4.13 development update discussion and feedback

[majorfailure]

Originally Posted by major.kudo

http://gachopin.no-ip.info/kudo/Fighter_2.jpg

I got you in your first post, but the drawing is just hilarious. And yes it would be nice to have battles end without one side totally wiped out. Tactical retreat is a word that is currently not in the AI's dictionary - they only try to run when they are already in too deep.

Originally Posted by major.kudo

http://gachopin.no-ip.info/kudo/bombardier.jpg
I want to play this in mltiplayer games.

Strange, never had this feeling. Have you ever tried this:
1.Find out at what %throttle and altitude your plane reaches what speed after ~10 mins flight -in QMB.
2.Fly towards target, accelerate with more rpm than needed for bombing, until you reach your bombing speed, then throttle back to desired rpm.
Meanwhile input data into bombsight -works from pilots seat.
3.Trim plane
4.Engage Level stabiliser
5.Switch to bombardiers seat, set bomsight to maximum useful forward elevation, towards target.
6.Correct your flight path with rudder trim -and rudder trim only!, or if target is too far off left/right, disengage level stab and adjust flight path.

[sniperton]

Great drawings, major.kudo!! Even my wife enjoyed them very much, and understood in a moment what you mean. Could we get some more, please?

[anikollag]

Thanks for update!
Vierling and camera for the bombs:

[Jami]

Thanks guys for your comments of AI skills. You have given great ideas and suggestions so far, but I hope that still more people would take part to this conversation.

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by Jami

Thanks guys for your comments of AI skills. You have given great ideas and suggestions so far, but I hope that still more people would take part to this conversation.

Why do we need more agreeing? They are right, or at the very least, what they suggest would be much nearer the truth than what we currently have.

Or are you hoping a lot of people will disagree, because you don't like what has been said?

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Igo kyu

Why do we need more agreeing? They are right, or at the very least, what they suggest would be much nearer the truth than what we currently have.

I'm hoping that folks from TD will read this, pick up on the data and ideas we've presented and make them their own.

In fairness to TD, I think that the work they've done on AI in 4.12 and 4.13 is magnificent. Due to their hard work, it's now actually challenging to fly against Average or better AI.

Even better, at least in 1 vs. 1 combat, planes actually behave like they were reported to do so historically. For example, fly a single Average AI Spitfire Mk IX vs. a single Ace AI P-47D-10 and you'll usually get the same results that Robert Johnson described flying a mock dogfight against a Spitfire pilot.

My only complaints are that AI still has some trouble with squadron level tactics, AI at all levels is more aggressive than they were historically - at least in QMB missions, and badly damaged planes still make stupid decisions (e.g., not immediately trying to run for friendly territory when badly damaged, not having the crew bail out until it's too late when flying over wooded or hilly territory).

So, while I might seem like I'm complaining, I'm actually trying to further "polish the gem."

[Jami]

Originally Posted by Igo kyu

Why do we need more agreeing? They are right, or at the very least, what they suggest would be much nearer the truth than what we currently have.

Or are you hoping a lot of people will disagree, because you don't like what has been said?

Well, I was actually the one who started this conversation and I couldn't agree more those things that has been said untill now. And Pursuivant just was quick enough to tell my thoughts about polishing this great sim.

[dFrog]

no update this Friday...

[Fighterace]

Originally Posted by dFrog

no update this Friday...

[julien673]

What about night fighter and radar )))))))) ?