PDA

View Full Version : So, Oleg, when will you be fixing the current 4.05 AI?



SeaFireLIV
04-29-2006, 04:34 AM
I`m sure you`ll continue to ignore this question, but I ask just in case you actually do mean to correct the faulty 4.04/5 AI. I have not flown offline since the spoilt AI and am slowing losing interest in IL2 due to this... (still playing online though, for now).

My previous threads have already explained it`s short coming problems. A simple return to the realistic 4.02 or 4.03 would make it much better.


Of course, I`m only one little consumer, in a world of billions of consumers, so I mean nothing to you. That`s ok. I`m just looking for an answer. I probably won`t get one, but I like to give every person I ask questions of a chance to respond....

Skycat_2
04-29-2006, 10:32 AM
I agree. The offline experience is aggravating and I feel sorry for anybody just coming to the game through the new DVD.

Last night I tinkered around with a 'simple' quick mission of Mosquito vs. Me-323 Gigant. The Gigant could outfly me even with one of its engines on fire. I know I spent at least half an hour trying to get on the Gigant's tail but he just kept turning and climbing, even with that bad engine, always staying above me and at an oblique. I turned off the game thoroughly frustrated with 4.04m and with the series in general.

GH_Klingstroem
04-29-2006, 05:18 PM
you must be playing a diffrent game than me. For me the AI has never been more realistic and more aggressive!
The only thing that needs to be fixed IMO is the continous rolling (since the AI never suffers from G-load the can do it forever) and that they can see you when you are behind them and below....
Otherwise, just make them average or easy if they are too difficult for you...

panzerd18
04-29-2006, 06:50 PM
I have the original IL-2. I just bought the DVD version but like the AI from the patched original IL-2 better

Treetop64
04-29-2006, 09:22 PM
The only things I'd like to see fixed are the issues with AI machines not being subject to the same overspeed conditions in a dive as the player, with their consequent structural stresses and failures; their lack of overheating engines; and lack of blackout conditions under high G loads. The AI is simply too fast too much of the time.

I was once chased down in level flight, and shot out of the sky by a pack of I-16s while I was flying a perfectly healthy Bf109-F4. That should have never happened. Period. The AI is too fast.

However, I will say that I like their behavior in combat, especially now that the AI flies to the strengths of whatever particular type of aircraft they are flying. They BnZ in machines that are optimized for BnZ tactics, and they TnB in machines at home twisting and turning in knife fights. No more P-38s trying to mix it up in a phone booth with Zekes. This is good.

Please, just fix the issues with the AI speed and superman strength in pulling Gs, as well as their complete immunity to structural failures in a dive. Everything else I can definitely live with.

shinden1974
04-29-2006, 09:55 PM
Originally posted by GH_Klingstroem:
you must be playing a diffrent game than me. For me the AI has never been more realistic and more aggressive!
The only thing that needs to be fixed IMO is the continous rolling (since the AI never suffers from G-load the can do it forever) and that they can see you when you are behind them and below....
Otherwise, just make them average or easy if they are too difficult for you...

we get it! you're a great sim pilot! the ultimate deskrider!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

...still I can't remember anyone complaining about difficulty, just idiotic maneuvers and unnatural speed, doesn't matter the difficulty level.

If it's good for you, what are you doing here? have fun! I think Oleg's brain works, and if he thinks everything is fine like you do, you'll get to keep your wonderful AI, and I'll keep flying 4.03!

NonWonderDog
04-30-2006, 01:01 AM
Idiotic maneuvers at unnatural speed aren't new to 4.04... not in the slightest. The AI has always done a snap roll as soon as you get a gun solution, they've always flown in a giant circle at unnatural speed until help arives or they run out of fuel, and they've always been able to catch me when I run if I'm in a slightly faster plane. If there's really a difference between 4.03 AI and 4.04 AI, I still haven't noticed it.

I think it's time to start a rumor that Pe-2 fixes the AI. Then no one will complain about the AI anymore, because everything you read on the internet is true.

SeaFireLIV
04-30-2006, 09:57 AM
Originally posted by GH_Klingstroem:
you must be playing a diffrent game than me. For me the AI has never been more realistic and more aggressive!
The only thing that needs to be fixed IMO is the continous rolling (since the AI never suffers from G-load the can do it forever) and that they can see you when you are behind them and below....
Otherwise, just make them average or easy if they are too difficult for you...

GH_Klingstroem,

You`ve been around enough to know that it`s not about difficulty at all. I`m not going to go into the macinations of it all except to say that 4.02, 4.03 AI behaved much more realistically. Once again, I believe that when Oleg changed the `wobble` for Human players this also affected the restrictions on the AI somewhat.

I also suspect that Oleg`s hesitant about changing AI because it`s probably quite a big job and even in the worse case scenario might re-affect the whole flight model (uh, oh, this`ll get the online-only crowd worried).

Oleg says little so I can only assume until he says different.

Also, where`s this supposed mystery fable thread whereupon once he spake and intoned that `Yonder wayward Intelligence of the Artificial will be fixed` ?

I hear about it, but never seen it.

DuxCorvan
04-30-2006, 10:09 AM
I like 4.04 AI, it's great... to make me play other games I had in oblivion... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Seriously, someone should give kryptonite to the 4.04 supernatural AI. In 'Crimson Skies' I could at least cheat the same than the AI.

Flying a historical mission in a scenario where you are the only one which is subject to the laws of physycs and your plane is the only one subject to its realistic specs, is a bit discouraging. A bit? No. It's VERY discouraging.

GH_Klingstroem
04-30-2006, 10:15 AM
Originally posted by shinden1974:
we get it! you're a great sim pilot! the ultimate deskrider!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif


For your information I happen to be an airline pilot IRL...

GH_Klingstroem
04-30-2006, 10:20 AM
I hear you seafireLIV...
And I also see the problems you talk about. I think everyone agrees that they should be fixed. Im all for it as long as they keep the AI as agressive as they are now. Also havent you noticed that TnB planes now TnB and BnZ planes now try to BnZ? Surely thats an improvement...?

VW-IceFire
04-30-2006, 11:10 AM
Originally posted by GH_Klingstroem:
you must be playing a diffrent game than me. For me the AI has never been more realistic and more aggressive!
The only thing that needs to be fixed IMO is the continous rolling (since the AI never suffers from G-load the can do it forever) and that they can see you when you are behind them and below....
Otherwise, just make them average or easy if they are too difficult for you...
The problem isn't their agressiveness...its their laws of physics defying stuff. They have it much easier than a human...moreso in 4.04 than previous patches. The actual routines are great...they have never been more challenging to get a bead on. On the other hand they have never before done some incredible moves that are essentially impossible by a human pilot no matter how good, disciplined, or capable.

shinden1974
04-30-2006, 02:05 PM
For your information I happen to be an airline pilot IRL...

oops, cool! lemme revise that...Your a great real life pilot, the ultimate Airline pilot!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

Gee...I'm an avionics technician in real life! ...from that I know exactly what I'm supposed to do now that I know your an airline pilot... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif now pull your pants down while I pucker up http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif (none of that is meant in harsh manner by the way)

...seriously though...I like the AI's aggressiveness and improved accuracy, which has never been the problem...The Ai has never suffered from human frailties but the AI in the past would rarely go into the zone you can't go.

Sounds like others see something different but here's my typical DF with the AI after I get on his siX: He immediatly noses down into a near 90 degree dive, to follow I must roll because I'll red out. He spirals during the dive and pulls out and very high speed, If I do the same I blackout, obviously he doesn't. Than up, down, up, down, spiral until his wingman gets you.

I deal with it by not following, eventually he climbs to me and it's an easy kill...*yawn*. If he goes into idoit -G spiral, I just climb and watch...*yawn*...it's not hard folks, just crazy, which I guess is suppose to mean 'good'.

slipBall
04-30-2006, 02:17 PM
I have enjoyed the new AI, mainly for the new increased aggreshion that they use. I really haven't seen any un-realistic move's performed by them. I'm not saying that that dosen't happen, only that I have not witnessed it. I would hate to see a fix in AI, that take's away the aggreshion. Some patches in the past demonstrate a huge swing in the thing's requested

ICDP
04-30-2006, 03:40 PM
SeaFireLV,

I looked throught the old 4.04 AI threads and found this from the following thread. Look for a post by NerdConnected.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/5271058714/p/4

Here is Nerdconnected's post (and I have no reason not to believe him).

SeaFireLIV,

FYI, just got a reply from Oleg. They've looked at some AI issues I've sent them (also pointed them to this thread of course), and Maddox confirms there are some issues with the current AI/FM and they will look into this and fix it.

However, he said they will not make a any code changes until the Pe-2 add-on and free map from Ian Boys (Burma) are released.

So, we just have to wait and hope that the Pe-2 add-on and the new map from Ian Boys will be released soon ;-)

It seems that NerdConnected an e-mail reply from Oleg about problems found with the 4.04m AI FM. Oleg said that there would be no changes to the code until after the Pe2 addon and the maps from Ian Boys are released. It seems that we will have to wait for the AI fix.

GH_Klingstroem
04-30-2006, 04:01 PM
I know exactly what move you are talking about shinden1974 and find it very annoying, but still I prefer the 4.04 AI compared to the 4.03...

I never found an offline mission difficult b4 but now I have to seriously fight my way out of a dogfight!

However, The best would probably be the 4.03 AI with the 4.04 aggressiveness and BnZ capabilities...

shinden1974
04-30-2006, 04:11 PM
I'm still willing to wait on this because I honestly think that they probably made an improvement to the AI and maybe made a small mistake that effected everything.

Oleg and crew are very busy, and Pe-2 was probably already ready to go before even 4.03. IAW, there hasn't been enough time for a patch or any type of fix.

I think we have a consensus now, and we are on the same page. Just hoping they improve things (including the assymetric recoil on the USN planes) in a patch or the Il-10 add-on.

SeaFireLIV
04-30-2006, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by ICDP:
SeaFireLV,

I looked throught the old 4.04 AI threads and found this from the following thread. Look for a post by NerdConnected.



Here is Nerdconnected's post (and I have no reason not to believe him).

SeaFireLIV,

FYI, just got a reply from Oleg. They've looked at some AI issues I've sent them (also pointed them to this thread of course), and Maddox confirms there are some issues with the current AI/FM and they will look into this and fix it.

However, he said they will not make a any code changes until the Pe-2 add-on and free map from Ian Boys (Burma) are released.

So, we just have to wait and hope that the Pe-2 add-on and the new map from Ian Boys will be released soon ;-)

It seems that NerdConnected an e-mail reply from Oleg about problems found with the 4.04m AI FM. Oleg said that there would be no changes to the code until after the Pe2 addon and the maps from Ian Boys are released. It seems that we will have to wait for the AI fix.


ah, yes.

Thanks, ICDP. I`m not unappreciative, but I saw this. It isn`t actually proof...

Oh well, perhaps I`m just being too untrusting and suspicous. Guess I`ll have to just trust Nerdconnected's uncorroborated post and wait after the add-ons are released...

Back to Oblivion till then, I guess. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

carguy_
04-30-2006, 05:09 PM
OLEG PLEASE I BEG YOU FIX THAT AI,IT HORRIBLE NOW.AI PULLING FECKING 70DEGREE HIGHSPEED SHOTS IMPOSSIBLE FOR A HUMAN TO DO THE CURRENT STATE OF AI IS VERY BAD

VENTING CUZ I WAS OWNED BY AI I16 IN AN IMPSSIBLE SITUATION!

sledgehammer2
05-01-2006, 03:09 AM
How many times have I logged on here hoping to see Oleg respond to this issue?! This is what it all boils down to for me. I agreed with SeafireLIV before and I will again... AI has basically ruined this whole thing for me.

My main beef isn't difficulty or aggressiveness, it's that the AI is too fast. And all the other stuff that everyone else says.

We all have our special love in this sim, and for me it's the PTO stuff, maybe because my Dad was a Marine in WW2. So, my favorite rides are the USN/USMC and IJN and JAAF birds. I agree with what folks have said about the Hog and the Hellcat and I wish to God they would get fixed.

However, that isn't AI so it's not germane to this thread. I am a realist... to be totally honest here the Pe-2 doesn't interest me at all, but I would like to buy it to support Oleg. I could live without it but I won't because I really want the Burma map and the other IJN and JAAF planes we are getting.

And to get that stuff I will need the Pe-2 add-on. HOWEVER.... my interest in this sim, and my desire to play it (I am an off-liner obviously) are fading because of this AI problem. If it doesn't get addressed then that will be a bitter pill to swallow. It may sound silly to some, but I don't see myself doing much flying if it stays the way it is.

Sledgehammer2

NerdConnected
05-01-2006, 04:39 AM
SeaFireLIV,

Here's your fish:

I sent Maddox some time ago some info about some little bugs I found. I noticed following:

1) Climbing bug: odd looking vertical climbing and near-stalling behavior when bombers are at 12 o'clock high. It happens when bombers
are at medium to high (5, 7.5 or 10km altitude) and fighters pass underneath in the opposite direction (edit: head on) and fighters want to climb to reach the bombers' altitude. They try a loop, but never get there. They nearly all go vertical, stall and tumble down trying to control the plane again. On many time this causes the fighters to loose track of their
target and they just cruise to the next waypoint. Looks to me there's an AI/FM bug.

Sometimes (more rare) it also happens when fighter pass from 12 o'clock high, roll and make an inverted loop to get on bomber 6 o'clock low and hit their bellies. While doing this they loose control and dive down at high speed only to recover near ground level. Wingmen which try to follow crash. Seen this happen to LA-7's against some high flying He-111's but also with FW190-A9's at relatively high altitude.

2) 'missile' bug (edit: Quick Mission Generator)

fighters with wfr g21 (e.g Fw190-A9) or R4M do not attack enemy bombers and just cruise along to the next waypoint. It seems they act like
bombers.

3) I also sent some suggestions about fighter vs fighter and fighter vs bomber ACM. A bit of a long story, but I suggested high speed fighters like eg. do335 and me262 need more manouvering time to perform their attacks.

Olegs answer:

"Curently, untill release of Pe-2 add-on we will not put any changes and release patches.

However you description was evaluated and my programmer thinking what to do.
So, after release of Pe-2 would be possible free add-on with the new map
(Burma from Ian Boys) and some minor changes in code."

(sent by Oleg on 3/6/2006 01:03 PM ;-)

The Pe-2 addon is done, so we can expect the new maps made by Ian and a small AI fix hopefully very soon.

I reckoned I would take Maddox two months, so that would mean 5/6/2006. So, maybe this week or next week ;-) Honestly, I don't know but my guess is we will soon get some new map(s) and some minor fixes.

Hope this helped.

Regards,

(edit: I also said I don't mind the AI 'cheats'. They're unavoidable and I can accept them. To me, fighter vs fighter AI is pretty convincing I think, but there are however some issues with fighter vs bomber)

Mark

joeap
05-01-2006, 05:47 AM
Honestly I don't find it that different.

Nimits
05-01-2006, 11:19 PM
Honestly I don't find it that different.
I am glad you don't notice it, really, truly I am.

On the other hand, the combo of the AI energy boost and the assymetric recoil on the 'Cats nd Corsair have made PF much less enjoyable for me at the moment . . . oh well, I guess that just leaves more time for campaign modding till those problems get fixed . . .

tagTaken2
05-03-2006, 11:35 PM
Originally posted by GH_Klingstroem:
However, The best would probably be the 4.03 AI with the 4.04 aggressiveness and BnZ capabilities...

+1

Think I'll stick to pe-2 bombing. On a 109 tail last night 100m behind, when he dips his nose... and then zooms half a km straight up. My jaw dropped... 20 seconds later I was punching eject. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

TankerAce
05-04-2006, 03:05 AM
I too hope the AI gets fixed. i am an offliner, and have had FB for two years (now AEP and PF), but thanks to an old machine and crappy joystick haven't played it all that much until recently. Haven't run in to too many problems, but at least from the PF campaign standpoint, have run in to a game killer.

Basically, the AI is completely stupid regarding waypoint pathing. In the USAAF campaign and the Japan map, was flying as part of an element of Tbolts. The DGEn created the altitude too low, so about 30 minutes into the flight we are coming up fast on a mountain. I pull up and fly over the mountain, while 7 P-47D-27s happily plow in to the mountain as if it wasn't even there. Needless to say I had to scrub that campaign. That was back in 4.03.

4.04, I decide to try it again. First mission, 30 minutes in, good ol mountain. I pull up, 7 Tbolts slam in to the mountain. Ugg, what a waste.

So basically I have to limit myself to campaigns on non mountainous maps, though thankfully with The Last Days and the DGEN4043 I can fly in the ETO, so I think my Jugs should stay well above mountain level.

All I humbly ask, make the AI smart enough to know when to not slam into a mountainside. Please....

Otherwise best flight sim I own, bar none. Well, I don't think you can compare Falcon 4 and IL2 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

WTE_Galway
05-08-2006, 06:00 PM
I am actually finding AI easier to kill lately but my suspicion is the mission generator now defaults to a lower enemy AI skill.

On the plus side the Ai now occasionally does some bright stuff http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

On a recent mission in a dynamic campaign I managed to damage three SB2's.

With the first the wing caught fire and it fairly quickly crashed and burned.

The other two however both managed to glide with no engines to a nearby airfield and crash land ... sliding spectacularly across the runway, narrowly missing parked planes coming to a final stop close enough to their parking area not to count as a kill.

Ratsack
05-11-2006, 05:19 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
I`m sure you`ll continue to ignore this question, but I ask just in case you actually do mean to correct the faulty 4.04 AI. I have not flown offline since the spoilt AI and am slowing losing interest in IL2 due to this... (still playing online though, for now).

My previous threads have already explained it`s short coming problems. A simple return to the realistic 4.02 or 4.03 would make it much better.


Of course, I`m only one little consumer, in a world of billions of consumers, so I mean nothing to you. That`s ok. I`m just looking for an answer. I probably won`t get one, but I like to give every person I ask questions of a chance to respond....

I agree with you that the way the AI applies the FM seems a little...optimistic. I don't think you're going to get a response, though, because asking him when he's going to fix the AI is like asking you when you're going to stop beating your wife.

cheers,
Ratsack

96th_Nightshifter
05-11-2006, 06:00 AM
Originally posted by Ratsack:
I don't think you're going to get a response, though, because asking him when he's going to fix the AI is like asking you when you're going to stop beating your wife.
cheers,
Ratsack

I've tried really hard to find the relevance in that statement. Are you saying he isn't going to fix the AI or or he is going to fix it but doesn't have a specific time scale for it?

Now compare those kind of answers and apply similar answers to the metaphor you used? see a problem there?

Ratsack
05-11-2006, 06:52 AM
Originally posted by 96th_Nightshifter:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ratsack:
I don't think you're going to get a response, though, because asking him when he's going to fix the AI is like asking you when you're going to stop beating your wife.
cheers,
Ratsack

I've tried really hard to find the relevance in that statement. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

S'alright, I'll explain.


Originally posted by 96th_Nightshifter:
Are you saying he isn't going to fix the AI

Yep.


Originally posted by 96th_Nightshifter:
or or he is going to fix it but doesn't have a specific time scale for it?

Nope. I said nothing about time frames. You introduced that.


Originally posted by 96th_Nightshifter:
Now compare those kind of answers and apply similar answers to the metaphor you used?

Which answers? And by the way, it's not a metaphor, it's a simile. The difference is that a simile is where you say one thing is like another (e.g., €˜She€s like a rainbow€), whereas a metaphor is when one says that one thing IS another (e.g., €˜The moon was a ghostly galleon, tossed on stormy seas€).


Originally posted by 96th_Nightshifter:
see a problem there?

No.


The problem to which I am referring is that the thread starter has titled the thread ('When are you going to fix XYZ?') in such a way that for Oleg to reply is for him to admit that there's something wrong. The original poster has left no space for the developer to save face. I'm suggesting this was a tactical error, given that he is actually asking for the game developer to do something for him. For free.

Clear?

cheers,
Ratsack

96th_Nightshifter
05-11-2006, 07:17 AM
fair nuff, got my Metaphors and similes mixed up.
I apologise, I saw the "wife beating" bit and lost my temper.

Col_Tibbetts
05-15-2006, 08:37 PM
Man its nice to see this thread hasn't been locked yet. My thread on this subject was locked after 15 mins over in the General Discussion forum. Its sad really. The company has resorted to censorship rather than admit they have a problem.

Anyway why is no one but me rasing the issue that there has always been a limited number of options around actually controlling the AI? Most flight sims of the 1990s had options where you could set up bracket attacks or split half your flight high or low. Heck, you cannot even tell your wingman to break right or left!!! How are you supposed to set up the ol' drag and bag?

I guess in Olegs world pilots barely worked together in WWII...

H4wkw1nd
05-16-2006, 04:26 AM
Originally posted by Col_Tibbetts:
Man its nice to see this thread hasn't been locked yet. My thread on this subject was locked after 15 mins over in the General Discussion forum. Its sad really. The company has resorted to censorship rather than admit they have a problem.

Anyway why is no one but me rasing the issue that there has always been a limited number of options around actually controlling the AI? Most flight sims of the 1990s had options where you could set up bracket attacks or split half your flight high or low. Heck, you cannot even tell your wingman to break right or left!!! How are you supposed to set up the ol' drag and bag?

I guess in Olegs world pilots barely worked together in WWII...

The sims you are referring to were jet sims, weren't they? My memory is shot, but I can't recall a prop sim with bracket or break high/low AI commands...

joeap
05-16-2006, 05:25 AM
Originally posted by H4wkw1nd:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Col_Tibbetts:
Man its nice to see this thread hasn't been locked yet. My thread on this subject was locked after 15 mins over in the General Discussion forum. Its sad really. The company has resorted to censorship rather than admit they have a problem.

Anyway why is no one but me rasing the issue that there has always been a limited number of options around actually controlling the AI? Most flight sims of the 1990s had options where you could set up bracket attacks or split half your flight high or low. Heck, you cannot even tell your wingman to break right or left!!! How are you supposed to set up the ol' drag and bag?

I guess in Olegs world pilots barely worked together in WWII...

The sims you are referring to were jet sims, weren't they? My memory is shot, but I can't recall a prop sim with bracket or break high/low AI commands... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Me neither.

SeaFireLIV
05-16-2006, 09:35 AM
Originally posted by Ratsack:

The problem to which I am referring is that the thread starter has titled the thread ('When are you going to fix XYZ?') in such a way that for Oleg to reply is for him to admit that there's something wrong. The original poster has left no space for the developer to save face. I'm suggesting this was a tactical error, given that he is actually asking for the game developer to do something for him. For free.

Clear?

cheers,
Ratsack

You are trying to be far too esoteric and clever by half, Ratsack, and half of what you think I mean isn`t.

My statement has given Oleg plenty of room to manouever, not none. I have continuously supported Oleg over successive generations of Patches and his great work. Oleg knows this, most of the regulars know this.

I`ve been called a `fan-boy` more times than I`ve had hot dinners. I`ve done much to help keep the `faith` alive.

But oh, how quickly people forget. Just because I love Oleg`s sim does not mean I`m not going to say when I perceive a fault. I`ve flown offline many hundreds of hours and can tell when something`s wrong with AI`s actions.

I`ve explained in detailed what seems wrong and I believe this happens mostly with Ace AI.

It`s NOT a tactical error, it`s NOT about saving face, Oleg doesn`t need to.

Stop talking when you don`t know my history in the community here. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

And this stupid `beating wives` term, I certainly don`t understand at all.

Clear?

Hoarmurath
05-16-2006, 10:24 AM
ok, so, where are the tracks illustrating the problem?

lowfighter
05-16-2006, 12:23 PM
Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
ok, so, where are the tracks illustrating the problem?

Before asking for tracks, it would perhaps be nice if you state your own opinion. It can sound like:

Placebo, AI are the same as in 4.03

Placebo, the AI didn't change at all from 1.0

Yes, I see a positive change from 4.03 to 4.04,05, AI act more realistically

Yes, I see a positive change, AI are more challenging than in 4.03, although some of their flying is a bit weirder than before.

AI are less realistic, they perform more neckbreaking maneuvres than in 4.03, but I still think they don't violate the laws of physics.

AI are less realist, they perform more neckbreaking maneuvres than in 4.03, and I suspect they violate the laws of physics to some extent.

Your oppinion please?

mwhincup
05-16-2006, 01:23 PM
Ratsack, that was hilarious. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

I'm sure Oleg is not afraid of criticism as long as it is supported by credible evidence. The consensus is that there is a problem and I've no doubt the team will be working on it. (Though I don't see any harm in reminding him of the most important problems)

Now I must go and check my Pe-2 addon to see if he's fixed the asymmetric recoil bug...

Hoarmurath
05-16-2006, 03:47 PM
Originally posted by lowfighter:

Before asking for tracks, it would perhaps be nice if you state your own opinion. It can sound like:

Placebo, AI are the same as in 4.03

Placebo, the AI didn't change at all from 1.0

Yes, I see a positive change from 4.03 to 4.04,05, AI act more realistically

Yes, I see a positive change, AI are more challenging than in 4.03, although some of their flying is a bit weirder than before.

AI are less realistic, they perform more neckbreaking maneuvres than in 4.03, but I still think they don't violate the laws of physics.

AI are less realist, they perform more neckbreaking maneuvres than in 4.03, and I suspect they violate the laws of physics to some extent.

Your oppinion please?

My opinion is that the game shouldn't be changed based on opinions, but on facts. So far, i have seen a lot of opinions, but no tracks.

NonWonderDog
05-16-2006, 03:57 PM
No, no, no; you don't get it. You have to state your position first, otherwise your statements have to be taken at face value. If you don't tell us your position (either for or against, none of that "gray area" ****), people on each side of the debate won't know whether to ignore you, ridicule you, use your support to validate themselves, or misquote you in order to bolster their own arguments.

Don't you know anything about debating on the internet? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


Personally, I see "it's broken, fix it" as rather harsh (particularly without hard evidence), and I seem to remember fastastic AI maneuvers in every version. Since 4.00 or thereabouts the AI has been more adept at utilizing the strengths of their aircraft (no more knife fights in P-47s), but that's the only change I can state with certainty.

SeaFireLIV
05-16-2006, 04:02 PM
You know what happens, Hoarmurath. I could post a `track` once I figure out how, and knowing the sceptics here - Look at people who see tiger tanks being blown up by P-51s guns when it isn`t happening from clear footage, or B17 rear bombers gunners who apparently don`t shoot back because the footage `shows` it-

I can guarantee people would still find reason to poo poo any evidence I put down. I remember spending ages sticking up pictures of details of bomber formations and avoidance and landing procedeure, and after all that, people just either moved the goalposts or complained that my screenshots were too big.

After that, a guy`s less inclined to go to that aggro just to prove to you or another forumer that I am NOT hallucinating. Now if Oleg asked, that would be a different story...

Sorry, Hoarmurath, but unless I see it`s worth my while posting a `track` for you isn`t going to happen.

You are not the person i`m appealing to.

Hoarmurath
05-16-2006, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:

Sorry, Hoarmurath, but unless I see it`s worth my while posting a `track` for you isn`t going to happen.

You are not the person i`m appealing to.

Well, if you are not interested into showing us your finds and discussing the matter, why do you post this here? There is an email for bug reports.

WTE_Galway
05-16-2006, 06:45 PM
There seem to be a number of totally unrelated complaints about the AI going on:

1. unrealistic manouvres and abilities that give AI an unfair advantage against the player(excessively good zoom climb for example)

2. weird behaviour that spoils the "immersion" factor .. (examples .. the typical frieght train effect of a whole squad chasing a single target ... also the failure of AI to return to base when badly damaged o low on fuel)

3. things that effect your score in game (example, when flying wing, if you badly damage a target your commander invariably steals the kill even though it is already going down)

4. Stupid or inept behaviour even from "ace" pilots which results in the loss of squadron members you have been nurturing for silly reasons (example your two best pilots with 50+ kills collide in the landing pattern and die)


Overall though .. I find the AI issues an anoyance but acceptable. I play a lot of offline campaigns.

shinden1974
05-16-2006, 06:59 PM
"Purpose of Oleg`s Ready Room:

1) Dialog with the developer:

a) Questions regarding IL-2 series and future flight simulations.
b) Suggestions for current products and future line of products.
c) Personal questions €" but please, be reasonable

2) Bugs and possible inaccuracies reporting:

a) All bugs, such as graphical, sound, controls, AI, maps €" any show stoppers must be reported to PF@1C.RU and if you wish, added to €œinsert version here€ patch bugs sticky thread. As was pointed out many times, it is very hard to hunt down all bug related threads scattered between 4 forums, nobody is going to do it. If you want to make a difference, please do as it described above, it will be greatly appreciated.
Note: with graphical, sound, controls or any other related issues €" please include dxdiag and conf.ini, screenshot and description of the bug. If It is possible to record ntrk file, please do so. It is very important that you will include all that in the e-mail.

b)Anything questionable as far as accuracy of this simulation concerned should also be reported to pf@1c.ru with enough materials to prove it. Do not send something like €œ I feel€¦. I Think, We thought€ more likely something like this will be ignored. Feel free to discuss anything in question in this forum but same rules apply. Anything that starts with €œ I feel€¦. I Think, We thought€ will be moved to General Discussion.
Also, please do not start a thread on the same issue multiple times. Once is enough. If several planes have the same issue, please list all those planes, describe the issue and provide documents that say otherwise. There are over 200 planes in this simulation and all of them could be affected by the same problem, there is absolutely no need to start a thread for each plane, one is enough."


that's from the sticky, I looked and looked and I couldn't find

3) submit track to Hoarmurath so we can have an endless arguement about whether the AI is 'right' or not as opposed to letting a grown man like Oleg decide.
This is an old one and a request to follow up on emails already sent.

Hoarmurath
05-16-2006, 09:04 PM
Well, why don't you take a closer look at the 2b part...

Where is the material?

shinden1974
05-16-2006, 10:24 PM
Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
Well, why don't you take a closer look at the 2b part...

Where is the material?

I'm looking...your name still isn't there!

let me clarify...why would anyone send you anything? who are you? are you one of the programmers?

If someone wanted to have an arguement/discussion with you about the AI, that would be in GD right?

Can someone post a question for Oleg here, or do we have to get a permission slip from you?

I don't get what your beef is. If you think everything is fine, what are you worried about?

Hoarmurath
05-16-2006, 11:48 PM
Well, i don't see your name either, so it seem that this forum isn't here for your personal use.

So, the question stand, where are the materials. If there is no materials, then this question have nothing to do here, and mods should move it to GD.

WTE_Galway
05-16-2006, 11:56 PM
Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
Well, i don't see your name either, so it seem that this forum isn't here for your personal use.

So, the question stand, where are the materials. If there is no materials, then this question have nothing to do here, and mods should move it to GD.

I am confused.

Oleg has indicated a possible code rework to address AI issues may happen at the same time as Burma is released.

What is the point of extra evidence ?

Hoarmurath
05-17-2006, 12:55 AM
If Oleg have said so, what is the point of extra thread?

WWMaxGunz
05-17-2006, 01:54 AM
I notice this thread has not been moved to GD so perhaps conditions of 2b have not been met.

OTOH some of the claims having to do with AI having uber FM do not make sense after Oleg has
announced the AI have the same FM as players. I might suggest that the AI flies with perfect
control and always trimmed, can't be matched on minute scale but can be out-thought in large.
There is also the problem of judging energy states and distances of the LOD's that has many
times people screaming about impossible moves that makes things worse.

Kill stealing and the rest of the bonehead things are not mistaken observations though.
Better communications perhaps would help or if no radio then what?

Sometimes I think that AI is missing higher level status for when to run, etc, and other
times it acts right but there are different AI levels so what to say? Real fighter pilots
do not all act the same and some were very unreasonable.

RamsteinUSA
05-17-2006, 02:07 PM
??!! WTF?? you mean there is actually a real live push on to fix the P51 so the wings don't break off in a dive??? I don't belive it,, this thread is probably ready for the round file, and we will live with these problems till the end of time..

NonWonderDog
05-17-2006, 02:18 PM
This thread doesn't make sense to me. If you want to appeal directly to Oleg Maddox without people on the forums challenging your claims, send an email. If you want to get support on the forums first, you're going to need some sort of demonstration of your claims. Otherwise, what's the purpose of this thread? It won't be seen unless people post in it, not everyone who posts in it is going to have the same opinion, and noone is going to be persuaded to agree if there's no evidence. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

WWMaxGunz
05-17-2006, 03:12 PM
Originally posted by RamsteinUSA:
??!! WTF?? you mean there is actually a real live push on to fix the P51 so the wings don't break off in a dive??? I don't belive it,, this thread is probably ready for the round file, and we will live with these problems till the end of time..

WTF? WTF? WTF sim are you running? I'm on 4.04 exe's and 4.05 SFS files here.
Funny how I can pull a P-51C or D out of a dive clean past the beginning of wobble speed, 840kph
without ripping the wings off *provided I do it gently*.

My stick settings for pitch are 64 to 100 in steps of 4. My stick is now a Saitek X-52 but the
sliders were the same when I had a Logitech Wingman not a year ago.

If your sliders are in any kind of steep line or bowl shaped curve then you have to go slowly
with the stick cause the little bit of pull near the center is a *lot less* than the same little
bit of pull farther out.

The only way to get linear response is a straight line, all sliders the same value.

Check yourself for how you use the stick. Is the weight of your hand or arm resting on the
stick? If so then you're going to ham-hand the stick. Same if you hold the thing tight.
Same if you get fixated on a target and lose track of your hand, it takes fine control esp
for a plane with as easy to move controls as the P-51 is modelled with which does give you
a lot of authority even at extreme speeds. No matter the plane, the throw of your joystick
is 100% of *available pilot strength*. Pilot strength goes farther at high speed in the P-51
than in any 109 at the same speed. The 109 however has greater control at lower speeds so
it's not a one way street.

Suggestion: only fly one plane, the P-51, for at least a month. Spend time just flying
without combat where you can concentrate on where the stick is, how fast you're moving, and
where the nose goes among other things. I'm guessing you don't mess with prop pitch much
either, if I'm right then spend time seeing what you can get out of that too. Maybe I'm
not but I can't see how anyone who has spent much time just flying and practicing maneuvers
will have trouble losing wings.

It's like playing EAW and learning just how far you could go without going into a crazy spin.
The spins are not realistic but the sim itself is an excellent teacher for stick handling and
SA. Run EAW at 90+% sensitivity and you will learn fine stick control if you can get that far
and not spin on any regular basis.

The more realistic the sim, the less it is suited to jumping into combat and calling that your
training. It is also not bright to jump from plane to plane as reflexes do get trained and
you won't be really good with any of them. Of course if you only fly the P-51's now then you
should see if your stick is loose or it's just you, either can be fixed.

WWMaxGunz
05-17-2006, 03:18 PM
Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
This thread doesn't make sense to me. If you want to appeal directly to Oleg Maddox without people on the forums challenging your claims, send an email. If you want to get support on the forums first, you're going to need some sort of demonstration of your claims. Otherwise, what's the purpose of this thread? It won't be seen unless people post in it, not everyone who posts in it is going to have the same opinion, and noone is going to be persuaded to agree if there's no evidence. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

You've just characterized over 80% of complaint posts except for the last part.
Many who have the same 'problem' at the feel level will join in for the chorus.
Doesn't mean wrong, or right, it's just not a good way to communicate or get anything changed.

Isn't it time for a huge campaign to get 190's to turn easier with less bleed? It's been a
while now. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

shinden1974
05-17-2006, 05:22 PM
Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
Well, i don't see your name either, so it seem that this forum isn't here for your personal use.

So, the question stand, where are the materials. If there is no materials, then this question have nothing to do here, and mods should move it to GD.

Never mind, I don't want this thread to get locked or fill it with anymore of this mindless back and forth. Maybe you can spam all the other materialess threads here also.

Thanks for banning me Mod hoarmurath, these forums need more overbearing *******s like yourself. see ya.

SeaFireLIV
05-18-2006, 01:08 AM
Originally posted by shinden1974:
3) submit track to Hoarmurath so we can have an endless arguement about whether the AI is 'right' or not as opposed to letting a grown man like Oleg decide.
This is an old one and a request to follow up on emails already sent.

LOL. Had to reformat PC so couldn`t come back here, but thanx, Shinden. You`ve said in a nutshell what I should have said and really meant to say. I`ve explained what I feel is wrong before, I`m not doing it again. I`m not in this to go into a roundabout argument with certain individuals whom I`m sure cannot make Oleg do anything.

Actually, I think I did make that clear in my last post! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

p.s. Hoarmurath, once again, you miss the title of the thread. Oleg looks here too, y`know. I like the way you didn`t deny that you`d go through a song and dance even if I posted your tracks for you. It seems you really do just want an endless argument.

Hoarmurath
05-18-2006, 03:27 AM
Endless argument?

That's easy to end, post tracks illustrating the perceived problems.

carguy_
05-18-2006, 05:47 AM
The meaning of this threas is
THE AI SUX FIX IT OR ELSE!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

WWMaxGunz
05-18-2006, 08:10 AM
SeaFire, since 4.04 is no longer supported it might be good idea to remove the 4.04 from
the thread title... I think you can do that?

I really doubt that AI will get the extra level of process unless changes from BoB code
will be adapted. I have done such compile and analyze in RT code and done right the higher
level takes very little extra CPU compared to the importance of the task. It is mostly to
set or change a status based on few other status. I think the heavy load is in the tactical
as that is always 'right now' while higher levels can delay evaluation for seconds.

However the writing, the ruleset, and wedging all that into an existing project that was
never designed for it could also take major time. What I wrote, I wrote around such a thing
and not as an added module.

SeaFireLIV
05-18-2006, 08:30 AM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
SeaFire, since 4.04 is no longer supported it might be good idea to remove the 4.04 from
the thread title... I think you can do that?

.

Yes, I was just testing Pe-2 4.05 to see if the AI had improved. On levels below Ace it`s ok, but once the Ace appears, then it begins again... I`ve certainly seen the incredible deflection shooting begin... I would still like to test just a little longer, to be sure.

I think the real problem comes when you many Aces duking it out i e, collisions, super speed manouevers, etc.

Hoarmurath
05-18-2006, 08:45 AM
If i understand correctly, you hadn't tested the last patch AI before today?

And it seem you are upset by the ace AI being good at deflection shots?

Something else? (and don't forget the tracks)

Brain32
05-18-2006, 09:06 AM
Plane and simple, current AI sux and it sux big time and it's NO FUN. And if somebody think they fly realistic and have same FM like we do he obviously doesen't play against AI at all. I'm sorry but if Spitfire outrolls my FW190 at 600km/h, that is not right, same as 109 which magically recovers from a 800km/h dive(nice elevator can I have one of those for my 109?). Also I would like to be able to control my plane when I black out http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif and zoom at 10km/h "plop" my nose down and accelerate to 400kmh in a blink of an eye, non overheating engines would also be a neato feature especially for my Tempest http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif
Hmm what else? I know! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Seeing backwards would be awsome coupled with cat reflexes.
Look guys I still play vs ace level and I still shot them down, but the overall feeling when fighting them is pretty arcade, Crimson Skies commes to mind...

Hoarmurath
05-18-2006, 09:22 AM
That's a lot of statements. Can you back them up with tracks?

ICDP
05-18-2006, 09:54 AM
He doens't need too, just play the game to see the truth about the awfull AI. I laughed out load when Oleg said IL2 series had the best AI of any simulation http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

It's not the worst but it sure isn't even close to the best.

See through clouds: check
See at night: check
Use simplified physics: check
Use simplified engine management: check
Defy gravity: check
Ignore damage to aircraft: check
Ignore orders from player: check
Can't level bomb: check
Can't dive bomb: check

I played the Pe2 campaign with the "recommended" settings and none of my flight will drop their bombs!!!

Overall the IL2 series is the best WWII sim available but it is not the best in any single area apart from possbily graphics and FM and I haven't tried them all.

Hoarmurath
05-18-2006, 10:02 AM
He doesn't need to?

Well, i will check again my shortcut for launching FB, maybe i was playing some other game all the time.

Yes, the AI can be very dumb. But it seem that this isn't what these people are complaining about. And i wonder where you have seen AI that weren't dumb in a flight sim.

Hoarmurath
05-18-2006, 10:04 AM
Use simplified physics: check
Use simplified engine management: check
Defy gravity: check
Ignore damage to aircraft: check

how did you check these four?

SeaFireLIV
05-18-2006, 10:14 AM
Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
If i understand correctly, you hadn't tested the last patch AI before today?

And it seem you are upset by the ace AI being good at deflection shots?

Something else? (and don't forget the tracks)

You understand incorrectly. And you assume incorrectly. You are also stuck in `asking for tracks` mode. Have you taken in none of what`s been said? Please stop trying to be difficult for difficulties sake.

Not that I care, but you`ll just wear yourself out pointlessly. I for one am not going to have a personal 1 on 1 with you.

ICDP
05-18-2006, 10:20 AM
I frequently play PF 405m and have found the AI to be exceptionally dumb. I seldom get any wow wasn't that AI amazing moments. I frequently get the laugh out load AI ******* moments such as the two Hurricanes who decided to fly a wonderfull formation right into the sea during my last campaign mission. Or the entire flight of eight AI Pe2 who refused to drop their bombs. Or the seven wingmen who flew after one damaged Hurricane leaving me to fight off the other five. Or the badly damaged P51 who followed my Fw190A all the way accross normandy rather than go home.

I very seldom fly a mission that doesn't have at least one ******* or cheat AI moment. I know there are no such thing as perfect AI in a combat sim but there are other sims that do better than the IL2 series. BoBII WoV has some very excellent AI, they still defy gravity ocassionaly or give some odd moments but overall still better than the AI in PF.

ICDP
05-18-2006, 10:29 AM
Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
Use simplified physics: check
Use simplified engine management: check
Defy gravity: check
Ignore damage to aircraft: check

how did you check these four?

Simplified physics: The AI don't suffer from excessive G forces, They can pull full control deflection even at high speeds. Simply leave the autopilot on during combat to verify this.

Simplified engine management: The AI don't suffer from engine overheat, simply leave the autopilot on during combat to verify this. The coolant temperature NEVER rises under AI control, watch the instruments to verify.

Defy gravity: The AI can climb at impossible speeds and don't spin/stall. Simply leave the autopilot on during combat to verify this.

Ignore damage: If you suffer damage that causes your plane to become very hard to control simply turn on the autopilot and watch it fly as if nothing is wrong. Obviously I am referring to damaged wings.

Hoarmurath
05-18-2006, 10:59 AM
The AI don't pull as much G as you do. never.

The AI don't overheat because it doesn't use WEP.

Well, i have done enough climb testing to guarantee you that AI isn't doing anything special. If you can't climb as well as the AI, then you just don't know how to best climb.

Ignore damage? While on autopilot, how do you check what the AI do with controls/trims? You are probably upset as the AI isn't swearing all the time about its damaged wing?

Curiously, when i test AI, using autopilot or AI controlled planes, i don't experiment the same as you. I was probably lucky and got a FB special edition, complete with dumb, but believable AI. Or maybe it is that i don't use FB in english, maybe there is a special AI for english users. Who knows.

I would have liked to see those strange behaviour you are describing, but i can't reproduce them myself, and nobody want to show me tracks illustrating them.

Brain32
05-18-2006, 11:31 AM
The AI don't pull as much G as you do. never.
Very brave statement, but same as we, you can't prove that, all I know is that due to my expirience with some planes I can ride the gray area pretty efficient while in the same time AI pulls mega-sharp manouvers to come to my six.

The AI don't overheat because it doesn't use WEP.
Interesting, then they are too fast. Have you ever flown a close match up in speed, without the WEP you should catch them with ease every time - not so in the game...

Well, i have done enough climb testing to guarantee you that AI isn't doing anything special. If you can't climb as well as the AI, then you just don't know how to best climb.
Again you miss the point, human controlled plane can zoom the same, but at the top you will get to the point of stall and enter a spin, AI will not.
I don't understand how did you miss the control stiffness at high speed problem with AI, you wan't us to prove the Sun is hot http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif. I've mentioned 2 extreems 109's elevator and Spits aileron.
Now don't get me wrong I still think AI is quite good if not the best in some areas(for example team tactics, drag and bag especially), but in some other it really sux...
Also, about shooting did anybody else noticed how even Ace AI sux at small angle turn-fight shooting while in the same time it can hit you between the eyes in insane deflection shot...

ICDP
05-18-2006, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
The AI don't pull as much G as you do. never.

I doubt anyone even remotely agrees with this. In fact this issue has been the core of many threads here on Ubi. So laughable


Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
The AI don't overheat because it doesn't use WEP.

Another good one http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
The AI does use WEP it just doesn't say WEP eanbles on the screen, check the boost levels of the aircraft on autopilot to verify this. I just checked a 1v1 QMB with the Tempest v a 190D9 and the AI most certainly uses BOOST and DOES NOT OVERHEAT IN THE PROCESS.


Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
Well, i have done enough climb testing to guarantee you that AI isn't doing anything special. If you can't climb as well as the AI, then you just don't know how to best climb.


This requires no comment other than we all see how the AI can retain energy after steep climbs. We would stall and spin but the AI does not, they retain control through impossibly slow speeds.


Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
Ignore damage? While on autopilot, how do you check what the AI do with controls/trims? You are probably upset as the AI isn't swearing all the time about its damaged wing?


Next time you take some wing damage that causes lateral instability swith on the autopilot and watch as the AI can fly as though nothing is wrong.


Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
Curiously, when i test AI, using autopilot or AI controlled planes, i don't experiment the same as you. I was probably lucky and got a FB special edition, complete with dumb, but believable AI. Or maybe it is that i don't use FB in english, maybe there is a special AI for english users. Who knows.

I would have liked to see those strange behaviour you are describing, but i can't reproduce them myself, and nobody want to show me tracks illustrating them.

Why should we produce traks showing faults that can be easily replicated by creating a simple QMB mission? The levlel bombing issue is a confirmed bug that requires a contrived workaround by the player. The player has to ensure that autopilot is enabled when passing over the IP waypoint or the AI ignore the primary target. The dive bombing bug is also a verified bug and a fix has been requested many times on these boards. As for the see through clouds and perfect AI vision at night don't even try to claim these don't exist. These are all parts of the AI and as a whole these make the AI less than decent for anything other than a quick QMB as offline campaigns are an excercise in frustration. The friendly AI frequently ignore your orders and practically every mission ends up with the enemy AI forming a neat congaline after my plane.

If you have never experienced these issues then you aren't flying offline enough.

Hoarmurath
05-18-2006, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by Brain32:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> The AI don't pull as much G as you do. never.
Very brave statement, but same as we, you can't prove that, all I know is that due to my expirience with some planes I can ride the gray area pretty efficient while in the same time AI pulls mega-sharp manouvers to come to my six. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
you are welcome to activate autopilot and then use UDP to check how many G AI is pulling. Your statement about how AI can catch you when you are blacking out only show how few you know about combat maneuvering.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> The AI don't overheat because it doesn't use WEP.
Interesting, then they are too fast. Have you ever flown a close match up in speed, without the WEP you should catch them with ease every time - not so in the game... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
They are not too fast, in fact, they have the exact same top speed as you. Easy to check, just have a look at IL2compare, it gives AI perfs. You can do just the same. Concerning the AI using WEP, i guess you are, once more, speaking about how you can't do what it does in combat.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Well, i have done enough climb testing to guarantee you that AI isn't doing anything special. If you can't climb as well as the AI, then you just don't know how to best climb.
Again you miss the point, human controlled plane can zoom the same, but at the top you will get to the point of stall and enter a spin, AI will not. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Most people stall at this point because they are trying to shoot at the AI. Common mistake, just keep your aoa as needed for best climb, and you will continue climbing as happily as AI do. If your plane is a better climber, you will eventually manage to catch it in the climb.


I don't understand how did you miss the control stiffness at high speed problem with AI, you wan't us to prove the Sun is hot http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif. I've mentioned 2 extreems 109's elevator and Spits aileron.

Control stiffness? It would be fun to see AI trying to do what you do in front of her in order to follow you. Mine never do that, it just fly doing the minimum of maneuvering required to stay behind me.
And when AI is in front of me and begin to do high speed maneuvers, i start cutting off the power. What AI do is done at the expense of its speed, most of the time i overshoot it because of one of those snap rolls AI like doing as evasive maneuver.

I would suggest less swearing about AI uberness, and more training. AI is easy to beat, even at ace level. The only problem i had is that the AI changed tactics, so i had to change mine as well.

ICDP
05-18-2006, 12:51 PM
There is no point trying to prove what has already been proven as facts with Hoarmurath. He is obviously Oleg under another name http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

He honestly believes what he posts despite being proved wrong on many points. Such as "The AI don't use WEP" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Best to ignore his tripe posts entirely

Hoarmurath
05-18-2006, 01:31 PM
Originally posted by ICDP:
There is no point trying to prove what has already been proven as facts with Hoarmurath. He is obviously Oleg under another name http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

He honestly believes what he posts despite being proved wrong on many points. Such as "The AI don't use WEP" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Best to ignore his tripe posts entirely

You have proven something? where?

All i have asked from the beginning is some proof. But as we can see, all this end in a lot of personal attacks and evasive answers like "everybody knows", "obvious problems", "just launch the game and you will see". Where are the facts? If these problems are so obvious, why is it so hard to get a track illustrating it?

ICDP
05-18-2006, 01:56 PM
Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
You have proven something? where?

I have proved that the AI do use WEP and don't overheat their engines.

I have a track that I can e-mail you showing a 1v1 QMB with a Tempest versus a Fw190D. I show the boost levels under human control using 110% throttle and WEP, I then reduce throttle and turn off WEP and enable autopilot. Instantly the AI goes to the exact same boost levels as WEP and 110% throttle and stays there until the fight is over. At no stage during AI control did the engine temperatures rise. During the fight the AI was doing some very fast rolls that a human pilot could not match at the same speeds. Beyond doubt the AI is NOT overheating and they are USING WEP constantly during combat. I am not saying they shouldn't be given some boosts but the point is you are wrong on this issue.

NerdConnected
05-18-2006, 03:31 PM
Ratsack,


Originally posted by 96th_Nightshifter:
Are you saying he isn't going to fix the AI

Yep.

[QUOTE]

Just curious. Is this your opinion on the AI matter or did you get some kind of confirmation from Maddox in which they say they won't fix the AI?

Mark

vonSpinmeister
05-18-2006, 03:57 PM
The AI issue has been brought up many times in the past. Oleg either won't or doesn't care to fix the AI. And yes they are uber AI. They preform antics that non I can't even try to match. And I've yet to see one spin out making a turn "on" the water. In the last patch they can even land safely after flying 10km without engines running.

Hoarmurath must be flying an entirely different IL2 series than the rest of us.

RCAF_Irish_403
05-18-2006, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by Brain32:
Plane and simple, current AI sux and it sux big time and it's NO FUN. And if somebody think they fly realistic and have same FM like we do he obviously doesen't play against AI at all. I'm sorry but if Spitfire outrolls my FW190 at 600km/h, that is not right, same as 109 which magically recovers from a 800km/h dive(nice elevator can I have one of those for my 109?). Also I would like to be able to control my plane when I black out http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif and zoom at 10km/h "plop" my nose down and accelerate to 400kmh in a blink of an eye, non overheating engines would also be a neato feature especially for my Tempest http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif
Hmm what else? I know! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Seeing backwards would be awsome coupled with cat reflexes.
Look guys I still play vs ace level and I still shot them down, but the overall feeling when fighting them is pretty arcade, Crimson Skies commes to mind...

Dead On and Colorful as ever Brain

SeaFireLIV
05-18-2006, 04:46 PM
I think now it`s time to close this thread. I have the impression Oleg has heard the message and while I seem harsh, I still believe this is the best WWII flight sim available at the moment. Just that AI needs returning (or improving) to at least something out of 4.02/3 imho.

It`s time to pause and see what happens with his latest add-ons. If no change, I`ll query Oleg once again. I have a feeling something is and will be done. Nerd connect also provided some evidence of this.

It`s up to you mods to close if you wish. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

NerdConnected
05-18-2006, 04:56 PM
Originally posted by Brain32:
Plane and simple, current AI sux and it sux big time and it's NO FUN. And if somebody think they fly realistic and have same FM like we do he obviously doesen't play against AI at all. I'm sorry but if Spitfire outrolls my FW190 at 600km/h, that is not right, same as 109 which magically recovers from a 800km/h dive(nice elevator can I have one of those for my 109?). Also I would like to be able to control my plane when I black out http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif and zoom at 10km/h "plop" my nose down and accelerate to 400kmh in a blink of an eye, non overheating engines would also be a neato feature especially for my Tempest http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif
Hmm what else? I know! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Seeing backwards would be awsome coupled with cat reflexes.
Look guys I still play vs ace level and I still shot them down, but the overall feeling when fighting them is pretty arcade, Crimson Skies commes to mind...

Brain32,

Make sure you don't mix up FM (and DM) with AI. If AI planes use some kind of reduced FM (very likely) , it just gives them a better flight envelope with fewer restrictions and greater capabilities.

AI is something else. Most of the issues you mention are entirely FM related, although solely for the AI's FM.

AI is about making the right descisions and making maximum use of the available capabilities, i.e. the FM. E.g. using acceptable and believable ACM, using proper tactics ('know' when to break off, run or attack, 'know' when to turn back because fuel is low, bank, split-s, when to fire rockets, bail out, gain alititude etc, etc.)

When you discard the AI FM issues, the AI of Il2 is pretty good. Still, it has its quircks. Strange and annoying things still happen, but give me a flight sim that does all of these things right. I don't know a single flight sim that does all of these things right and that's problably because there aren't any. Good AI is so extremely difficult to program.

I do believe however, that Il2's AI does not suck and it does not certainly suck big time. It's not even arcade too.

Just let's hope some of the remaining AI issues will be fixed by Maddox. Maddox never let us down in the past, so for once, just trust them. They've at least earned that right by now.

Mark

WTE_Galway
05-18-2006, 07:11 PM
Originally posted by ICDP:

I have proved that the AI do use WEP and don't overheat their engines.


Not sure about the WEP thing but its pretty clear AI do not overheat .. theh same thing occurs with your own plane on autopilot.

In fact its a cheat of sorts in difficult missions offline .. let the autopilot take off and get you to the combat zone and you arrive with a totally fresh barely warmed up engine.

Viper2005_
05-18-2006, 08:44 PM
Since the AI is trying to replicate the way in which human pilots fly the aeroplanes in the sim, I think that comparisons between online and offline experience have merit.

In my experience, real pilots fail in the following ways (in rough order of frequency):

i) Lack of situational awareness; this is the most common problem by far. High workloads tend to make matters worse, since the task (such as setting up a firing pass) takes priority over maintaining SA, often without the pilot even noticing. Obviously, high workload aeroplanes suffer from this to a greater extent than low workload aeroplanes. Lack of situational awareness comes in all sorts of flavours, from not seeing the bandits at all, to mis-identification. Misidentification often causes not only friendly fire incidents, but also tactical "mistakes". If I'm flying an Fw-190A9 and see an eliptical wing and RAF markings, I might assume that I'm fighting a Spitfire and try to extend, only to be chased down by a Tempest. Right decision, wrong aeroplane.

ii) Lack of gunnery skills. Analysis of server stat pages reveals that a 10% gunstat is generally representative of what might be described as "good gunnery". Most pilots are quite bad shots, and often need to have an easy angle to do any damage. If they miss, most pilots over-correct (high stress = high gain) and the result is a spray, rather than a stream of bullets. Most pilots are pretty bad at judging distances accurately. As such, they don't open fire at a consistent range. From day to day any given pilot might vary by 50% or more in the range at which he opens fire. This is particularly true if his situational awareness is limited, since incorrect aircraft identification results in incorrect range estimation. And of course individual pilots have their own preferences. This variation from pilot to pilot and day to day obviously results in deflecion errors, but also makes attackers somewhat unpredictable.

iii) Lack of flying ability. Simple stuff; some pull to hard and stall. Some fly straight into the ground. Some break their engines one way or another. Many more than you might think actually run out of fuel. Some mess up their landings. Some fail to takeoff, especially if carrying bombs. Some dive too fast and break their aeroplanes that way. More subtly many pilots pull slightly too hard in the heat of the moment and buy their angles at too high a price in energy. This is the most common failure in flying technique. Incorrect engine management is very common and costs some people a lot of power, especially in aeroplanes with manual supercharger and mixture control. Dead feet; the rudder can give a large advantage in low-speed flight, especially in scissors.

iv) Bad tactics; trying to turn with a Spitfire in an Fw-190 for example. Glaring errors are rarer than you might at first think since Fw-190 pilots are told time and again not to turn with Spitfires. If even a quite inexperienced Fw-190 pilot sees a Spitfire, he's quite unlikely to elect to turn with it. Generally gross tactical mistakes seem to be the result of pressure; once people run out of options they'll often start turning, perhaps in the hope of delaying the inevitable. Many aparrant tactical mistakes are aren't mistakes at all; they stem from a lack of SA and aren't actually decisions at all. For example, when being bounced, nobody would decide to fly straight an present an easy target - they do so simply because they haven't seen the bandit and are making choices based upon only the limited information available to them.

v) Bad strategy; taking the wrong route to the target, perhaps hanging around for "just one more pass"... Few pilots take the time to plan their routes carefully to reduce the chances of interception. Bad strategy rarely gets people killed however; it's just one of those things which "doesn't help".

vi) Incorrect weapons useage. A classic example is using an AB500 with a delay at low altitude; the submunitions often don't have time to arm before impact. Then on the next flight the pilot sets a delay of zero to overcome this problem. A few flights later he takes an SC500 to kill tanks, forgets about the delay and blows himself up... This is quite rare for the simple reason that the people who mess up tend either to learn or to quit bombing! However, other more common problems include such as, shallow dive angles leading to accidental skip bombing, steep dives pressed to far resulting in CFIT, or departure during pullout leading to unCFIT. In both cases, T can stand for Terrain, Tanks or Trees...

I would suggest that the mark of an effective AI is that it should exhibit similar failure modes with roughly similar relative frequency.

In my view the AI is very good at flying, but seems to make the wrong kind of mistakes. At lower settings it seems to have perfect SA (witness the way in which it'll break just as you close to convergence range, even if you're in its low 6 blindspot; it is also very good at judging distances (in addition to the convergence thing, it always seems to open fire at the same range). When shooting, it often fires for seconds at a time with the bullets missing by ~ 10 feet without attempting to correct.

It also seems to have an amazing skill at energy management even at lower settings, which most real pilots simply can't match.

Still, it's a useful training aid for online combat; I don't fly offline a lot so I shan't presume to comment upon campaign flying, other than to suggest that the removal of the "i" and the addition of the letters "e" and "h" would make it more fun! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

Hoarmurath
05-18-2006, 10:50 PM
Originally posted by WTE_Galway:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ICDP:

I have proved that the AI do use WEP and don't overheat their engines.


Not sure about the WEP thing but its pretty clear AI do not overheat .. theh same thing occurs with your own plane on autopilot.

In fact its a cheat of sorts in difficult missions offline .. let the autopilot take off and get you to the combat zone and you arrive with a totally fresh barely warmed up engine. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would really like to see that track of AI constantly using wep, must be very interesting. Mine never do.

I did a simple test to get the AI to fly at max speed. With the FMB, i just putted a flight going from airstart from point A to point B, very simple, and i asked that flight to go at max speed. I did it with P-38, and the max speed the FMB allow for this plane is 675 kph. Then, i launched the mission, and engaged the autopilot. The plane started at 675 kph, but speed decreased quickly, as the autopilot would not go beyond 100% power setting.

BTW, if you can't arrive with a cool engine on target, you certainly have a problem, because the default cruise speed from point to point in the FMB is 300 kph. I maintain this speed in the P-38 with 50% prop pitch and slightly less than 40% power setting.

The AI have many shortcomings, the one i dislike most being its SA. It would be nice if AI would stop seeing through clouds, for sure. But having some ufo FM isn't one of these shorcomings. The AI just manage the plane better than most people do. However, considering that it is rather dumb and never change tactics, it stay easy to beat.

ICDP
05-19-2006, 12:43 AM
Hoarmurath,

Create a 1v1 QMB with you flying a Tempest against a Fw190D9. Once started go to full throttle (110%) and engage WEP at 100% PP and take a note of the boost levels. Then reduce throttle and turn off WEP and after the engage autopilot. You should note that the AI goes to the same boost levels as 110% throttle + WEP. Take a look at the temperature guage (below the boost guage) and note that it doesn't rise when under AI control. The WEP engaged message does not come on under AI control but neither does any other aircraft control messages (gear/flaps or throttle etc).

The track I made lasts three minutes and the AI controlled Tempest never overheats. If I use manual control and use WEP + 110% throttle the engine overheat message will come on at just short of two minutes. I tested four times and the engine always overheats at full power at just short of two minutes in the Tempest.

Some of the so called AI UFO moves are attributed to the lack of spin or proper stall modelling for the AI. While human controlled aircraft will drop a wing or enter a spin at stall speed the AI will simply float gently and gain speed in a shallow dive. How many times have you witnessed an AI aircraft stall in a tight turn? (not damage related).

As I have stated previously the AI in a sim is a collection of many little pieces that all make up a whole. The ability of the AI to put up a decent fight 1v1 is not the only part to look at. The level bombers are broken, the dive bombers are broken. The AI regularly ignore your orders, or even worse acknowledge your orders but do nothing anyway. I rarely play an offline mission where it doesn't end up with the comical conga line party. Four plus enemy AI chasing my aircraft while ALL of my wingmen chase a single enemy. The last mission I tried had me fighting four Bf109E's in My Hurricane while all my AI wingmen chased after one Hurricane. No ammount of requests to rejoin or help made a difference, my AI wingmen ignored my plight. It is these moments that I rate AI ability in a sim, more so than seeing AI UFO manouevers. Unfortunately PF 405m is full of these moments.

Ratsack
05-19-2006, 12:54 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ratsack:

The problem to which I am referring is that the thread starter has titled the thread ('When are you going to fix XYZ?') in such a way that for Oleg to reply is for him to admit that there's something wrong. The original poster has left no space for the developer to save face. I'm suggesting this was a tactical error, given that he is actually asking for the game developer to do something for him. For free.

Clear?

cheers,
Ratsack

You are trying to be far too esoteric and clever by half, Ratsack, and half of what you think I mean isn`t.

My statement has given Oleg plenty of room to manouever, not none. I have continuously supported Oleg over successive generations of Patches and his great work. Oleg knows this, most of the regulars know this.

I`ve been called a `fan-boy` more times than I`ve had hot dinners. I`ve done much to help keep the `faith` alive.

But oh, how quickly people forget. Just because I love Oleg`s sim does not mean I`m not going to say when I perceive a fault. I`ve flown offline many hundreds of hours and can tell when something`s wrong with AI`s actions.

I`ve explained in detailed what seems wrong and I believe this happens mostly with Ace AI.

It`s NOT a tactical error, it`s NOT about saving face, Oleg doesn`t need to.

Stop talking when you don`t know my history in the community here. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

And this stupid `beating wives` term, I certainly don`t understand at all.

Clear? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Get a grip on yourself...or perhaps I should suggest you loosen your grip. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


I don't give a fig for your posting history. Your thread title is demanding and highly likely to put off the developer. The likelihood of this thread actually achieving your goal is, as a consequence, just about nil.

Now, the 'beating your wife' quip is well known example of a no-win question. Imagine you are a politician confronted with the question, 'When did you stop beating your wife?'

If you answer, 'I didn't' because you know you have never been an abusive spouse, you will be deliberately misinterpreted as saying you're actually an unrepentant, unreformed misogynist.

The way the question is framed constrains your answer, unless you ignore the question.

Oleg will just ignore the thread.

There's nothing esoteric or clever about it.

cheers,
Ratsack

Hoarmurath
05-19-2006, 01:21 AM
Originally posted by ICDP:
Some of the so called AI UFO moves are attributed to the lack of spin or proper stall modelling for the AI. While human controlled aircraft will drop a wing or enter a spin at stall speed the AI will simply float gently and gain speed in a shallow dive. How many times have you witnessed an AI aircraft stall in a tight turn? (not damage related).


Well, i have even seen an AI plane stall after a merge, and spin all the way into the ground without i even had the occasion to fire a single shot http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Rare occurence, but it can happen, and it happen fairly often with damaged AI planes.

It look that you are complaining that the AI fly better than you. This doesn't necessary mean that the AI cheat, it can also mean that your flying sux. But of course, this cannot be. Like seafire complaining that the ace AI fly better than him. This cannot be.

NerdConnected
05-19-2006, 04:20 AM
Viper2005,

Well said, but maybe you should add one the key factors why real pilots fail(ed): luck or bad luck.

Just pure luck or lack thereof is unfortunately one of the main reasons that determines(d) the outcome for many. If the amount of variables goes up it all becomes pretty random in the end because of the infinite amount of combinations. Probabilites for the entire group will just mean luck or bad luck for the individual.

The amount of things a pilot can control are far fewer than the things he cannot (and that isn't just true for pilots but for all of us ;-). Pilots are just in a much more hostile and unforgiving environment where the probability to get killed is much higher; even without shooting at eachother ;-)

So, I would like to add some more reasons why real pilots fail(ed):

vii) Luck and bad luck: pilots got killed because they got hit by a friendly plane while they pursued an enemy or hit eachother in or coming out of the clouds. Sometimes parachutes did not open for no particular reason. Some pilots got shot while they parachuted down, were hit by flak bursts or bailed out and were fatally wounded when they hit the tail section.
Some flights never encountered enemy planes, others got kicked around all the time. Some pilots simply fell out of the sky due to failing oxygen equipment, engine failure, or got killed because of bad runways with large holes in them.

Some were just lucky when they flew their missions and encountered enemy planes. Others were unware they received damaged planes that simply broke up while flying. On occasions fuel tanks could not be dropped or suddenly the landing gear would extend in mid flight.

viii) Morale: e.g. training standards, winning mood, aggresiveness, relative plane performance, relative quality and quantity of enemy and the overall feeling of superiority are all key factors. If there's a very high chance you won't survive a mission you'll simply behave and act differently. No matter how good the flying skills of a pilot, if your flight makes a single pass against hundreds of bombers and fighters, you're very likely to get killed while doing so. In this case having good SA hardly counts; there are simply too many planes and bullets in the air at the same time and things get more and more random.

Operation Bodenplatte is a also a nice example: many German pilots were killed by friendly fire because the flak crews were not informed of their mission.

ix) fitness/fatigue: fatigue and high stress have always been key factors. Lots of missions in a single day or long range missions got many pilots into trouble because of fatigue. Some got killed while they joined enemy fighters they thought was their own formation.

x) weather: suddenly changing weather conditions is still the main reason why so many pilots fail and have failed in the past.

Some pilots just got good because they were lucky to survive the first few missions and gained essential experience while others, maybe more promising ones were killed instantly.

Sadly, it's not just the pilot ;-(

Mark

Brain32
05-19-2006, 04:58 AM
I'll just point out some situations I'm sure everybody except Hoarmurath expirienced with AI.
Let's start with this, you are in a dive 109 is in front of you, you are in a Spit at about 650km/h, he pulls up, I follow but he is pulling so hard I can't follow because I would black out(already in gray area), then the zoom part goes on, at the top we are both at very slow speed(no I'm not shooting, I'm just trying to follow) , I stall, he flips over and regains speed in an insanely shallow dive, you will never see human do that simply because it can not. Other example, chasing a Spit in a Dive with the FW190, he starts barell rolling at a very high speed(I know he is fast because my closure rate is very slow) those who fly the Spit know how stiff it's ailerons are at speed, but the AI rolls so hard, it's reducing shooting to snapshots like it's a FW!!!
Again problem here is not inability to shoot down Ace AI, I have no problems with them being good, but let them be good because they make a good use of their airplane characteristics and overall tactics not this star wars thing..
In the end my problem is, you can't "mix it up" with the AI, oldie but goldie still works, vs 2 Ace AI's, go directly at them, avoid the head-on with the first one using a moderate dive, shoot down the second one from underneath, zoom to extend, reverse, again avoid the head-on(they always hit the head-on with ultra precision), reverse, you are on his six so just finish the job and hope he will not press the "my perfect best climb mode" button and take you to 7000m http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Same thing every time...

ICDP
05-19-2006, 09:29 AM
Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ICDP:
Some of the so called AI UFO moves are attributed to the lack of spin or proper stall modelling for the AI. While human controlled aircraft will drop a wing or enter a spin at stall speed the AI will simply float gently and gain speed in a shallow dive. How many times have you witnessed an AI aircraft stall in a tight turn? (not damage related).


Well, i have even seen an AI plane stall after a merge, and spin all the way into the ground without i even had the occasion to fire a single shot http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Rare occurence, but it can happen, and it happen fairly often with damaged AI planes.

It look that you are complaining that the AI fly better than you. This doesn't necessary mean that the AI cheat, it can also mean that your flying sux. But of course, this cannot be. Like seafire complaining that the ace AI fly better than him. This cannot be. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sigh!!!

You really are being silly, now it is our flying that sucks and not the AI. You asked for a track and I said I had one showing three of the issues we are seeing. Namely lack of engine overheat, constant boost and simplified physical constraints for the AI (rollrate at high speed).

You asked for a track, I provided it and asked you for your e-mail address but you have not responded to my request. I knew you wouldn't because you don't want tracks you aren't here to debate you are here to riducule and nothing else. You are a simply here to disagree with common knowledge. People are becoming aware of your behaviour and I called your bluff perfectly.

Judging from your comments I seriously have to doubt you even fly offline.

ucanfly
05-19-2006, 09:46 AM
I have seen AI glide forever on a dead engine, but I have also seen them stall out. But... I have two other updates for anyone who says the AI does not use WEP or doesn't cheat severely ...

1) The world is round

2) We did land on the moon

RegRag1977
05-19-2006, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by Brain32:
I'll just point out some situations I'm sure everybody except Hoarmurath expirienced with AI.
Let's start with this, you are in a dive 109 is in front of you, you are in a Spit at about 650km/h, he pulls up, I follow but he is pulling so hard I can't follow because I would black out(already in gray area), then the zoom part goes on, at the top we are both at very slow speed(no I'm not shooting, I'm just trying to follow) , I stall, he flips over and regains speed in an insanely shallow dive, you will never see human do that simply because it can not. Other example, chasing a Spit in a Dive with the FW190, he starts barell rolling at a very high speed(I know he is fast because my closure rate is very slow) those who fly the Spit know how stiff it's ailerons are at speed, but the AI rolls so hard, it's reducing shooting to snapshots like it's a FW!!!
Again problem here is not inability to shoot down Ace AI, I have no problems with them being good, but let them be good because they make a good use of their airplane characteristics and overall tactics not this star wars thing..
In the end my problem is, you can't "mix it up" with the AI, oldie but goldie still works, vs 2 Ace AI's, go directly at them, avoid the head-on with the first one using a moderate dive, shoot down the second one from underneath, zoom to extend, reverse, again avoid the head-on(they always hit the head-on with ultra precision), reverse, you are on his six so just finish the job and hope he will not press the "my perfect best climb mode" button and take you to 7000m http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Same thing every time...


Brain32 is right!

Nothing else to add... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

RegRag1977
05-19-2006, 11:48 AM
Originally posted by ucanfly:
I have seen AI glide forever on a dead engine, but I have also seen them stall out. But... I have two other updates for anyone who says the AI does not use WEP or doesn't cheat severely ...

1) The world is round

2) We did land on the moon

This one is excellent! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

edgflyer
05-19-2006, 02:15 PM
Originally posted by GH_Klingstroem:
Originally posted by shinden1974:
we get it! you're a great sim pilot! the ultimate deskrider!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif


For your information I happen to be an airline pilot IRL...

So, What does that have to do with the AI problem.

leitmotiv
05-19-2006, 04:02 PM
I agree with GH_Klingstroem---the AI is better than ever once you account for their advantage in high G maneuvers. As for the AI's extraordinary situational awareness---I can sabotage that by hitting the deck---suddenly the AI is flying upside down and in apparent confusion. I pulled this on two P-47 razorbacks with my Ki-61 and when they were completely fuddled I popped up and went after them. One thing nobody seems to notice is that, if you can learn to deal with the superhuman maneuvers the AI can pull, human opponents are easy, albeit less predictable.

RegRag1977
05-21-2006, 12:28 PM
Don't play the new AI if you don't want to lose your skills...Wait for the fix.
Playing with such AI will make you forget everything useful you took months or years to learn.

That's my advice.

Maybe those who agree that new AI is great should ask Oleg to enable AI A/C to fly under the ground to escape after forcing you to scissor...AI cheats, but has always cheated,as they say, so why not...
It would be cool to have enemy AI ace beeing able to hide under the ground, or being invisible just when we're on a good position to shoot!
Yes, not realistic, but imagine all the things you could learn if AI ace could do that, it would help against humans, be sure...

sc1949
05-21-2006, 07:23 PM
Originally posted by TankerAce:
I too hope the AI gets fixed. i am an offliner, and have had FB for two years (now AEP and PF), but thanks to an old machine and crappy joystick haven't played it all that much until recently. Haven't run in to too many problems, but at least from the PF campaign standpoint, have run in to a game killer.

Basically, the AI is completely stupid regarding waypoint pathing. In the USAAF campaign and the Japan map, was flying as part of an element of Tbolts. The DGEn created the altitude too low, so about 30 minutes into the flight we are coming up fast on a mountain. I pull up and fly over the mountain, while 7 P-47D-27s happily plow in to the mountain as if it wasn't even there. Needless to say I had to scrub that campaign. That was back in 4.03.

4.04, I decide to try it again. First mission, 30 minutes in, good ol mountain. I pull up, 7 Tbolts slam in to the mountain. Ugg, what a waste.

So basically I have to limit myself to campaigns on non mountainous maps, though thankfully with The Last Days and the DGEN4043 I can fly in the ETO, so I think my Jugs should stay well above mountain level.

All I humbly ask, make the AI smart enough to know when to not slam into a mountainside. Please....

Otherwise best flight sim I own, bar none. Well, I don't think you can compare Falcon 4 and IL2 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Mate,
Have a play with FMB, raise problem waypoint 100 m (or more till it's right), you won't regret the effort.

Col_Tibbetts
05-21-2006, 11:31 PM
If you think about it guys we all deserve the AI that is in the game up to this point. The AI control interface has been the same since day one. Oleg has never updated it and never will. The lack of tactics and utter ineptitude of the AI is the reason I now call IL2 a game, not a sim. With the inability the player has to interact as a squad with the AI (it would be nice just to be able to tell them to break right or left) it is hard to call this an air combat simulator.

How can one simulate air combat when there is no way to employ basic tactics with the AI. Want proof? Its very simple. Watch what happens when your AI wingman has an enemy on his six. Can you tell him to break right or left so that you can setup a drag and bag? Can you even warn him that he is about to get bounced?

NO, huh? I rest my case. How can we call this an air combat simulator if we cannot do what I have just described in paragraph two? You can bet that squadrons in the air war we are trying to simulate did this on a daily basis. In fact not allowing for good squad tactics in an air combat sim is about as bad as not putting props on the planes. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Its sad really. All those years we whined about some adding some obscure version of the FW190 (did we really need a different ATA version of the 190?) we should have been whining about the piss poor AI.

In summation... Yes, we all deserve the AI of the IL2 series.

lowfighter
05-22-2006, 02:04 AM
Originally posted by Col_Tibbetts:
If you think about it guys we all deserve the AI that is in the game up to this point. The AI control interface has been the same since day one. Oleg has never updated it and never will. The lack of tactics and utter ineptitude of the AI is the reason I now call IL2 a game, not a sim. With the inability the player has to interact as a squad with the AI (it would be nice just to be able to tell them to break right or left) it is hard to call this an air combat simulator.

How can one simulate air combat when there is no way to employ basic tactics with the AI. Want proof? Its very simple. Watch what happens when your AI wingman has an enemy on his six. Can you tell him to break right or left so that you can setup a drag and bag? Can you even warn him that he is about to get bounced?

NO, huh? I rest my case. How can we call this an air combat simulator if we cannot do what I have just described in paragraph two? You can bet that squadrons in the air war we are trying to simulate did this on a daily basis. In fact not allowing for good squad tactics in an air combat sim is about as bad as not putting props on the planes. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Its sad really. All those years we whined about some adding some obscure version of the FW190 (did we really need a different ATA version of the 190?) we should have been whining about the piss poor AI.

In summation... Yes, we all deserve the AI of the IL2 series.

Yeah, just watch no of posts and reads on this or that AC, fancifull or not, you're right...
However that example you gave is not quite right. Suppose me and my AI wingman are chased by an enemy AI. I just order my wingman "attack fighters" he'll break then of course. But there is a similar problem but reverted which shows the lack of AI tactic: I am flying on 6 of a pair of enemy AI, the enemy wingman will break only very late, when they practically lost the fight. So of course the corresponding way to cheat the AI imposes itself: I will engage first the poor wingman, why go for the leader when I know I'm safe this way?

leitmotiv
05-22-2006, 03:11 AM
Someday there will be an optimized AI in a sim with voice control and then all of us will be able to play Johnny Johnson wing leader. Unless you play online with a squadron all you can do is get a taste of the tactics---this from somebody who doesn't care a whit for online play.

lowfighter
05-22-2006, 02:36 PM
Well I play lately 4.03 which is much more AI decent, with exceptions. One made me laugh some minutes ago: chasing a Bf on the deck and this chap trying all the tricks to escape, that's fine but at a moment I see him flying straight at about 20 m from ground BUT 90 degree banked to the right. It did this for 1 minute, insane, good bitter laugh http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

RCAF_Irish_403
05-22-2006, 03:47 PM
There are some planes i will not fly against offline...the zeke come to mind

the way i see it, the problems are

1. "All Knowing AI"...they know when you are in convergence, they see through clouds and have a pair of eyes in the back of their head

2. No G model for AI....no blackout/redout

3. they seem to accumulate and retain energy vey well

4. Friendly AI will leave you in the thick of it...and then warn you about a bandit as your wing gets shot off

5. Vetren/Ace AI are capable of making insane deflection/head-on shots


Now for the good news...the current AI fights smarter...they try to mantain height and seem to fight to their AC's strengths

leitmotiv
05-23-2006, 07:12 AM
Col_Tibbetts is right---what we have is a clever game with simulator garnish but it is still a game. And, we got the AI we deserve because we did not raise an unholy ruckus about it instead of lobbying for new airplanes (a vice for which I am prone). I am relatively new to flight sims (exactly two years) and, frankly, until fairly recently I was still stunned by the illusion and too lobotomized by the graphics to care overmuch about the whacked out AI. Now, as a more sophisticated consumer, I crave more realism. I am with the critics 100%.

joeap
05-23-2006, 09:24 AM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Col_Tibbetts is right---what we have is a clever game with simulator garnish but it is still a game. And, we got the AI we deserve because we did not raise an unholy ruckus about it instead of lobbying for new airplanes (a vice for which I am prone). I am relatively new to flight sims (exactly two years) and, frankly, until fairly recently I was still stunned by the illusion and too lobotomized by the graphics to care overmuch about the whacked out AI. Now, as a more sophisticated consumer, I crave more realism. I am with the critics 100%.

Disagree unless you can name another sim with better AI then you have to add other reasons than not calling it a sim. Online play can be realistic be sure.

leitmotiv
05-23-2006, 11:11 AM
Online is where it all comes together. I relish the day when the AI will be cleverer---gad, when I am able to be outmaneuvered and shot down by a computer, even one that cheats!, I am awed---but I was born in 1952. I am comparatively easier to please because I never dreamed of even virtually looping around the sky!

ICDP
05-23-2006, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by joeap:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Col_Tibbetts is right---what we have is a clever game with simulator garnish but it is still a game. And, we got the AI we deserve because we did not raise an unholy ruckus about it instead of lobbying for new airplanes (a vice for which I am prone). I am relatively new to flight sims (exactly two years) and, frankly, until fairly recently I was still stunned by the illusion and too lobotomized by the graphics to care overmuch about the whacked out AI. Now, as a more sophisticated consumer, I crave more realism. I am with the critics 100%.

Disagree unless you can name another sim with better AI then you have to add other reasons than not calling it a sim. Online play can be realistic be sure. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Better in what area?

For 1v1 dogfights PF can be very good but for bombers and group combat it varies from below average to totally worthless. Level bombing and dive bombing campaigns are pointless due to the abysmal bomber AI. They won't drop bombs on the assigned target if you are the flight leader. The bomber gunner AI is widely accepted to be laughable due to the totally unrealistic shooting accuracy they have. It is so bad that if I am far into a fighter campaign I completely refuse to attack the bombers. I have watched many of my wingmen die attacking single bombers. PF would have us believe (contrary to what history tells us) that the bomber was the most effective anti fighter aircraft that flew in WWII. I frequently fly bombers online and I have flown alone into enemy territory and returned with multiple fighter kills when in reality I should be dead as soon as one fighter shows up.

If you think PF AI is better overall than any other sim then you musn't fly many other sims. The AI in BoBII WoV (with the updates) is overall better IMHO. It flies group combat far better than the AI in PF and the wingmen are not actually total ******s as in PF. Add to this hte fact that they listen to orders and you have what ammounts to better AI than that in PF. It is not better in all areas but overall it is superior. Overall PF merged is a better sim but only due to the variety and online play.

leitmotiv
05-23-2006, 11:42 AM
Concur with ICDP regarding BOBII---I quit on it a year ago with a huge pile of my hair on the floor, but even with all the troubles it had then, Hurricanes flew in tight vics---so wonderfully, dreadfully tight if you tried a fast break you totaled-out 12 Hurricanes. That impressed the heck out of me. Also, the massed Luftwaffe bomber formations were very very very impressive. The buzz is we will get this with Oleg's baby. I hope.

PlaneEater
05-23-2006, 12:01 PM
However many flaws there are in 4.05, there aren't as many as in 4.04. I saw fighters continuously--as in, never doing anything else--behaving brain-dead (long dives straight down with increasing wing-waving all the way down, for 7-8k feet, never engaging, etc).

4.05 flies like planes, engages the enemy, and accounts decently for itself.

Things like blackout, energy retention, overuse of rudder for turns, out-of-envelope control authority in A6Ms, and stuff like that is probably going to have to wait until we come around the horn again with the SoW engine.

ICDP
05-23-2006, 01:17 PM
I agree with a lot of your points PlaneEater. I must add that IMHO the AI in 4.04 flew more realisticaly (obeyed physics) but they are not aggressive enough. Give them the aggression of 4.05 and the flight dynamics of 4.04 and they would be ideal for combat. This then leaves the problems with the bombers and dissobeying orders and bomber snipers and seeing through clouds and seeing at night and having spidey senses. Fix all these major issues and it would be the best AI ever. For now the AI in BoBII WoV are better overall IMHO.

Sillius_Sodus
05-23-2006, 07:46 PM
I've encoutered the "all seeing" AI effect like everyone else but I've also been able to bounce bandits without them maneuvering at all, especially if you start at least 1000M above them.

A slow overtake usually results in the bandit breaking close to conversion distance but I'm still usually able to get in a tracking shot on them. I only fly offline and I don't think I'm much more than an average stick. I remember way back when the sim du jour was Chuck Yeager's Air Combat. When bandits were flying straight and level they would regularly drop a wing to check their six o'clock (no rudder back then), and often spot you as you stalked them. Maybe the bandits in IL2 do the equivalent of this but the wing drop/yaw is missing.

In any case, I think the AI is better than in the original IL2 sim. In that one the bandits always seem stay 500m above you and can do bat turns to get on your six on go for a head-on shot.

As far as the bomber gunners/snipers go, trying to get a tracking shot on them from behind is near suicide but a high speed pass is relatively safe. German gun camera footage of attacks on bomber formations do show a lot of high speed passes through the bomber boxes and attacking said formations was considered high risk.

I haven't found the uber maneuvering of bandits to be a fun killer, annoying as it can be sometimes. I try to allow for it by hanging back a bit then closing in for the kill when the AI starts flying more gently as it will always eventually do. I also try to attack the wingmen first since the element leaders are no better than player's wingmen at protecting flightmates.

Good Hunting,
Sillius_Sodus

WWMaxGunz
05-23-2006, 10:28 PM
I think maybe it's that they can hear you if you hang back there trying to come in slow
or just way close. Zooming in from a bit below to keep them from invisi-planing then hit
hard and as long as you can with no slow down or deflection shooting (they don't dodge that)
works. I also drop revs but dunno if it makes any difference though it would cut the noise
some.

Bearcat99
05-24-2006, 08:35 AM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Online is where it all comes together. I relish the day when the AI will be cleverer---gad, when I am able to be outmaneuvered and shot down by a computer, even one that cheats!, I am awed---but I was born in 1952. I am comparatively easier to please because I never dreamed of even virtually looping around the sky!

This is one reason why I prefer COOPS... the mix of live and AI is very interesting.

leitmotiv
05-24-2006, 09:49 AM
Great, Bearcat99---where do I go for COOPS? I like high realism---which are best for this?

RegRag1977
05-25-2006, 10:43 AM
Hi,

In my point of view, i think what would be interesting with this AI problem would be to know what tactics and aircrafts, people who expresses themselves here, are using.

Because, as far as i'm concerned, when i fly Spitfires, 109, 190D or Hayate, or A/C like that against new AI, i find it more "challenging" than before, more interesting, but too unrealisticly cheating, even if still dumb and piece of cake. EAch time i've got a kill with them against enemy ACE AI i think that if there was pilot fatigue modelled, i wouldn't be able, logically to achieve them, what is frustrating.

But when i try P47, Mustang, Tempest, FW190A i feel like unlike online flying, i have'nt any of the advantage those planes had in reality...(Dive, E retention, roll rate, elevator authority, for instance.) For those, E tactics seems to be forbidden due to the extra 4.04 and 4.05 cheating boost...

PS Note that i fly mostly E fighters online and do great with them...And feel comfortable with them. I always fly full realism game.

But in both cases i'm aware of the highly cheating AI (more than anytime ago, it seems to me). It's personal, subjective, but maybe somebody here feels the same?

Is new AI giving advantage to the turners? (They can turn anyway, even when they loose the Energy fight, then be able to reach a shooting position...)?

Just a question?

Kuna_
05-25-2006, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by Sillius_Sodus:
I've encoutered the "all seeing" AI effect like everyone else but I've also been able to bounce bandits without them maneuvering at all, especially if you start at least 1000M above them.

A slow overtake usually results in the bandit breaking close to conversion distance but I'm still usually able to get in a tracking shot on them. I only fly offline and I don't think I'm much more than an average stick. I remember way back when the sim du jour was Chuck Yeager's Air Combat. When bandits were flying straight and level they would regularly drop a wing to check their six o'clock (no rudder back then), and often spot you as you stalked them. Maybe the bandits in IL2 do the equivalent of this but the wing drop/yaw is missing.

In any case, I think the AI is better than in the original IL2 sim. In that one the bandits always seem stay 500m above you and can do bat turns to get on your six on go for a head-on shot.

As far as the bomber gunners/snipers go, trying to get a tracking shot on them from behind is near suicide but a high speed pass is relatively safe. German gun camera footage of attacks on bomber formations do show a lot of high speed passes through the bomber boxes and attacking said formations was considered high risk.

I haven't found the uber maneuvering of bandits to be a fun killer, annoying as it can be sometimes. I try to allow for it by hanging back a bit then closing in for the kill when the AI starts flying more gently as it will always eventually do. I also try to attack the wingmen first since the element leaders are no better than player's wingmen at protecting flightmates.

Good Hunting,
Sillius_Sodus This man nailed it to the bone. I think you have A LOT of experience with offline aspect of playing (Ai).

Especially that "slowly overtaking" on Ai. That is totally true. Usually when we bounce them on high speed we will get kill 9 out of ten times. Or so.

And it seem that v405 Ai is somewhat different as I can sometimes shot down 4 contemporary fighters. May be placebo, tho. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif

I have made two tracks against several "ace" Ai's... sure it's tough as hell as if player makes one or two mistakes and he is no more. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

But it should be that way when one is tangle with several aces, IMO! That is why it is interesting. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

P39N_vs_4xFW190A4_ace50 (http://free-vk.t-com.hr/domagoj/tracks/offline/405__kunap39n_vs_4xfw190a_ace50.zip)
P51B_vs_4xFW190A165AtA_ace50 (http://free-vk.t-com.hr/domagoj/tracks/offline/405__kunap51b_vs_4xfw190a165_ace50.zip)

As you guys were already probably noticed now you can catch with Ai in properly trimmed aircraft, catch and shot them down. Even in slower aircraft, like it may be seen in my Cobra vs. Würgers track.

All that is left is to fix their non-blackout, their structural titan strengh in dives, seeing thru clouds, sniper gunners and other "ancient" bugs that were here from the very beginning.

Kuna_
05-25-2006, 06:42 PM
Originally posted by RCAF_Irish_403:
There are some planes i will not fly against offline...the zeke come to mind You are right. Zeke *used* to be perhaps toughest Ai in the game (out of 'common' aircraft).
But nowadays I find for example FW-190's to be tougher. Ai has changed their way of 'thinking' and now Ai use speed to pull away from engagement. Much like humans online do. And combining that with their outstanding snapshots/deflections shots now their BnZ is really fearsome.

I was in fact surprised to see that the Zekes have perhaps 'deteriorated' in skill with v405... again I am talking about my subjective opinion. I can defeat four of them on ace level almost regularly and quite fast (usually under 10mins). So you guys should be able to do the same.

That isn't the case (unfortunately) with for example ace Würgers... they are always tough in v405.

Here is the track with zekes:
F4F-3_vs_4xA6M2-21_ace50 (http://free-vk.t-com.hr/domagoj/tracks/offline/405__kunaf4f_vs_4xa6m_ace50.zip) --- file is around 1,6MB
More info about track setup etc. can be found in README provided in .zip file.

WWMaxGunz
05-25-2006, 07:51 PM
Originally posted by Kuna_:
Especially that "slowly overtaking" on Ai. That is totally true. Usually when we bounce them on high speed we will get kill 9 out of ten times. Or so.

.......

As you guys were already probably noticed now you can catch with Ai in properly trimmed aircraft, catch and shot them down.

Both just too true.

I wonder if the AI has ears instead of eyes in the back of the head. That's a working model
of my own as I dunno about the code.

Coming in fast and staying fast catches them flat generally as does deflection, the wider the
better IMO. They don't have the cycles to predict my trajectories. Maybe when hardware gets
enough faster there will be an algorithm that watches for the potential but not today!

Keeping speed steady on the run is also I think semi-critical. When speed changes there's
the need to trim which I don't wanna do in a guns run. Speed changes enough which in some
planes ain't much and the plane will rock when you shoot. Faster I go, the more solid the
aim stays although it may get too solid and I can't correct fast enough.

I am lovin the ability to rudder my aim not just again but better than ever! The semi auto
rudder pre-4.x was okay but not as good and forget 4.01-4.02 esp in some planes, every side
by my look-ats even a couple Russian fighters were squirrelly. I am running the same stick
profile as 4.04 but now it feels just a bit more stable ==IF I stay near trimmed==.

Kuna, it's been since the start that I'd find how trim made all the difference in me being
able to keep up with my own AI flights. Well, that and smart flying by never trying to
match the climb speed they'd use. But at least they'd quit cursing me to catch up!

IMO figuring out proper use of prop and engine is as critical as trim. I've been able to
make and hold very good speed without burning the mill up. If I had more personal E I
might be able to get it down solid for even one plane, LOL! Example: P-51 at 400kph I
already have the 'pitch' at no more than 95% and usually 90% and still accelerating.

The management aspects are complex compared to what came before. I can see that it's learn
this well or be even more lost come BoB. More and more we don't have toy planes and cannot
be toy pilots. BoB will I am sure introduce us to more real what is called pilot workload
and with the number of people complaining and never thinking of flying RR on CEM I think
that B&M posts will be rising.

Adam906
05-29-2006, 09:49 PM
Earlier today I was flying offline in the Ardennes offensive campaign for the LW. Flying the 190D-9 I came from on high blasting away at a fomation of 4 P-47 jabos.. I got 1 on the pass (diving from behind) and left another trailing smoke. Anyway I zoomed a loop and tried again with less success, 1 p-47 broke off and the other I managed only several cannon shots on his right wing and tail assembly... as I screamed past I saw that the outer panel on the jugs wing had been shot off along with his rudder and 1 vert. stabiliser and there were two large holes the same wing.

By this time the a/c trailing smoke from the first pass had augured in and the number 2 aircraft was a little way off - climbing for a BnZ. so I decided to concentrate on the damaged a/c. anyway we twisted and turned for a bit then he pulls nose up banking to the left (it was his right wing that was busted) and is accelerating away from me. I have 110% +WEP and he is pulling away from me in a vastly heavier a/c suffering serious damage to a wing and missing an elevator/stabiliser. By this time I had to turn to take on the undamaged jug - he kept bnz'ing which is what you'd expect but he'd got to the top of his climb and just would settle out nicely and then pick up speed in only a shallow dive like he had rockets on. Meanwhile I'd be stalling/blacking out trying to follow. I tried to get him back on the deck where BnZ would be less effective/attractive idea and only managed in shaking him off by flying under bridges and in and around warehouse smoke stacks. By this time I'm full of holes and the first jug is back in the fray and is flying like he'd never been hit. I couldn't outrun, out-turn these guys, In desperation I tried a boom and zoom but at the bottom of the boom I cut the throttle and pulled hard back on the stick to bleed as much energy as possible and kicked hard rudder to make the shot difficult for them, as one shot past I let off everything in the general direction and saw something fall off him (didn't hang around to check what it was!) and before I stalled out flattened my turn and came round heading away from these guys and just went full throttle with WEP in steep dive to put as much distance between as us possible and headed for home.

It's one thing for the AI to wipe the floor with me, its quite another to be walked all over by a/c that perform beyond their capabilities.

The AI capabilities re: their FM is just beyond a joke. For a "sim" that prides itself on the realism factor - I've played more realistic arcade games than this.

I like the AI aggressiveness and the way it uses its aircrafts attributes but defying the law of physics is just not on.

DuxCorvan
05-30-2006, 10:14 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

And then there's that immersion-breaking 'hyperdrive' effect. You know, when enemy planes appear, and all your wingmen -WOOOOOSSHH!- accelerate in the target direction just like Millenium Falcon before a jump into hyperspace. Silly, unrealistic -surrealistic- and annoying.

zoinks_
05-30-2006, 11:28 AM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
Silly, unrealistic -surrealistic- and annoying.
took this sim off my drive 4 weeks ago...don't miss a thing.

RegRag1977
05-30-2006, 12:01 PM
It has been so long like that, that now i can hardly remember how fun this game was offline...

Guys, there's dust and spider webs on my Joystick.

Help Oleg, i'm on the verge of a nervous breakdown... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gifDo something before i become indifferent.

WTE_Galway
05-31-2006, 12:20 AM
maybe i am not as kill hungry as you guys

but my main complaint is about the stupid friendly AI killing itself not the behaviour of the EA

Bearcat99
06-01-2006, 10:04 PM
When I have an AI wi gman and I request help.... orwhenever he says "This id two.. Roger be right there!!" or "Number one bandit on your 6!!" I know Ill be dead in 6 seconds or less...LMAO.

Harras
06-12-2006, 06:07 AM
http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/6579/bump0lw.gif So will the AI be fixed in 4.06?

Aimosika
06-16-2006, 12:43 PM
Please fix it or downgrade it or give us possibility to fix it our selves! I just spend 3 hours offline, I forced myself to fly even I knew already how ****ty AI is.

I Love this sim ansd want to fly and cos I fly only offline these few months have been agony with this sim. I even bought that Pe-2 expansion hoping it would fix that crappy AI but no. Snort.

At least disable AI's nose down dive, give the AI plane at least some real-life limit of that plane its flyin. (Like just few Hurri, I-16, P-39 outrun and outdive and outclimbed my 109-G2). And G-limit to AI also. I blackout and the AI can do whatever it wants.

Hell, I dont want to go back 4.01 something cos then this money I spent to Pe-2 is lost and I cannot return this sowfware and get money back even I want to!

sledgehammer2
06-17-2006, 09:02 AM
Christ you said it. I really miss flying but the way it is now there's not much point. I really wish Oleg would give us some hope here but I am really frustrated with waiting and hearing nothing...

JamesBlonde888
06-18-2006, 08:01 PM
I havent had a chance to see the new AI. I have a old version with no upgrades so I just try to shoot down as many as I can before they fly into a hill or one of their team mates. Nevertheless they are at times excellent and in other cases hysterically stupid which entertains me both ways. The only thing that annoys me is the long pointless tail chase on the deck in a 15 degree bank. This seems stupid and isn't really successful at all since even in a slower aircraft I can eventually put myself in front of the enemy. AI will never be perfect perhaps but they should at least be lively.

blindpugh
06-19-2006, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by Skycat_2:
I agree. The offline experience is aggravating and I feel sorry for anybody just coming to the game through the new DVD.

Last night I tinkered around with a 'simple' quick mission of Mosquito vs. Me-323 Gigant. The Gigant could outfly me even with one of its engines on fire. I know I spent at least half an hour trying to get on the Gigant's tail but he just kept turning and climbing, even with that bad engine, always staying above me and at an oblique. I turned off the game thoroughly frustrated with 4.04m and with the series in general. yep sometimes this game sucks -i just flew a mission in PF an got my wing shot off by one bullet from a 7.7 mm mg-BAH! humbug!!!

WWMaxGunz
06-19-2006, 04:52 PM
Why bother getting on the tail of the Gigant? It is huge. Go fast enough that the thing is
a tortoise compared and hit it as you pass, in the cabin if you can. From 200+m out you
wont have to turn nearly as hard as he does.

You do know that the DM of the Gigant is not exact? The base has been overstrengthed to
allow the model to land without breaking and will take multiple 108 MG shells easy.

It's almost like the target was cherry picked.

Scrappy_D
06-29-2006, 06:30 AM
It is fairly clear that most of the effort has gone into making things look pretty (Yes it is perhaps the most pretty looking game out there), and not so much work has gone into making things function correctly or at least those things that really need fixing http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

And to be honest its all politics and money http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

At this rate I'll be playing solitaire exclusively again http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Grey_Mouser67
06-30-2006, 03:47 PM
Somebody at 1C is not "getting it".

All these add-ons are useless to the offline player if the AI is screwed up...just like any AI aircraft with a screwed up Damage model is not usable for mission building or campaigns.

I have 4.01 for offline play...I love that AI and would like to keep it except for improving that aggressiveness of my wingman. I have 4.04 for online play, but now the community is split, albeit 80/20. I have a bunch of cool planes in 4.04 but I can't enjoy them much as the AI is porked.

No AI fix, no money, no add-on purchase for me.

I've not flown much at all lately and won't likely fly much until AI is addressed.

Sillius_Sodus
07-01-2006, 05:46 PM
Originally posted by Grey_Mouser67:
Somebody at 1C is not "getting it".

All these add-ons are useless to the offline player if the AI is screwed up...just like any AI aircraft with a screwed up Damage model is not usable for mission building or campaigns.

I have 4.01 for offline play...I love that AI and would like to keep it except for improving that aggressiveness of my wingman. I have 4.04 for online play, but now the community is split, albeit 80/20. I have a bunch of cool planes in 4.04 but I can't enjoy them much as the AI is porked.

No AI fix, no money, no add-on purchase for me.

I've not flown much at all lately and won't likely fly much until AI is addressed.


Grey_Mouser67,

You have very strong opinions about this sim and while I won't try to change your mind, I'd to like to ask a few questions, then offer some of my own opinions. I'm not trying to flame you either.

You say the AI and the DM are screwed up, can you be more specific? We all know the AI in this sim does some unrealistic things like no engine overheats, blackouts or redouts, and the annoying speed at which Japanese fighters can dive. What exactly do you find unplayable about the AI? Like you, I switch between 4.01 so I don't get a wobbly Corsair, and 4.04 for the new aircraft. Personally, I haven't found much of a difference in AI between the two even though I have read the various threads on this forum about it. I get my butt kicked with about the same regularity in each version. At Ace level, the AI is pretty nasty but then again I've found that most AI pilots in the included campaigns are not Aces. Even at the highest levels, the AI becomes predictable. I'm not sure that it's possible at this time to program a non-predictable AI witin the confines of a PC based simulation and have processing power leftover for stuff like graphics and sound. All you get if you take away the no blackout/redout, overheat and dive speed bugs is an AI that's easier to kill. I still enjoy the sim but I've had to learn to fly in such a way as to negate those advantages, as many other players have done. I'm still working on keeping my AI wingmen in formation and getting them to attack ground targets on command though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif . As for the AI being unplayable in missions and campaigns, I don't know what to say, there are some very good user-made missions and campaigns that have well balanced AI behavior.

Damage Models. What is it about them exactly that makes them so porked? What aircraft are you talking about, what are you shooting at them with and finally, what are you expecting when you hit them. I like flying the IAR-80, and there have been time where I have had to pour half my MG ammo into a I-16 before it went down firing from directly behind http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif . I then found that it took far fewer rounds if I used deflection shooting to hit when the target presented more of a planform to me, in this sim that usually means when the bandit is in a zoom climb or pulling out from an evasive dive. I find that with the exception of early war Japanese fighters, all fighters in the sim are fairly resistant to fire from directly behind. Also, you don't have to set a bandit on fire in order to take it out. Most of my kills were not on fire when they crashed. How many kills do you expect to get per mission? IRL multiple kills each and every mission were not common. Even Erich Hartman didn't score on every mission and when he did it was usually one or two. He had high scoring days but not necessarily missions.

An finally, this is a PC based sim. Although it does a very good job of simulating aspects of flight, it has a long way to go when it comes to simulating actual flying. The computers that run real flight simulators fill entire rooms, or semi-trailers. I don't care how good you are at flying the sim's Spitfires, Mustangs or 109's, if I owned a real one I wouldn't hand you the keys and say: "Off you go boyo, drive 'er like you own 'er!"

Could 1C have done a better job on the AI? Absolutely, but they didn't. Does it make me pull my hair out at itmes? You better believe it, and don't get me started on the snipers in the bombers, but I still fly it almost every day.

Good hunting,
Sillius_Sodus

Deadmeat313
07-07-2006, 07:24 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

SeaFireLIV
07-08-2006, 04:32 AM
You guys love just going around in circles, don`t you?

All that half of you need to do is read this thread from the start and everything (including AI faults are explained). What`s the point of answering the SAME question every 3 pages?

Didn`t I also say we are done here now? Since we know Oleg`s correcting this soon in 4.06/7?

Guess you guys just like talking past each other.

sledgehammer2
07-09-2006, 10:47 AM
SeaFire, at what point have we heard that Oleg will make adjustments to the AI? All I had heard was the email where somebody said Oleg had emailed them and said that he was aware of some issues and would make some changes after the Pe-2 add-on.

Has there been some other info where he actually said this would happen? If so then that's awesome, but I was unaware of it.

Sledgehammer2

Wtornado_439th
07-09-2006, 04:15 PM
They fix this for 4.06m and we will get the
add-on in Jan 2007

sledgehammer2
07-09-2006, 06:50 PM
Huh?

RegRag1977
09-13-2006, 08:47 AM
So,

After several months of practicing with the "new" AI, tell me please, guys, how you get used to it, http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gifif you ever get used to it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Man it has been such a long time since i started to hate to play my offline campaigns... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

RamsteinUSA
09-13-2006, 01:08 PM
This is disgusting...
The USA Aircraft have al kind sof FM problems and I see tons of the FW190 Whiners here..
what about our planes? We have bugs and problems 100000x more serious,,

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif

you guys have Uber planes yet you still complain... makes us sick... we just fly and clinch our teeth knowing we are going to take it up the wazooo when flying the Uber German Planes that fly like modern jets....

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

If anything needed fixed there are several of our planes that should be at the top of the list..
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

Though, I doubt they will ever be fixed,, but saw the Uber plane fliers crying... and could not sit quiet...
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

TooCooL34
09-13-2006, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Man it has been such a long time since i started to hate to play my offline campaigns... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
I'm with you.
Such a long, long and long time.
Please, do the right thing. Not fancy add-on or shet.
We're not asking you to improve someting. Just bring it back so we can enjoy offline like before.
I'm really tired of this circle. I've been away from offline play for over at least 6 months and nothing has changed, nothing.
How can you developers neglect us this long. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

OldMan____
09-14-2006, 03:20 PM
I still have a 4.00m install here just for offline gamming.. so much better. Almost a completely different game offline.

Just copy and paste 4.0 IA to 4.06 and everyone will be happpyyy!!!

sledgehammer2
09-19-2006, 07:40 PM
Yeah, but don't count on it. This thing has been busted for a long time now. I still occassionally fly but rarely. All I wanted was for the simple damn question of "will it be adjusted?" to be answered, but no go.

I know Oleg has given us alot but I can't help feeling let down.

Tater-SW-
09-19-2006, 08:16 PM
The AI needs a serious look by Oleg, et al. Hey, they have no time with BoB? How about using the last Il-2 patch(es) be testbeds for new AI concepts?

The best thing about Il-2 is coop play, DF servers are cat herding. Without decent AI, it's just furballing. SOme of the AI does well enough, but there are certain areas where the AI is totally unacceptable in behavior. Strafer bombers (and ground attack like Il-2, no less) are seriously flawed. Usually I harp about their inability to execute mast height attacks, or proper parafrag runs, but it is worse. After such attacks (their version of) they come back again and again until dead or winchester. Really needs to be looked at.

tater

RegRag1977
09-20-2006, 03:39 AM
Just copy and paste 4.0 IA to 4.06 and everyone will be happpyyy!!!

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

And it won't cost much time!