Official Fulqrum Publishing forum

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)
-   Daidalos Team discussions (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=202)
-   -   4.11 - AI debugging (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=29040)

FC99 09-30-2012 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jumoschwanz (Post 462678)
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.

Well, that's rather normal, air duels are like dancing, what you do depends a lot on what enemy is doing.

Quote:

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.
AI react on your plane attitude not on your control inputs.

Quote:

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.
That's not intended behavior, we will fix it when we find exact cause for this.

Quote:

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.
What exactly you have in mind?

Quote:

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 took purpose built monster machine to beat human champion in chess. Chess is great game but you always have same position at the start. Same number and type of pieces. Movement is limited on 8x8 board. Compare that with Il2, 300+ planes, combinations of types, numbers and positions are infinite. And you want AI to make decisions in a fraction of a second. This is hard task for AI.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RegRag1977 (Post 462767)
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...

That is correct.

Quote:

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.
:grin: What to do now, some says AI shoots too good and some says it is too bad? No way to please everybody.

Quote:

Close to the ground, well unfortunately AI ace have the greatest problems to fight efficiently,
That's true and that's very hard situation for AI, detailed collision check can be very time consuming so some compromises are necessary to keep game smooth.

Quote:

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?).
That's probably related to one bug in ground avoidance logic, it should be better in 4.12

Quote:

two times i witnessed Ki43 pilots bailing out without giving a fight!lol
Cowardliness is not reserved for humans only, some AI values their lives more than the fight.

Quote:

I also felt that the weight limit for AI aces seemed to be 50%, under this why no maneuverability gains?
Where you heard this, I don't think there is anything like it in code.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luno13 (Post 462827)
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.

I'm afraid that we must make compromise here and make AI bit better than historical. IMO using Rookies and Average AI for the most part and some Veterans and Aces in historical missions provides good approximation of WWII skill level.

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_Freddie (Post 465139)
Plenty work to be done here.. don't be biased - just do it as it is/should be ?

Blackout is not plane dependent, it can't be more unbiased than that.

IceFire 09-30-2012 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_Freddie (Post 465186)
It seems so as every time they know exactly where to 'blind' shoot with a combination of all control surfaces, nearly a 100% of the time, which is an impossibility for any human, hence AI :grin:

Not only that.. with all the control surface agitation the AI still maintains a superior speed advantage.

I've practised my skills with the ace AI for years, but have never seen anything like this... it's like chalk and cheese. As I said .. a BIG AI fudge has occurred.

One doesn't mind the ability to 'lead shoot', but the ability to place the a/c in any 3D position without 'costs'... is a bit much. This in not coming from a noob.. it's coming from a 4000hr plus on FW190s sim person.

;)

I'm trying to visualize the problems and I'm not 100% sure what I'm expecting to see. Do you have any tracks recorded that illustrate what's going on? I'd like to see... if you can point out the timecode when weird things are happening that would be even more useful.

Bearcat 09-30-2012 07:07 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
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.
AI react on your plane attitude not on your control inputs.
That is good to know ...

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
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.
That's not intended behavior, we will fix it when we find exact cause for this.
That is good to know as well and hopefully will probably address the issues I raised with the friendly AI

Quote:

Quote:
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.
I don't know about that .. I think the 1946 AI is much better overall than the original IL2 AI.. in every way..

Quote:

Quote:
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 took purpose built monster machine to beat human champion in chess. Chess is great game but you always have same position at the start. Same number and type of pieces. Movement is limited on 8x8 board. Compare that with Il2, 300+ planes, combinations of types, numbers and positions are infinite. And you want AI to make decisions in a fraction of a second. This is hard task for AI.
I think the enemy AI is pretty nice.. especially since 4.10 .. it is the behavior of the friendly AI that gets me.. Heck if my AI wingman acted like the wing men of the bandit I am chasing I would be happier.. and maybe I am wrong but it seems to me that they do not both act the same. Even when I tell them what to do more often than I'd like there will be 3 or four friendlies flying around me while I have 3-5 bandits taking turns ripping me a new one at the same time..

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by RegRag1977 View Post
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...
That is correct.
Another good to know..

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
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.
What to do now, some says AI shoots too good and some says it is too bad? No way to please everybody.
I dunno about that one either.. I don't do too many headons with ace AI .. I usually loose no matter what they are flying.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Luno13 View Post
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.
I'm afraid that we must make compromise here and make AI bit better than historical. IMO using Rookies and Average AI for the most part and some Veterans and Aces in historical missions provides good approximation of WWII skill level.
I agree 100%. This is exactly my take and what I do when I made missions ..

Luno13 09-30-2012 07:36 PM

Thanks for the Q & A, FC!

Stig1207 10-02-2012 10:44 PM

Quote:
I think the enemy AI is pretty nice.. especially since 4.10 .. it is the behavior of the friendly AI that gets me.. Heck if my AI wingman acted like the wing men of the bandit I am chasing I would be happier.. and maybe I am wrong but it seems to me that they do not both act the same. Even when I tell them what to do more often than I'd like there will be 3 or four friendlies flying around me while I have 3-5 bandits taking turns ripping me a new one at the same time..


Hitting the nail on the head. The friendly AI are pretty much clueless compared to the opposing AI. A wingman would try to clear his lead's tail if he's in a position to do so, without waiting to be ordered to do so, and vice versa, that's the idea of flying as a pair, teamwork, supporting one another.
The enemy AI can do it, and the friendlies should be able to do so.

Stig

SPAD-1949 10-03-2012 02:26 PM

AI differences over the last versions
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Stig1207 (Post 466358)
Quote:
I think the enemy AI is pretty nice.. especially since 4.10 .. it is the behavior of the friendly AI that gets me.. Heck if my AI wingman acted like the wing men of the bandit I am chasing I would be happier.. and maybe I am wrong but it seems to me that they do not both act the same. Even when I tell them what to do more often than I'd like there will be 3 or four friendlies flying around me while I have 3-5 bandits taking turns ripping me a new one at the same time..


Hitting the nail on the head. The friendly AI are pretty much clueless compared to the opposing AI. A wingman would try to clear his lead's tail if he's in a position to do so, without waiting to be ordered to do so, and vice versa, that's the idea of flying as a pair, teamwork, supporting one another.
The enemy AI can do it, and the friendlies should be able to do so.

Stig

Well I saw a big difference in AI behaviour between 4.10 and 4.11
With 4.10 enemy AI was extremely agressive and there was little chance surviving a 4 vs 4 fighter encounter where all were set ace. Usually you were killed within seconds from a headon sniper shot, less then 5 rounds necessary. Also friendly AI were agressive and you stood little chance staying in formation when heading towards the enemy.

With 4.11 evrything seems a little to sissy. Your flight leader avoids the encounter, enemy AI lost lots of agressivity.
I added a simple fighter mission where it was immediately to be seen. Try it in 4.09, 4.10 and 4.11 and you will easyly recognize the differences.

K_Freddie 10-03-2012 04:09 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Control surface positions...
I'm not sure how the AI is modelled but in this pic the rudder and elevator positions are at max = instant violent stall.... Not so with the AI.
These positions are held throughout the turn.... Also :)
Doing a lot of crimea quickies... The Spit AI can do the most amazing turns and not black out, then while doing a mild turn just flies into the ground.
I'm beginning to enjoy pre-modded IL2 more :)

Pursuivant 10-04-2012 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RegRag1977 (Post 464662)
Yes they did though few of them survived to tell: sometimes they prefered to stay in a burning/hard smoking aircraft rather than to bail out above enemy controlled areas. Especially on eastern front (for obvious reasons), they would try to join friendly territory at all costs.

I can think of other obvious situations where a fighter pilot would stay with his plane if it was on fire:

1) Too low to bail out. The pilot would ride the plane down and try to crash land/ditch.

2) Close enough to base/smooth ground to possibly make an emergency landing. This option has claimed a lot of real life pilots over the years, since sometimes the choice to try to make an emergency landing rather than immediately bail out is the wrong one.

3) Over water, but close enough to land to possibly bail out or crash land on dry ground. Similar to the situation above, but particularly applicable when flying over shark-infested or extremely cold waters, where falling into the water was almost certain death.

4) "Doomed hero." Pilot is mortally wounded and/or plane is in too bad a condition to get back to base, but the pilot can still complete a vital mission by sticking with the plane until the very end. Very rare, but it did happen. A slightly more common scenario is where the pilot sticks with his plane long enough that it won't crash onto a friendly populated area.

5) Stubbornness. As long as the fire isn't burning him, a pilot might try to deal with smoke or fire rather than bailing out.

Many fighters carried fire extinguishers in the cockpits, and pilots could try to blow smoke out of the cockpit by slightly opening the canopy. The wind rushing over the gap created a partial vacuum which could suck the smoke out. They could also try to extinguish fires by going into long, hard dives, shutting down the engine, or shutting off damaged fuel tanks, which sometimes worked.

Pursuivant 10-04-2012 05:54 AM

I still think that Ace AI is too aggressive about taking head-on shots in meeting engagements where neither side has the advantage.

In "AI vs. AI" dogfights I've set up in the QMB, I see way too many "double kills" where Ace AI fighters take each other out during the first head-on pass.

Especially where one fighter has a big speed or maneuverability advantage over the other, the AI should try to avoid head-on shots and use their speed and/or maneuverability to set up a safer firing situation.


Another flaw seems to be that AI fighters who are superior in both speed and maneuverability prefer "boom and zoom" tactics rather than pure maneuvering, even when maneuver tactics would take the enemy out more quickly and with less risk to the attacker.

Furthermore, AI B'n'Z tactics usually don't use enough speed or altitude to get a really advantageous angle on the target. Often, AI planes will make a pass, then fly off to a distance of 2-3 kilometers before turning around and making diving attack from 20-30 degrees above, giving a human player plenty of time to try to "jam" the attack or take a head-on shot at the merge.


Finally, AI rookie or average pilots are still too prone to breaking off the fight and flying around before resuming the attack. Unless they've lost sight of their opponent, it's more common for inexperienced fighter pilots to be too aggressive rather than not aggressive enough.

An excessively aggressive rookie will burn off too much altitude and/or speed maneuvering to stay on his opponent's tail. Often, this is combined with target fixation, which leads to loss of situational awareness. Sometimes, it results in the pilot actually overshooting his target.

I don't know if IL2 models an inexperienced fighter pilot's loss of Situational Awareness when they're focusing on chasing or firing at a foe, but it would be a cool addition if it isn't already there.

Stig1207 10-04-2012 01:09 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by SPAD-1949 (Post 466490)
Well I saw a big difference in AI behaviour between 4.10 and 4.11
With 4.10 enemy AI was extremely agressive and there was little chance surviving a 4 vs 4 fighter encounter where all were set ace. Usually you were killed within seconds from a headon sniper shot, less then 5 rounds necessary. Also friendly AI were agressive and you stood little chance staying in formation when heading towards the enemy.

With 4.11 evrything seems a little to sissy. Your flight leader avoids the encounter, enemy AI lost lots of agressivity.
I added a simple fighter mission where it was immediately to be seen. Try it in 4.09, 4.10 and 4.11 and you will easyly recognize the differences.

I must stress that I haven't had time to try your mission probably, but I have flown it a few times in 4.11.and 4.10 on autopilot, and yes, I can see the difference. I think though that this stems from the overhaul the AI recieved in 4.11, where the AI won't always just wade into any fight, but sometimes may seek a more advantageous position before engaging or even running away.
So in general the AI in 4.11 are probably less aggressive in 4.11 than in earlier versions, but on the otherhand that probably makes them more 'human'. I consider the enemy AI much improved and more of a challenge in 4.11, but in some respects the friendly AI arn't in the same league.

I have attached a ntrk to illustrate what I (and Bearcat) have mentioned, where the friendlies don't react to bandits flying along side them and attacking the flight leader (yours truly), until I request assitance. In the track i haven't I haven't given the order to 'attack fighters' so the friendlies just follow me around in formation and then I more or less just let the enemy attack me.

Stig


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:39 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.