Do we need AI at all? I do not think so...
 

Well...gentlemen...

I think that we do not need AI at all, because, there are enough phisical models developed for first person simulation.

Now we have tanks, we have aircrafts, we will have some ships..probably. I am sure.

Soon this simulator will become all round war simulation.
If you see a tank, he is man driven and operated, if you see a submarine it is man driven and operated, same for the aircrafts.
My oppinion is:
The development team is loosing their time with AI. Thats all.

The better way is for example:
6 aircrafts fliable;
6 tanks drivable;
2 submarines drivable;
2 anty-submarine ships drivable;
2 heavy destroyer ships drivable;
2 trucs drivable;
2 anty tank guns operable;
2 anty aircraft guns operable;

and thats all +PLUS very detayled 3D models and phisics models.

There will be real war simulation! Man agains man.

Regards!

You should stop doing that. Seriously.

I guess this will come true with the MMO direction they are heading in.

No AI? So that means bombers without crew? Tanks without crew? Ships without crew? Useless...

There will ALWAYS be the need for AI. You don't seriously believe that there will be 500 players available to make even the smallest of battles happen do you? :-P

Just imagine one map, 600 km / 600 km whit 300 people on its.... its only 300 objet... think about that. Did you ever see human pilot try really hard to protect bomber... like in real life, or tank assault.... whit more than 2 human... lol . Maybe human as commander of formation... not for single unit. And think about the hardware........... in 10 yr the top end pc will struggle whit this game... like Lock On

That's the spirit....just kiss 70% of the COD gamers goodbye that play offline, makes complete sense.

Feel free to point me to the 40 human pilots and 300+ human gunners who want to populate my current on development mission.

And everyone want to be a pilot ;) .

Please stay well away from game development.

No AI for an MMO, oh wait, those do need AI.

For the newbs that have no clue of the game they just bought.

They're in the game for the first time, and their a55 is a wad of cookie dough.
After a few weeks, he was carved out of wood.

The cookie dough players will want AI just to learn the game and pick it up, instead of going out with others and getting sniped / bombing / rushed / shanked / detonated at spawn point by the uber players


And if you've been to this wonderland called mission4today . . . then you know lots. I mean lots. Like enough to vote out the US current president twice, americans use enough water bottles in a week to circle around the globe 12 times, works 60% of the time All the time . . .

Lots of people do campaigns with only online aspect is to download them.

AI would be pretty useful to keep the bombers flying in formation, the flak to send bursts up around your altitude etc . . .


And the first rule of game longevity is SDK
Second rule of game longevity is SDK

What does that have to do with AI?

Video game impression dents are done by AI (realistic AI) . And first impression helps with longevity. Can't have longevity if someone isn't into your game.




http://www.mission4today.com


Well people are entitled to an opinion, even if its wrong. The spirit of a good law just prevents wrong opinions from being imposed on other people. :o

There was a poll months ago, sigle player people were like 20%...

Hi. pls do not forget that the majority of players do not come here every day, in fact, the majority of players are not registered, they are who prefer offline play. (I say this based on the Hungarian community, il-2 and clod). On this basis, 70 percent more believable than the 20...

And I agree, the AI ​​is also important for the online play... no question.

You mean a poll in an online forum where 99% of the customers don't even bother to register?

:confused:

Sounds legit.

No more AI? Then why are you still playing historical combat flight sims? Because if you remove AI you will not get a serious representation of the historical environment but a pointless, shallow gangbang between fighters. No thanks ... I'll pass.

Sounds absolutely thrilling, cant wait to set off on my 3 month u-boat cruise.

no ai is horrible even for online gaming.do we need ai?of course we do.
i have never seen 20+ bombers in formation, flown by humans, and probably i never will.for those scenarios, which are essential in simulating any historical air combat, you just need ai. sorry, but your opinion is.......

anyway, you are probably stating, what we will face with 1c next project....no ai,pay to play on small maps against tanks and maybe even submarines, while the flight models suffer....

i dont know, and i have to wait for the announcement, but somehow i have the feeling, that cliffs was my last purchase from maddox games..

gents, please go and cast your vote in bugtracker's AI relevant issues from the "AI and communication" il2bugtracker issues.. thread

and understand once and for all, that the vast majority of this game's customers are offline players, and that AI is needed for online persistent battlefield simulation anyway.

With the June deadline to announce what they are up to, we should have some answers by 2 weeks.

I think this question is just filler .. the real question is, when do we get access to SDK, so we can fix AI bugs!

I whole heartly support the hard work the new russian team are doing to fix bugs ASAP but the bug list is growing faster, i think. And when you see bug reports like "the 98.76 octain fuel is only giving 123.78645 plbs of thrust on a winters day last sepquemby .. " and many people support this .. bug ? when the game doesn't have a proper "1946 like" mission recorder, you can see getting proper game play for offliners is going to take forever! :(

I really need access to the source code .. for dummies! :grin:

.

agreed:rolleyes:

yes. :-p

I don't think they'll release an SDK at all.

1+

I still use Illustrator all the time, why get rid of it? Wait... what?

Simply don't. This will get you in all kinds of trouble, says this offliner.

That suggestion/idea is pointless, nothing real to discuss.

Being a little of topic: It would be great to have "multiple" simulators in CoD or new versions on IL-2 that would be epic, tank, train, ship etc simulator would be epic!

You didn't really think this through did you...

I used to play offline only and I after playing online I would certainly encourage everybody to try online. Real pilots are so much better than AI. But even online play need lots of AI to make it work.

I've heard of many half-baked ideas, but this one tops them all.

Agreed. In Italy we use to say “frying air” to define discussing something totally removed from reality. But there is more. A simulator is software doing a simulation. It is its very nature to simulate everything: wind, grass, engines, gasoline properties, bullets, stonewalls, sea, beaches… Why on earth humans should not being simulated? The ultimate goal is exactly the opposite. If we had a really good human being simulation, then we could have not only crews, but also soldiers on the battlefield, and a really ultimate war simulation. We just need computers from year 2050…

The war and combat decisions, and skils (flight skils) are result of human psichics. Thats why AI can not be compared to human. So only humans can simulate war, because war is human product.

I agree on this:

AI fits for: trains, ships.

But for pilots AI do not fits, because human abilities and behaiviour are unique apearance of the nature. They can not be simulated.

What abbout "historical" missions...well they are historical only in your mind.
Thats why i say: more human envolvment, and less AI.

Pardon, but Bollocks. A military simulation without AI is impossible because human players do not follow orders (no snipes at current AI issues pls ;)), don't use historical tactics or fly any aircraft they're being assigned. Human players play for fun, their fun to be precise, and that means they will follow their own paths, do their own thing and if some kind of cooperation comes out of it that is mere coincidence.

True to a point. But AI can be programmed to act like the historical pilots (in theory, that is). No human player would follow tactics and orders which ran contrary to his common sense. Or would you adhere to flying vics when the Finger-4 is so much more effective? Pilots back then didn't have a say in such matters ...

And quite honestly: Given the amount of ego-driven whines, flames and crybaby alerts I had to see over the years I doubt the majority of people is interested in historical missions - all they seem to want is clusterf*cking with the latest über-fighters so that they can stroke their ego and pretend they're [insert-historical-ace] reborn. And there I can say with utter conviction: Thanks, I'll pass. :roll:

God beware you keep on,m8!

And to add to the points csThor pointed out: Not only do humans not follow orders - they also and most importantly do NOT have the psyche of a soldier during the times of WWII.
Do we lose our comrades in battle? Do we see them wounded, shot down, blown to pieces, traumatized? Do we experience this? Do we get wounded, shot down, almost killed? Do we kill?

The psyche of a gamer is totally different and thus you can't simulate "war" in games even with real people. In fact real people might be even worse than programmed AI.

The reason is simple: you say for pilots AI doesn't fit. Well, I say it's almost the other way round. Todays virtual pilots are very much different from the real pilots during the war. Not only we differ in psyche but also we have the knowledge that the pilots didn't have at that time. We know the precise numbers behind plance performance, structural weaknesses, FM capabilities etc.
We also do not have to be physically fit at all and many virtual pilots wouldn't even fit into a fighter pit.

And what about culture, media exposure? There are so many factors involved... even just the simple fact that we KNOW the outcome of the war changes everything. Historic campaigns? Not happening anymore, ever.


As I said in my first post: a game like CloD or anything like it without AI won't happen and wouldn't work.

Oh ya I forgot the devs are in Russia, so either you tell them what to NOT do (and they do it, so stop giving the right advice people!) or what anywhere is an insane idea that would be a challenge for the biggest dev team somehow will work, because its russia right?
I mean it must be true, wasnt this flightsim meant to be working? Its Russia's fault!

i think the IA is necessary, in every game, especially in war games like this.

I play.. Cliiffs..... of .... dover.... all the .... time .... off .... line .... rarely do... I .... play online ... at ..all...

+1

Hit the nail on the head with that one.

This is putting the "No such thing as a dumb question" theory to the test.

LOL

@BG-09 ... look mate don't be disheartened by the knock backs of your opinion. We're not attacking you personally, just your opinion on not having AI in the game.

Just keep an open mind when pondering such a question for future posts.

:) If I understand correctly, the same could be said for the dumb answer theory. :grin:

I can't see them releasing an SDK either, considering how much they have their work cut out just trying to get this sim playable at a basic level. Even if they were in a position to release an SDK to the community, I suspect this would just conflict with their future development plans anyway. Same reason we'll not see a proper SDK for Rise of Flight anytime in the near future. Unfortunate but understandable from a business perspective.

Thanka everybody for the oppinions stated!
 

Very interesting question for me is how many of computer resourses the AI is consuming...
More sophisticated AI must consume a lot of computing power...does the simulation engine suffers from this? Definitely...

Well, more human desisions, and more human generated actions in-game is better option...

The AI question is very complicated matter...definitely nobody will partcipate in online simulation, just as driver, driving a fuel truck as a dive bomber target. A lot of psichology is involved here...

Regards!

Sorry, BG, but your POV is seriously FUBAR. The simulation aspect sufferes without decent AI adn the more "human decision" you enter into the equation the less simulation and the more "mindless pointless clusterf*ck" remains. :(

Well, the BG thought is the idea that Luthier and Co. have .... in the MMO (their principal project), the AI will not exist, because all the vehicles, planes, etc will be driven by humans.

Personally I think AI should be one of their key points of improvement right now. We are in a relatively niche genre - even when you take tank simmers/ sub simmers / flight simmers etc. all into account without thinking that there could be any cross over between these fan bases (which I am certain there would be since I play 2 out of the 3 types of sim listed) As such without AI even as an MMO there is going to be a hell of a lot of empty space with nothing going on.

AI improvements are one of the last desperately needed fixes in CloD - after that a lot of the other remaining issues or missing things I personally can wait until BoM for as right now I've got a relatively stable game, which I can fly with my squad on a regular basis, can jump into ATAG for a bit of PvP when I fancy, and can fly offline or against the computer in - and the only thing that really reaks the immersion and lets it all down is the AI being so poor on a frequent basis.
V

I don't remember Luther saying they were going to remove all AI, that would be crazy... I do remember one of the WOVII AI guys offering his help to make AI a bit better, but I don't know if Luthier ever took him up on that offer... :cool:

I agree 100%

That is exactly what I mean...but this simulation of air war is attracting for now only virtual pilots, but not virtual tank drivers or virtual submarine mariners. Thats why we need AI it seems for complete war theater simulation.