PDA

View Full Version : Interesting read on AI fm.



Deputy_Fife
08-30-2005, 08:13 AM
I happened to stop by Frugal's this morning & thought this would be of interest here.

http://forums.frugalsworld.com/vbb/showthread.php?t=93150

Deputy_Fife
08-30-2005, 08:13 AM
I happened to stop by Frugal's this morning & thought this would be of interest here.

http://forums.frugalsworld.com/vbb/showthread.php?t=93150

Rebel_Yell_21
08-30-2005, 09:05 AM
That is a nice thread.

I sure hope BoB will be revolutionary. If its evolutionary, well.....

DuxCorvan
08-30-2005, 09:34 AM
Well, it's not secret that FB/PF offline is, well... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

And, yes, AI FM isn't -it has NEVER been- the same than human. AI cheats as he11 -surely to overcome its awful shortcomings, but more than a solution, is an immersion disaster. And it's quite stupid, not in combat manoeuver, but in strange reactions. This, joined to the supersniper RoboCop that is in every bomber gunner position, has ruined many of my offline campaigns.

AEP and then PF leaned cheekly to online gaming, and this decision has harmed the series more than anything else.

I hope BoB fixes all this, and it's not just a collection of marvelous state-of-the-art GFX effects. I still like FB/PF and hope a lot of BOB, but I'm kinda skeptical about these AI issues, given the work employed in their fixing and improvement -this is, none.

x6BL_Brando
08-30-2005, 11:17 AM
Frankly, I've had more fun watching paint dry than reading that. I don't disagree that the AI are somewhat 'uber-modelled' and that is frustrating....but what is a self-styled Christian (see the sig) doing using such vile language? Any sympathy I had with the chap is completely negated by the shower of **** this & **** that's dripping from his dirty mouth. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

Vacillator
08-30-2005, 01:10 PM
I'm with you Brando, I gave up after two paragraphs.

Brain32
08-30-2005, 01:12 PM
AI in this game often deserevs vile language, and come on chill http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Have you ever had a bad day, then came home to relax and you got heavily frustrated, if not you are one lucky ******.

faelas
08-30-2005, 01:30 PM
You may not like it because he sounds pissed off, but he's 100% correct and anyone who flys offline a lot knows it. Yesterday I almost uninstalled because I was getting so frustrated that the AI planes could do stuff that I can't do in the same plane.

The most telling example of this is to go ahead and do what the man says, take a P-38, or just about anything, and climb to about 35,000 ft. Enter a steep dive and wait for total control lockup. Then engage the autopilot and watch it pull you neatly out. It's truly something to behold.

MLudner
08-30-2005, 01:40 PM
Indeed, his language was very questionable.

He does have a point, though. This weekend I was being chased by Rocket-assisted experimental Super Zeros in an Aircobra. I kept getting surprised by aircraft that at low altitude shouldn't be able to exceed 282 MPH catching up with my P-39D2 while it was moving between 340 and 360 MPH. At around 15,000 ft an A6M2 can go 330 MPH ... but we weren't that high up, none of us, and that's still slower than 340 - 360 MPH. It is SOP for me when fighting the Japanese while flying for the USAAF or RAAF to go fast. Never slow down, just go fast. Can't hit it? Pass by and keep going fast, then come back around.

R_Target
08-30-2005, 09:27 PM
Lol, you gotta love dropping 30,000 feet and the Zero's closing all the way down.

shinden1974
08-30-2005, 10:21 PM
I posted something about this before...I use DCG and my settings sometimes have my flight starting at 5000m on an escort mission waiting for bombers to take off. I was in a yak-1. I hit autopilot to grab a soda and watched the AI dive pretty fast, past the ~600Km/H that usually tears the plane apart...it was fine. I hit a and watched the yak fly apart.

TX-Gunslinger
08-31-2005, 02:28 AM
I'm predominatley an online flyer. In the last year or so I've flown offline more than I've ever done previously. It provides an escape when online issues "get on my nerves" or there is a break in the competitive cycles I fly in. I also find offline to be a good place to start the familiarization process with new patches.

I've also found offline play to be highly underrated by many "online only" folks. With difficulty set to higher levels, AI are very challenging. Face it, if you can't make deflection shots against AI, then you can't make deflection shots against humans either. There are many, many things that offline play has to offer in training value to the "online crowd".

Given that, the AI behavior could be better. I've been around here for over 3 years and it's always been an issue. Known problem and I'd love to see the AI addressed.

Even though it's a well documented issue, it's good to point it out from time to time in the forums.

I believe that the two most limiting aspects of this product are:

1) AI behavior coupled with the simple interface for offline play.

2) Inability to provide motion to objects in online play. As you all know, this is the basis for all your Carrier take-off and landing issues with regards to payload. This is also the source of the "weird" slow airspeed dynamics which were introduced in all A/C as a workaround to the carrier problem. This is why every A/C has better low speed handling characteristics than historical.

Ok, enough background. This sim could be better in some regards. So can everything made by mankind.

Why link to such an inflamatory post? Did you perhaps find some information there that you percieved to be new and informative? Maybe you searched for AI on these forums and found nothing?

When I searched the 1C forums, I found:

86 on "AI behavior" in PF forums
143 on "AI behavior" in all 1C related forums
4014 on "AI" in PF forums
20217 on "AI" in all 1C related forums

I did find four things that are "Interesting" to me in this thread you linked to (unfortunately none concerned the AI):

1. Why did you chose to publicly put forward the hostile views of an individual on another forum, expressed in an such an utterly profane and negative manner? Do you think this will help fix the AI? How so?

2. How an individual with a 9486 post count, still not possess sufficient proficieny with the English language to effectively communicate a very simple concept? The concept being is that the AI don't use the same damage model in diving that human controlled A/C do. What he does communicate (at least to me) is that the AI kicked his butt and he's very, very angry about it.

3. His solution to his lack of proficiency. Uninstall the game, and then berate one of the finest producers of WWII flight sims on the planet publicly.

4. I can't figure out if the references to Jesus in his sig are in jest or real, due to his anger and tone. Assuming for a moment, that he is sincere, I can easily forgive the language, but I don't hear or feel any of the principles of Jesus Christ in his words. The overwhelming majority of the time, it's not for me to judge his beliefs. That does change however, at the point where he puts his religion out in front, publicly linked to ideas expressed in that sort of manner. Then judgements become a neccessary when evaluating the sprit and intent of his message.

This is not the way to get things changed here. A little respect goes a long way.

S~

Gun

shinden1974
08-31-2005, 05:30 AM
okay, I clicked the link...

it's funny how guys you would think are against entitlements have an entitlement mindset all their own.

In the rest of the thread is complaints about the AI...I've never had that much truoble with the AI, it's flawed but it works to some extent. you CAN bounce.

This guy and his buddy's need to quit taking this thing so seriously...when quirks and bugs in a game cause you to start losing your mind and wanting to 'choke' people...you need to get the hell away...which I think he did.

Zjoek
08-31-2005, 05:44 AM
Indeed, it was quite a rant.

But still he has a point. After a long break I reinstalled the old Il-2 again. Patched it, and I'm currently playing the German fighter campaign. The most evil planes in the game are the I-16's. They're incredibly fast, best handling... Yikes 8P

Tater-SW-
08-31-2005, 08:13 AM
Part of the FR hit with the last patch was supposed to be because now all the planes flew with the same FM. Clearly that is not the case.

tater

Deputy_Fife
08-31-2005, 08:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TX-Gunslinger:


This is not the way to get things changed here. A little respect goes a long way.

S~

Gun </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


That's the problem, things haven't changed. Any reasonable person should be able to see, (as evidenced by the threads you posted), that there has been a problem with the AI's FM from day one. I'm surprised that more people haven't gotten pissed off.

And how long has this product been in the public's hands? They should worry about fixing what we already have before they even think of releasing BoB.

Tully__
08-31-2005, 10:47 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
Part of the FR hit with the last patch was supposed to be because now all the planes flew with the same FM. Clearly that is not the case.

tater </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't confuse FM with DM. The DM is clearly different but there is no evidence in that thread that the FM is different.

Texas LongHorn
08-31-2005, 10:36 PM
Great Post Sligner, I'm a Seguin TX boy myself (out of S.A.by way of Georgia.) Your description of offline play was excellent. Most fliegers around here don't realize that when you've got two or four Wildcats, the Japanese have FOUR times that many Rei-Sen (Zeros,) set the waypoints on the FMB way apart to allow seperation, DONT LET ANYBODY SAY THE AI ON FULL CRANK IS _THAT_ BAD &lt;GGG.&gt; lONGhORN

Tater-SW-
08-31-2005, 11:23 PM
Meaning the FM communicates nothing at all to the AI. The AI doesn;t know or care about overspeeding the aircraft, and nothing falls off anyway. What about compression? That's not DM, should the AI start seeing compression and try and stop it at all costs? Might as well be a different FM if the AI "knows" it can't break apart like everyone else at speed since it will effectively fly outside the bounds of controlled flight for a real player.

tater

Badsight.
08-31-2005, 11:50 PM
AI have their CEM computer controlled ,

AI fights differently in different planes

often when people saw AI do "UFO" moves online with me , it was just the AI having the computer fly them at the max possible thru all flight controls , (flaps , pitch , trim , ect ect)

AI have always been possible to match in hard TnB fighting

arcadeace
09-01-2005, 02:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TX-Gunslinger:

How an individual with a 9486 post count, still not possess sufficient proficieny with the English language to effectively communicate a very simple concept? The concept being is that the AI don't use the same damage model in diving that human controlled A/C do. What he does communicate (at least to me) is that the AI kicked his butt and he's very, very angry about it.

I can't figure out if the references to Jesus in his sig are in jest or real, due to his anger and tone. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well put TX.

I've only flown offline and 4.01 has been a significant overall improvement, including the AI, in my opinion. Yes there are plenty of problems but I've never had expectations spoil the enduring enjoyment. I can wait for BoB.

lowfighter
09-01-2005, 03:15 AM
I have on PC installed FB v1.0, FB v1.2 and PFv4.1. Depending on mood I play each of them.
I must say the AI in 4.01 are much more human and than in the previous versions. To give you a nice example of improvement: in v1.0 you could easily fool a FW AI to dogfight with you flying in an il2, it's a very comical and ireal situation. Try to do it now! No chance http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Another example: in v1.0 you have a bandit on your 6 of similar AC, try to shake him off. I go now to v4.01, I'm an ace in this respect.
Things where I haven't seen a steady improvement: 1.AI deflection gunnery too poor, veteran AI should do it much better.
2. Wingman way of protecting the leader, too pasive therefore inefficient.
I saw something nice some days ago though. Two ki's closing up on my leader's 6 and me trying to get in shooting position. But I'm too far and it's matter of seconds till they will open fire. Suddenly the ki's disengage and turn sharply, oh i'm in trouble. But my leader is now free http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

My overall impression: the AI improved with succesive patches.

Badsight.
09-01-2005, 07:18 AM
AI shoot straight , they dont "lead" their shots

before this patch , AI went for turn fighting , turning with the enemy always

now they fly away , but they dont do it as good as they did in the betas , the AI basically just fly around now , not giving a hard fight at all

Deputy_Fife
09-01-2005, 07:51 AM
The point is totally being missed here. This is not about the tactics that the AI employs, but how AI aircraft are able to perform totally unrealistic maneuvers.

Maneuvers that are well beyond the flight envelope for the given aircraft, and will cause the aircraft to come apart if performed by the player.

lowfighter
09-01-2005, 08:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Deputy_Fife:
The point is totally being missed here. This is not about the tactics that the AI employs, but how AI aircraft are able to perform totally unrealistic maneuvers.

Maneuvers that are well beyond the flight envelope for the given aircraft, and will cause the aircraft to come apart if performed by the player. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No missed point, just allowed myself to say some nice things about AI http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Nimits
09-01-2005, 06:39 PM
If he's quoting Christ, that language is unacceptable in any cirumstance.

His points about the AI are valid, though (and dissappointing, considering we were told that 4.01 AI used the same FM as the human).

Bearcat99
09-01-2005, 08:03 PM
Well be all that as it may be... I still do and will enjoy offline as much as online. Sometimes that's all I have time for... and .. maybe I have dulled my reflexes over the years or the abandon of my wild and reckless youth and early middle age are catching up to me...... but I enjoy the AI.... sure they could always be better but I can have a challenging time agianst AI. Oh yeah I could always go and fly that other... better WW2 flight sim.... oh yeah.... waitaminnit...... there isnt one.....



Hey Tx..... have you tried using VAC offline..... it is a real hoot.... it also adds to your flying by not having to type commands to the AI.... even though often they dont do Jack and they warn you after you are in flames or dead.... but hey..... it still adds to the fun for me.... try it if you havent.

Hoarmurath
09-01-2005, 09:05 PM
I would like to see a track of such AI incredible feats?

horseback
09-01-2005, 09:30 PM
This has been a bone in my throat for a long time. I play almost exclusively offline, and I would simply love to be able to duplicate the successful tactics of the wartime aces in campaign mode. The difference in ai vs player FM has never allowed this. It seemed to be coming closer until recently.

What really sticks in my craw is the fact that the ai have regressed in the last two patches. For every improvement in the FM enjoyed by the player in the last six months, we offliners have paid in increasingly ludicrous ai 'performance.'

Let's be clear here: I love this game. I also love my sons, but if I know that they can do better, I make sure that they know what my expectations are, and I don't accept bullshine excuses. As Gunslinger said, a little respect goes a long way-but it has to go both ways.

The ai could and should be much better; attacking a lone aircraft with a rear gunner shouldn't be the most dangerous mission in your campaign, fighters should rarely be hit by AA at medium-high alt and speed, German a/c should outdive Russians & Brits, Brits should outdive Japanese, Yanks should outdive everyone and there should be NO (zero, zip, nada, noyl) difference in the FM of a given aircraft if it is piloted by a player or ai.

That is the offliner's expectation. I don't think it's unrealistic to expect historical tactics to be useful, or for the aircraft I'm flying to do the same things that my wingmen's aircraft can do.

cheers

horseback

Badsight.
09-01-2005, 11:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Deputy_Fife:
The point is totally being missed here. This is not about the tactics that the AI employs, but how AI aircraft are able to perform totally unrealistic maneuvers.

Maneuvers that are well beyond the flight envelope for the given aircraft, and will cause the aircraft to come apart if performed by the player. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>thats not true of any patch

the AI are allowed to fly to the maximum of the planes CEM controls

operating all the flght controls in FB to the same degree allows you to do the same manouvers

ClnlSandersLite
09-02-2005, 12:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight.:
AI have their CEM computer controlled </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ohhhhhh really? I've never ONCE seen the autopilot adjust prop pitch OR mixture. Not to mention radiator. Using prop pitch alone you can easilly outrange your ai flight members.

ClnlSandersLite
09-02-2005, 12:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Deputy_Fife:
The point is totally being missed here. This is not about the tactics that the AI employs, but how AI aircraft are able to perform totally unrealistic maneuvers.

Maneuvers that are well beyond the flight envelope for the given aircraft, and will cause the aircraft to come apart if performed by the player. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>thats not true of any patch

the AI are allowed to fly to the maximum of the planes CEM controls

operating all the flght controls in FB to the same degree allows you to do the same manouvers </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right.... I've seen bi-planes stay with jugs right to the jugs dive speed limit. Then, they'll pull out AFTER the jusg falls apart. Explain THAT.

Hoarmurath
09-02-2005, 01:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ClnlSandersLite:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Deputy_Fife:
The point is totally being missed here. This is not about the tactics that the AI employs, but how AI aircraft are able to perform totally unrealistic maneuvers.

Maneuvers that are well beyond the flight envelope for the given aircraft, and will cause the aircraft to come apart if performed by the player. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>thats not true of any patch

the AI are allowed to fly to the maximum of the planes CEM controls

operating all the flght controls in FB to the same degree allows you to do the same manouvers </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right.... I've seen bi-planes stay with jugs right to the jugs dive speed limit. Then, they'll pull out AFTER the jusg falls apart. Explain THAT. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My IAs don't do that. Where's the track of yours doing it?

TX-Gunslinger
09-02-2005, 04:32 AM
Hello Longhorn!

I live in Austin these days, but grew up in Gonzales. Just came back to Texas about 5 years ago, after living about everywhere else. Great to hear from someone who knows what the largest pecan in the world looks like. I'm also a little fond of your "handle" as I'm employed at UT.

Bearcat: I'm not familiar at all with VAC. Please PM me with a link if you can, I'd like to try it out.

Deputy Fife: I agree with you, with respect to wishing that Oleg could match the performance limits of the AI to the performance limits of the player's aircraft. At first glance, that seems to be something that could be done, if 1C has the time. I'll cover later in my post, what I think that would mean.

I could have been a little more precise in explaning my attitude. I used the term "fix" when in fact, I don't believe it's appropriate.

The term fix, denotes that something in the code is broken. Broken would mean that the AI does'nt work. I would submit for your consideration that the AI works, just not the way you'd like it to. Software is purchased "as is". Period. No if's and's or buts.

Let's take CFS3 for example. One patch and that was it. All gone. All the whining, moaning and gnashing of teeth about that product did'nt change a thing.

Now, let's examine the patch record for the IL2 series. Through the patches, 1C has provided us with more capability than any other software product that I personally know about, or have ever heard of.

Since this sim is the only quality prop sim on the market and there really is'nt any reasonable competition, what do folks expect they are going to get by insulting the developer? What? It's not like the sim market is making a whole lot of cash do you think?

There is a flight sim developer that I'm personally aware of that can't understand to save his life, why Oleg continues to develop a product he's already delivered. This developer also can't understand why 25 or 30 aircraft was'nt enough. Sim developers privately marvel at what 1C has accomplished here, particularly in the face of constant, negative and abusive comments from a vocal minority of folks who expect miracles for $35 dollars.

Many people spend more on beer in a month than they have on this software.

Folks would be wise to examine the state of the Combat Flight Sim industry as a whole and then adapt their expectations to the "state of the art" and the "return on investment" that any small sim producer is likely to realize. How many software engineers and algorithm developers (math/physics Phd) do you think 1C employs?

In my day job, I actually assist in the development of "AI" or intelligent agents. I have over 25 years of day to day experience in applications of this nature. What I hear some folks asking for, is just not possible, EVEN IF THE APPLICATION HAD NO GRAPHICS AT ALL.

Let me ask some of you to think about:

1) Which algorithims would you apply to the AI controller in order to achieve what you want?
2) What is their computational cost, individually, per CPU cycle?
3) What now is the collective overhead of these (you must add more than 2 right?) computations?
4) Even simple logic loops, eat up computational resources. Remember, you have varied weapon ballistics, damage effects, etc... going on at airplane and bullet speeds...

So, let's take the "equal aerodynamic" performance issue. Now each individual AI aircraft must:

1) Track the kinematics of the player A/C in more detail than simple trajectory
2) Track it's own kinematics
3) Decide at what point it will "do something else, rather than what it's currently doing (following your A/C)"
4) Determine what it will do next from some sort of "tree".
5) Implement this decision while keeping track of all other objects
6) Adapt to changes in the player A/C's kinematics....

Does this make any sense to anyone?

In short, the world hasn't developed true AI yet. In my work we don't even use that term due to it's absurdity. What you are seeing in other appications are clever "slights of hand" that appear to be AI, but in fact are not.

Now, if you gave the AI the same damage limits as the player A/C, without the additional logic loops, then what would happen when you dive? They would all "lawn dart" as their elevators, ailerons and wings fell off. Would'nt be much fun, now would it?

I'd also like to add that serious intelligent agent developers typically don't develop their products in Windows. The operating system is too resource heavy compared to Linux and Unix.

I run a 2.8C PIV overclocked to 3.4 Ghz with 1 MB Ram and a 9800XT for video. I get good frame rates and performance at resolutions as high as 1280 X 960. My rig is getting a little older, but compared to most people who play this sim, it's probably on the higher side. I believe that significant increases in "AI" performance, would remove many folks from the game.

Unfortunatley, if you must have a signifcantly improved AI, you're only going to find that online against another human.

In any event, I'd like to close by saying that I would never have taken the time to respond to this thread, if the linked post hadn't been so offensive. Most of us here, who've enjoyed this series, would like to see Oleg continue developing it, as logically, we know it must be his passion and not his business sense that keeps him in it. Those of us that have an investment in this endeavor, would like to motivate Oleg, not demotivate him, if you understand my drift. Motivation is what keeps things like the new FM, new planes, new add-ons coming.

Anyone can tear something down, only a very few can actually build something.

People have a right to their opinion, and a right to point out what they believe are issues to them. People are then responsible, for the manner in which they communicate these things. In this case, it was a failure, and may have done more harm than good.

Don't worry though, I personally think, Oleg never sees this stuff, and I think that's a good thing.

S~

Gunny

Edited for grammar http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

ClnlSandersLite
09-02-2005, 06:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">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 ClnlSandersLite:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Deputy_Fife:
The point is totally being missed here. This is not about the tactics that the AI employs, but how AI aircraft are able to perform totally unrealistic maneuvers.

Maneuvers that are well beyond the flight envelope for the given aircraft, and will cause the aircraft to come apart if performed by the player. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>thats not true of any patch

the AI are allowed to fly to the maximum of the planes CEM controls

operating all the flght controls in FB to the same degree allows you to do the same manouvers </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right.... I've seen bi-planes stay with jugs right to the jugs dive speed limit. Then, they'll pull out AFTER the jusg falls apart. Explain THAT. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My IAs don't do that. Where's the track of yours doing it? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I assume you mean AIs and not IAS. I don't have a track, but I'll see about making one this weekend. I'm busy today, and likely wont have time this weekend either. I will try just for you though.

Kuna15
09-02-2005, 08:00 AM
I would say that in 3.o4 AI was worse performer than it is now.

Now I can regularly outrun/outclimb/outdive AI in faster aircraft. Also I am under impression that in beta 5 (if I'm not mistaken), AI was maybe even better than it is now. But then again I may be wrong -- I didn't test it properly. But when I selected 4 ace Bf-109G-2s versus me (in contemporary allied fighter), they beat me almost regularly in beta 4.o.

I believe with some more modification AI can be perfected and very well balanced, and that is not easy task to achieve IMO...

stubby
09-02-2005, 08:17 AM
I fly a lot offline since I believe 'dead-is-dead' and DCG are the two biggest success stories of Il2:PF.

My experience is that 'cheatin' AI' can be overcome by smart flying. Because I'm using DCG and I care about my virtual life, I fly very conservatively. Because I'm using DCG, I have lots of action going and I have to stay sharp. Attempting my mission is important but getting home is even more important. If I see a massive AI furball raging below me on the deck, I don't dive in like a madman. I gain altitude and wait. When I engage uber AI, I do it on my terms with lots of E. I make sure my advatage is high to overcome any cheatin' AI attributes. I avoid cloud fighting, etc..

Bottom line, folks can ***** about cheatin' AI but I bet if they were honest about their flying habits, that's where the fault lies, not uber AI. I used to be able to only last a few missions before getting it. I totally changed my flying style (hyper-conservative) and my survivability rate has improved dramatically. So fly smarter, stop the *****ing. It really is that simple. When you do buy it, be honest and admit why something happened. Outside of some fluke collisions, all my pilot deaths relate directly to greed or bad decisions on my part.

Mackane1
09-02-2005, 08:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight.:


the AI are allowed to fly to the maximum of the planes CEM controls

operating all the flght controls in FB to the same degree allows you to do the same manouvers </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This I believe is true, however...You "blackout" and the AI doesn't.

Badsight.
09-02-2005, 05:04 PM
i believe that the game allows them to ride the envelope to the max , doing all the little things that keep them from over-doing it

horseback
09-03-2005, 11:46 AM
...and I believe that for every drop of rain that falls, a flower grows.

cheers

horseback

PS-I may have discovered the root cause of the runaway ai flight leader. Your flight has had another flight of aircraft set as your 'objective' by the mission builder, and your leader is deperately trying to catch up. In the Full Mission Builder, you can see those bright green circles and lines leading from you flight to another one. To obtain a flyable mission, go into FMB & load Campaigns/(your campaign's country)/(your campaign)/ (current mission-DGen will have the most current mission listed last), and select your flight. When your flightpath becomes a glowing silver line, select Object Viewer, confirm that the Player is part of the flight, and then select the Waypoints tab. Starting at the beginning waypoint (usually 'takeoff'), clear the objective if it is a flight that is taking off ahead of you. You will need to repeat this for every waypoint where the objective is listed. Then close and save the mission as prompted.

It's a pain in the keister, but it can result in a less stressful and vastly more flyable mission. -HB

joeap
09-04-2005, 03:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ClnlSandersLite:


I assume you mean AIs and not IAS. I don't have a track, but I'll see about making one this weekend. I'm busy today, and likely wont have time this weekend either. I will try just for you though. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you make the track? BTW just because you can't see the prop pitch or rad animations in autopilot doens't mean they are not there. True the throttle moves but might have been too much work to add the others.

Looking forward to your tracks!

joeap
09-06-2005, 04:32 AM
Still no tracks? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif