman to help me but as long as I was maneuvering wildly AI was not able to follow me. Than I just did what I would do with human wingman, I set my plane in gentle turn, far enough to stay safe but close enough to enemy AI to keep him interested.

I repeated the order to my wingman to cover my butt and it didn't take long before he was right behind the enemy AI and blew him from the sky, perfect Drag & Bag, bread and butter of human Focke Wulf pairs.

Another "problem" with AI is that every player expect different thing from them, it's hard to please everyone.

I'm willing to communicate with my AI friends more, provided that I have some commands, like that 'Anyone help me!', under one key. In a dogfight I'm usually too busy to select a proper command from the list.

There was a bug in 4.11 which resulted in AI planes under the player command to be less aggressive than the enemy and friendly AI which are not under player command. That's fixed in 4.11.1 and there should be no difference in behavior between friendly and enemy AI.

But there is a one other important difference, AI guys understand each other and they do their thing. It is different with human leader, players should ,in general, communicate with their AI friends more. If player is a leader he should act as one and tell AI what to do but at the same time he should take care to put his AI friends in the position where they can execute given orders.

Few weeks ago I played some coops with Microwave and in one of the missions I was in the FW190 with Spit on my tail. I called my AI wingman to help me but as long as I was maneuvering wildly AI was not able to follow me. Than I just did what I would do with human wingman, I set my plane in gentle turn, far enough to stay safe but close enough to enemy AI to keep him interested.

I repeated the order to my wingman to cover my butt and it didn't take long before he was right behind the enemy AI and blew him from the sky, perfect Drag & Bag, bread and butter of human Focke Wulf pairs.

Another "problem" with AI is that every player expect different thing from them, it's hard to please everyone.[/QUOTE]

In 4.11.1 have lately for the most part been playing 4 vs 4 in QMB. When we engage the AI I have to order them to attack otherwise they just follow me around.

On quite a few occasions I have checked six to see my wingman there as he should be, but a bandit is flying right past him onto my tail! The wingman doesn't shoot at the bandit or even warn me.

There seems to be a whole different level of cooperation between the enemy AI compared to the friendly. Which is a good thing, they are a real challenge, and if the friendly AI were on a par with the enemy AI it would a make for an even more immersive experience.

/Stig

Isn't it possible to create "macros" which map a series of key strokes to single key?

Since we're on the topic of commanding AI. It would be nice if some of the gunner AI routines could be ported to wingman commands. For example, having your wingman be able to tell you to "break left/right" or "stop that" (if you're maneuvering too wildly for him to follow you).

If DT wanted to get really funky with the AI routines, they could include the following:

1) Ability to give warnings to ANY airplane in your flight/squadron - even if you're not in command.

A) Give the player the ability to warn of incoming enemies (currently you can't "call out" bogies if you sight them first - although the AI is generally good about sighting).

B) The ability to tell any airplane to climb/dive/break/evade if they're about to be attacked by surprise.

2) The ability to reassign AI under your command if you take losses. For example, if you lose 2 planes from your squadron, instead of each remaining plane flying solo, you can reassign them to make one pair of wingman and lead.

3) Better ability to communicate with your lead if you're wingman. In addition to the evasive and sighting commands in Suggestion 1, there should also be commands like, "I can't follow you.", "Can't comply.", "Slow down." and "Continue present action." Unlike standard commands, your lead doesn't necessarily have to follow them.

4) The ability to specify particular offensive and defensive tactics for your section/flight/squadron - things like "Thatch Weave" or "Lufberry Circle" and whatever the period name for "Drag and Bag" was.

5) Some ability for the player to program AI behavior - allowing him to make custom formations or implement his own squadron/flight tactics.

6) Some control over AI landing routines - so a flight/squadron leader can command badly damaged planes to land first/divert to auxiliary airfield.

7) Ability to command AI planes to leave the fight - i.e., "Break off," to stop attacking. "Go home," to leave the fight and return to base. "We're scrubbing the mission," to tell your entire squadron/flight to return to base without engaging the enemy - this is appropriate if planes in your flight/squadron collide or get badly shot up by flak before you ever reach the target, making it suicidal to continue.

8) Ability to control AI aggressiveness - from "be very careful" to "whatever the cost". This is appropriate for campaigns where you need to conserve planes/pilots or where certain missions make or break the campaign.

9) Differences in AI pilot behavior - especially for campaigns. Some pilots might be slightly better or worse at flying or gunnery than their nomimal skill level would indicate. Some might have better or worse eyesight - limiting or improving spotting ability (e.g., Greg "Pappy" Boyington's eyesight wasn't all that great - he often left the job of spotting distant bogies to the rest of the pilots in his flight). Some might be particularly reckless, prone to panicking in a crisis or outright cowardly. Some might be "by the book" while others might be willing to innovate new tactics. Actual "personality" for the people in your squadron would be fun, and give you even more incentive to keep your squadron-mates alive.

I tried that today on 2 occasions and it worked for me too, my wingman bagged the bandit on both occasions.

I also tested the issue of the friendly AI following the human player docilely around if not ordered to attack, thinking it may have been pre-4.11.1 hotfix.
But they still do that. I flew blue, 4 Fw190's(A4 142ata) vs 4 Spitfire Vb, and when I attacked the bandits my flight just followed me without engaging. I also allowed the Spits to catch us, ie. just flying straight and level while they closed in, and watched as they passed by my AI flight and attacked me without any reaction from my AI mates. Usually the bandits didn't bother firing at the AI, only going after me, but on one occasion my no. 4 was attacked and he broke calling for help. But no.3 didn't even respond, he stayed in formation behind me.

So in that respect at least, the friendly AI is limited and also unrealistic, you shouldn't have to order your wingman or members of your flight to clear your tail in that situation.

/Stig

Possibly an issue that needs some attention - AI fighters, when making passes at aircraft flying low and slow (usually damaged machines limping back home), quite often crash into the ground, even over flat land.

Another variation of the same problem - recently I've watched a badly smoking AI fighter about to belly-land. His wingman tried to stay in formation with him and crashed.

The AI pilots of a flight sometimes go 'ballistic' after combat. They let go of their controls and only pull up in the last second when they are about to dive into the ground, then let it go again. It has occurred in older versions too but I think it is more common now. If you are in command you can order them to rejoin, but if not, there is not much to do.

I know one way that should make it happen: You are the flight leader and use autopilot to fly into your landing waypoint. When you reach the WP, your map waypoints change into the landing circle route. If you disengage the autopilot now, any AI pilot who hasn't reached the landing WP by then will lose control. You need to wait for the last one to reach it to make them act normally. (It has been this way for long, not a recent problem)

I like playing with the AI a lot and just have a few observations about it.

The first thing I would like to bring up is the way the AI seems to be "wired" to your brain when you fly against it. By this I mean when you are on an AI pilot's 6, even though he should be having a little trouble seeing what you are doing back there, they seem to move in a way that is directly dependent on your control inputs, almost as if you are controlling the AI aircraft with your control inputs.
I can make almost all AI opponents do what I want to do and even fly in front of my guns with various control inputs. This lets me shoot down Ace AI that are in much faster aircraft by "commanding" them to climb and turn and scissor with my slower aircraft.

I thought that the ace AI would be more realistic if a slight delay was introduced between the time you moved your controls and the AI reacted to it. Not much but enough to make it seem like they had to look at what you are doing and move their own controls during a fight.

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.

Lastly I notice that the Ace AI should be a lot more effective than they are but for some reason when they are on the tail of an opponent or target they take extra time to do some redundant and useless barrel rolls etc.. This may help them foil certain tailgunners, but when they are on the tail of an enemy fighter aircraft all it does is wastes their energy and a lot of opportunities to make shots.

I still have the original IL2 installed, and the old FB also, which are both fun to play with now and then for various reasons. When fighting the Ace AI in the original IL2 a combination of their behavior and the vastly different flight/weapon models compared to IL246 makes it as interesting a challenge as ever. I would definitely say that IL246 is far better than the original IL2, but that there may be a few things worth looking at in the original IL2 AI etc. that might offer a useful perspective.

Thank you for all the wonderful work that is done on IL246.

109g6as v Lagg7 1944 ace is certainly interesting. When converging level but with him still 5km distant, if I engage WEP and start to climb he commits to another routine entirely which concedes advantage and makes him an easy kill, but if I don't climb or use WEP he goes for the head on shot. I haven't noticed him messing around much behind me though, just insanely attacking, even stalling into the deck attempting to turn much too quickly. No kill for that though ingame, more's the pity. If he's zoom climbing and you're below and in his six he will just keep climbing straight up with the usual outcome (him dead!) but will attempt 180 roll and dive as I come into gun range. All in all much more fun though.

Thank you for the AI FC99 and TD
 

109 vs La7 ace and 1vs1 in general improved greatly due to brilliant AI programming. But still there's some suggestions i would like to make.

As you said it seems that AI has trouble seeing player's dot after a 5km distance, AI ace often seeming to see player at the very last moment which makes it lose a great part of its maneuvrablity advantage (vs Luftwaffe types, for instance). I think this is why AI doesn't follow the climb...just a theory though...
Another thing, when head on La7 rarely fires at player, and when does very often misses, while player wont miss and will score (fatal wing or engine) hits: to me AI ace aiming should be far more accurate especially head on.
Another interesting thing i noticed is the way AI generally avoid head on by using rolls to move out of plan: could the roll be faster, as is now it often allows player to score hits.

Ai ace seems unable to aim when player (coming head on) is under its position and very close to the ground, when in this position it will never have a shot letting the engagement prolong itself when it should try to make it the shortest possible.

Close to the ground, well unfortunately AI ace have the greatest problems to fight efficiently, and if you slow down there to stall speed in scissors (even La7ace 50%fuel vs Bf109G14 80%), its dead very often. AI ace doesn't seems to know how to slow down quickly and to maintain low speed enough to have firing position before player: nose-to-nose generally ends up with AI defeated. Ai overshoots way too easily, could they perhaps zoom climb or barrel roll instead of coming back in scissors, exposing themselves to canon fire?

When AI sits in player's six following him in a diving spiral, AI seems to hesitate and disengages when a properly flown La7 would easily follow the maneuver (lag pursuit) and use its superior rate of turn and acceleration to keep position right on player's six: now he's leaving too soon, giving lots of degrees for free (sometimes even its 6 low), as if it lost its orientation, this prolonging the fight.

AI La7 ace (but so far i noticed this with all the good turners) will never try to shoot at an (moderately far to far target) extending player to force a break turn and have easy kill. Instead it stays patiently behind waiting for the wingover and the fatal (read above remarks) head on pass.

Also AI ace doesn't like neg G maneuvers, this can cause them to hit the ground apparently without reason (i thought it could be elevator trim related?). Same seems to occur when player snap rolls into a high speed turn close to ground (perhaps due to AI GLocking?).

I also noticed P40 early(flying tigers version) vs Ace Ki43: Ki43 seems to have a sort of unstability in the rolling axis, and i guess this makes him often miss when he's shooting. Other than that the other remarks also apply to this case.

Seems like AI aces don't like the high speed fighting of p51 when fighting them under 1000m with the 'Stang and to my surprise and fun, they often hit the ground for no reason. two times i witnessed Ki43 pilots bailing out without giving a fight!lol

The "slow speed close to the ground" fight is in general fatal to AI ace, i noticed that too while flying bombers against Ace La7. Perhaps this was a feature to allow bomber pilots a chance in offline campaigns. Fighters Aces take alot of hit against human controlled gunners, would be nice to see them actually attack more vulnerable parts from higher speed/angles, just like human ace do.

The zoom climbs and hard turns are new things i find great (i don't know why but reminds me of AI in LockOn when you fight canon only :) ) Give AI it's aggresivity and aim (head on, extending fighter, better close to ground ability, ability to decelerate quicker) and AI will be as deadly as aces online.

I cannot wait for the improvement, i'm really impressed so far, it's very nice what you guys at TD manage to get out of this game: you have my gratitude for this.

I also felt that the weight limit for AI aces seemed to be 50%, under this why no maneuverability gains?

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.

I hope this can be fixed in the future.
http://www.gqth.info/0.jpghttp://www.gqth.info/7.jpghttp://www.gqth.info/8.jpghttp://www.gqth.info/9.jpghttp://www.ymeu.info/test5.jpg

+1! When the AI got improved recently, I really hoped that I would finally be able to surprise it with slashing attacks or by coming from below and behind. No such thing. With the 'extra pair of eyes in the butt', the AI always know you're there and gets out of the harm's way just in time. In this way the game favours highly manouverable planes like I-16, at the expense of heavier fighters, like Bf 110.

AI doesn't always know where the enemy is, I've bounced them numerous times. That's one of the features of the improved AI. Attacks from behind and below do work, but only every now and then. AI often reacts to threats at their six because they are being warned by their wingmen, or are aware of the fact that you've just gotten to your six before you reach a spot where they can't see you. AI performs search manoeuvres, and also manoeuvres in order to maintain or re-establish visual contact.

Personally I prefer to have AI maybe a bit more aware than human pilots of equal skill, because as soon as you find a way to reliably beat AI the game becomes boring. AI completely incapable of defence against an attack from low six would be exactly that. I'm happy they manage to react to this threat, even if maybe a bit too often.

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!

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...

This....

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..

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.