PDA

View Full Version : Autopilot firing when under nose?



nearmiss
09-25-2004, 06:17 PM
Now I've found another little quirk O' that's not right. Whenever I put the full cockpit on, and start getting on the enemy six and pursue him I've found another problem. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Now...remember I'm just clicking onto autopilot going for a ride. When I have to pull up and the enemy is under me (not visible) my autopilot starts firing on the enemy when he is below my nose VISIBLY that is. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

The all seeing autopilot or AI programming should be fixed for this kinda stuff. Afterall, we've got this http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif fully enclosed full real FW190 cockpit that won't let you see XYZ. Cause it just ain't real if it's not 75% covered by cockpit frame rails. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

The 1C:Maddox should at least program the Autopilot/AI for not firing when the enemy goes below it's nose or maybe I should say when it comes up from under and doesn't come above the nose (where the pilot never sees the enemy) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

The solution must be to fly the HUD, but those friggin' lil arrows confuse me. I never know where I am in the HUD as well. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

The Online players are really gonna get a shot of Adrenaline in the PF with 128 players online. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

So, what's the solution---> http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif transparent Virtual cockpits, at least you're seeing what the AI sees. That's a fix for us por' ole Offline players.

nearmiss
09-25-2004, 06:17 PM
Now I've found another little quirk O' that's not right. Whenever I put the full cockpit on, and start getting on the enemy six and pursue him I've found another problem. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Now...remember I'm just clicking onto autopilot going for a ride. When I have to pull up and the enemy is under me (not visible) my autopilot starts firing on the enemy when he is below my nose VISIBLY that is. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

The all seeing autopilot or AI programming should be fixed for this kinda stuff. Afterall, we've got this http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif fully enclosed full real FW190 cockpit that won't let you see XYZ. Cause it just ain't real if it's not 75% covered by cockpit frame rails. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

The 1C:Maddox should at least program the Autopilot/AI for not firing when the enemy goes below it's nose or maybe I should say when it comes up from under and doesn't come above the nose (where the pilot never sees the enemy) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

The solution must be to fly the HUD, but those friggin' lil arrows confuse me. I never know where I am in the HUD as well. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

The Online players are really gonna get a shot of Adrenaline in the PF with 128 players online. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

So, what's the solution---> http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif transparent Virtual cockpits, at least you're seeing what the AI sees. That's a fix for us por' ole Offline players.

LEXX_Luthor
09-25-2004, 10:44 PM
Transparent cockpits is dumbing down the player to AI standards -- the wrong direction to go if you are looking for a solution. Better to program up the AI closer to humanoid standards...the ultimate goal of Artificial Intelligence research.

JRJacobs
09-26-2004, 09:32 AM
it would be "nice" if the AI followed the same "rule" as us - i.e. if we have unlimited ammo, then they have unlimited ammo. if we lose lock when we lose line of sight, they lose lock, etc.

LEXX_Luthor
09-26-2004, 10:01 AM
AI have limited ammo. They break off attack when they run out, and they don't attack if they are out of ammo. You may need to re~evaluate your testing procedure. I have screwed up some AI tests in the past, regarding AI engagement range. That was embarassing after all the Whinig I had done about it I was (choke) wrong lol.

nearmiss
09-26-2004, 10:47 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Transparent cockpits is dumbing down the player to AI standards -- the wrong direction to go if you are looking for a solution. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I meant to say translucent

It's senseless to even think it. You're correct the AI/autopilot could be fixed so that the AI would not be shooting at un-seen targets...namely me.

How you'd do that? You'd take EVERY aircraft and program it's lowest visual cockpit threshold. Then it would have to relate to the AI math processing for all the other AI flying around. That would take an exorbitant amount of work, and there just wouldn't be enough justification for it. The trade-off is clear, switchable translucent cockpits. This would take just altering the virtual cockpit graphics and create translucent cockpit sets. Then provide a switch to access the translucent cockpits in lieu of the opague ones.

Providing translucent visual cockpits, would require far less work.

As it is now, flying the HUD is the only way to compensate for what the AI is doing to the offline player. I hate the HUD because I have very little situational awareness. All those little blue and red arrow floating around are distracting, maybe I should turn them off http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

If I can turn off the little arrows and icons, why can't we have a translucent cockpits switch as well.

I think there are trade-offs 1C:Maddox has made with the little colored airplanes flying on the full color maps, etc. CFS2 had a better arrangement with the radar circle, you didn't need the tweaky little arrows either. Of course, if we had the radar then we'd have to have some type of navigational tool...so the trade-offs. The full real guys would whine about the effectiveness of radar or when to introduce it,etc,etc,etc.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Better to program up the AI closer to humanoid standards...the ultimate goal of Artificial Intelligence research.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You know this is never going to happen. I just read the big new selling point on PF is the 128 multi-player thingy. The whole emphasis is on the Online player. The online players could basically care less about AI programming, unless they introduce http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif ACE level AI in an influential manner in their missions.

Regardless, translucent cockpits wouldn't require a lot of effort and it would help the offline players.

Maybe even help the Online players as well, especially the newbies. Going to be a pile of newbies with PF, because that 128 player thing is all about GAMING

I guess we, more serious users, are just lucky that Oleg started out thinking of IL2 as more of a simulator than a game.

LEXX_Luthor
09-26-2004, 11:47 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>How you'd do that? You'd take EVERY aircraft and program it's lowest visual cockpit threshold. Then it would have to relate to the AI math processing for all the other AI flying around. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Only have to do this for other AI aircraft within AI engagement range, and not all aircraft flying around on the map. I know about programming this stuff (space combat "sim" in Fortran).

The AI engagement range is 7km or less over the FB.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Regardless, translucent cockpits wouldn't require a lot of effort and it would help the offline players. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
See~through cockpits is exactly what teh internet Ace dogfighters crave to boost their internet brownie point score...not that there is anything wrong with that; all real life WW2 pilots wished they could turn their cockpits off, from time to time. One thing Oleg modded correctly is the historical cockpit view Whining. Anyway your see~through cockpit won't help anybody offline cos your argument can be a method for lesser quality flight sim Devs to use see~through cockpits as a Standard Established industry reason not to program AI. You are right, it is easier to fake a solution with grafix only. This only hurts offline simmers and you know this.

Its no harder to blind AI below their nose or behind their backs than to program AI to shoot forward firing guns forward only. But you do have to find somebody with the skills to do the programming. You have to program humanoid behavior into AI, like some pilots religiously checked six constantly (and lived) while other pilots got lazy and didnt' check six constantly...or got sleepy like in P~51 missions over Germany. This can be programmed.

The problem we are having is there are fewer real computer programmers out there than grafix artists.

nearmiss
09-26-2004, 02:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Lexx_Luthor
You are right, it is easier to fake a solution with grafix only.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's most of what we get anyway...graphics add-ons, so that shouldn't be difficult for 1C:Maddox to do.

Besides, you say it'll hurt offliners...if it's on a switch, it's a choice.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

LEXX_Luthor
09-26-2004, 02:58 PM
Not optional if see~through cockpits become the flight sim Standard Method of programming realistic AI. If that statement confuses you, excellent. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

nearmiss
09-26-2004, 07:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Not optional if see~through cockpits become the flight sim Standard Method of programming realistic AI. If that statement confuses you, _excellent_. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I didn't say anything about a standard method of programming. It's not really programming. 1C:Maddox loads the virtual cockpit graphic files in to PHoto SHop makes them translucent, and then puts a switch in with all the other switches. The use flips a switch just like he flips a switch for no icons.

The process for converting the cockpits from opague to translucent might actually take a couple of days at most.

It would not be much in the way of programming.

THis is Cynical SUnday for me. I have better days with the IL2-FB, this isn't one of the better ones. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

LEXX_Luthor
09-26-2004, 08:02 PM
Well, every day with FMB is a Cynical monday, workday.

You nearmiss the point. The see~through cockpit is easy enough to do to become the standard method, or copout, of "balancing" humanoid and AI capabilities istead of real programming of AI routines. You can see with your own eyes the see~through cockpit is not the way to find flight sim realism. There are better ways, like AI programming. Think how more Mission Editor programming can make flight sims better, so can more AI programming.

nearmiss
09-26-2004, 08:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Well, every day with FMB is a Cynical monday, workday.

You nearmiss the point. The see~through cockpit is easy enough to do to become the standard method, or copout, of "balancing" humanoid and AI capabilities istead of real programming of AI routines. You can see with your own eyes the see~through cockpit is not the way to find flight sim realism. There are better ways, like AI programming. Think how more Mission Editor programming can make flight sims better, so can more AI programming. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're not wrong. I agree it's not a great alternative, but it does have merit. I'm thinking of it as compared to the HUD (WOnderwoman) view. It is FAR better than the HUD and it would help develop situational awareness.

Think about how many times in the virtual cockpits the enemy has been just below you, but you can't see him. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif The AI sees all. How many times does the enemy go just below your nose and you just fire into the air. I'd guess several times on every mission you fly.

I used to think translucent frame bars would be enough... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif silly me. The AI can see in all conditions, the player cannot. Jet sims at least have radar to level up the playing field a bit.

In EAW you get a prompt telling you someone is on your six. Course, I still got shot down a bunch of times before I started Jinking when I heard it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

LEXX_Luthor
09-26-2004, 08:56 PM
Right, to start the thread over again, we need AI programmed not to see through AI cockpits.

Like we need more programming done for Mission Editor...instead of "translucent" FMB screen like that would help anything (trying to put this in language we both understand).

Blottogg
09-29-2004, 04:09 PM
I agree with LEXX_Luthor that the road to more immersive sims lays with Ai, not graphics. I also agree with his observation that there are more than enough graphics artists and progammers in the gaming industry in general, and not enough true programmers (especially Ai programmers... I am neither.) Look at how even high-end rigs struggle to run at high resolutions/AA/AF settings with all the candy turned on. Unfortunately screen shots sell games. I keep hoping the sim buying public will grok a clue about Ai's importance to the enjoyment of games, but so far reviews and gamers spend much more time ooh-ing over the eye-candy.

Since LEXX has actually programmed some Ai, I do want to ask a couple of things though.

I don't know how easy it would be to limit the Ai's vision accounting for the cockpit, lighting, weather, camoflage, etc. LEXX, would you tap into the graphics calcuations to determine if the Ai pilot could "see" through the canopy, or is there another way to do this? I think that while limiting it to the view out of the cockpit would be relatively easy, the problem itself isn't that simple. Does the Ai "forget" about anything that moves behind an obstruction? If not, how long does it "remember"? This is the concept of Situational Awareness. Aces had the experience to know that when an aicraft moved behind them, that based on that aircraft's previous heading and maneuvering, it would reappear at X postion on the canopy. Rookies are much worse at this. The only way I can think of to simulate this is with timers of varying lengths for individual targets to be kept in the Ai's "memory" when sight is blocked. This would also work for blind deflection gun shots that nearmiss was talking about. The shots aren't impossible (I take them frequently), but the target has to remain predictable. Ace Ai could extrapolate target position for several seconds in order to take that kind of shot, but target maneuvering should ruin it. Rookies should be clueless shooting no-sight.

Delay timers are also a wish of mine to simulate other aspects of Ai experience. Now the Ai's reflexes are instantaneous, but in reality, pilots need a certain amount of time to react to target maneuvers (which is one reason why overshoots are much more possible against a live opponent than the Ai.) Rookies should have a long reaction time, while Aces should be much shorter, simulating the Aces ability to better anticipate and react to target maneuvers.

With all these timers running though, I've gotta believe this version of Ai programming is going to start eating CPU cycles. Is it possible now that computers have had four years to speed up since the Il-2 engine was originally programmed? Or am I just smoking dope?

LEXX_Luthor
09-29-2004, 05:00 PM
Blotto:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>With all these timers running though, I've gotta believe this version of Ai programming is going to start eating CPU cycles. Is it possible now that computers have had four years to speed up since the Il-2 engine was originally programmed? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I am sure Windows eats CPU cycles (compared to DOS for example that I program my Fortran for lol), as does the JAVA that Oleg probably programmed the AI with.

You know how when the FB combat starts between many planes and surface units the fps drops to slideshow--depending on the number of units in combat and your CPU. I think I once saw Oleg post or reply in interview that BoB AI will have "accuracy" bubbles like Rowan's MiG Alley had (and their BoB too I think). AI gets somehow reduced in complexity if its far away from your cockpit. This can be very bad if not done right, and can mess up larger campaign combat results. Done right who knows it could work well. It apparently can allow huge numbers of aircraft as seen in Rowan's BoB. Just something I heard about.

I have not gone as far yet with my AI programming beyond target detection around spherical planets/moons. Yes, behavior based around timers would work if AI lost sight of target. Glad you mentioned skill level because that should affect the basic AI engagement range. There are more advanced ideas out there I am sure, but few "pro" AI programmers to do it--and I am not one. My Fortran program is for DOS only (but running on Athalon 1700+).

Programming AI to see Cumulus Clouds are trivially easy if you use basic vector algebra and some good approximations like spheres or groups of spheres to represent a single cloud in the calculations. This can work if you think of the speed of aircraft in relation to clouds and how short the time is when the aircraft is between the sphere boundary and the actual cloud grafix boundary. Overcast clouds are even more easy. Only three conditions to test, both above cloud top, both below cloud top, or at least one between cloud top and cloud bottom (inside the overcast).

DOS Flanker 1.0 had heat seeking missiles that were distracted by the sun. This was a 1994 jet sim created for 486 CPU (what cpu?). Even 1994 DOS flight sims had AI distracted by the sun. This is astonishing that flight sim Devs in 21st Century have yet to program AI aircrew to also be distracted by the sun (a simple vector position in the sky). Guess there are not enough AI programmers around.

Blottogg
09-29-2004, 08:12 PM
LEXX, thanks for the reply. I remember Oleg mentioning the Ai FM (and possibly the Ai itself) varying with distance for BoB as well. Hopefully the 1C team will use the addtional CPU overhead to put in some of the Ai features we're talking about. I would even welcome tab-data Ai FM's for distant aircraft if it means enough CPU cycles to fight a full FM Ai with more robust Ai programming.

Good analogy with heat-seeking missiles. Just because they're simulating two very different real-world objects doesn't mean heater programming and Ai programming can't share code for similar behavior.

You mentioned the sun, and while the Ai aren't distracted by it, they sure are programmed to drag the player through it! The German gun sight shade is a nice attention-to-detail item, but it doesn't do much to cut glare.