Large plane formations

[IckyATLAS]

I am not far at the City Bridge chapter of the Campaign, but as since the beginning the scenarios are all similar and pretty boring, which does not entice me to continue this campaign. I was wondering if in the later campaign missions we get to attack larger plane or bomber formations, I mean by that maybe around 50 planes or so, and this both sides. Or does the whole campaign till the end be the same missions over and over.

Maybe instead of new maps we should get new more lively campaigns. I have no problem with snow. It is the scenario that is THE main plaything.

[[TWB]80hd]

Aside from the initial leveling of Stalingrad by German bombers, I think most of the action was more tactical in nature than strategic.

 

I've seen half a dozen He-111s/Pe-2s max in a single given group.

 

As far as 50 bombers on a mission, that sounds more like Western Front strategic bombing campaign missions to me, but I could be wrong.

[Finkeren]

I don't think 50 bombers in one attack is unfeasible for the Eastern Front but aside from a few special instances (which funny enough would include both the battles of Stanlingrad and Moscow) around 50 would propably be near the upper limit.

 

However, there is no question that the formations seen in BoS are generally far too small to be considered realistic. Fighter sweeps and ground attack missions were mostly conducted at squadron strength and above. Only intruder missions, reconaissance and regular patrols would involve single flights.

 

I'd love to see larger formations in SP, but I'm counting mostly on third party content for that.

Edited March 23, 2015 by Finkeren

[Y-29.Silky]

Can you imagine in this beautiful game...

 

 

A 50 aircraft formation of bombers contrailing right for you? That would be kind of intimidating and my heart would probably sink!

 

But sadly this game has memory problems and that would probably crash on many computers. Secondly as mentioned above, it wasn't common on the Eastern front, and I seem to be the only one begging for a Western front at the moment.

 

 

What would work is a 20 bonber formation on multiplayer, but good luck getting people to do that :/

Edited March 23, 2015 by Silky

[ShamrockOneFive]

I've seen some larger actions happen but they brought my system to a crawl and I couldn't play much until it outright crashed. That was around 25-30 planes that were in a pretty intense, albeit slow motion, battle.

 

I think 50 plane formations is out of reach for now. Engine and CPU improvements both required to get that happening.

 

I don't think its unrealistic to see small formations attacking each other. The campaign missions with the random events going on give you the sense and even let you participate in other battles going on at the same time and while your flight is small there are other flights flying missions too.

[Cybermat47]

Hopefully we'll see large formations of bombers in BoM and the summer map.

[Feathered_IV]

It would be so nice if at the beginning of a flight sim project the developers asked themselves, what is our target number of planes in the air? Then directed their efforts towards achieving it.

[Finkeren]

It would be so nice if at the beginning of a flight sim project the developers asked themselves, what is our target number of planes in the air? Then directed their efforts towards achieving it.

And ended up with a quite un-impressive sim in most other aspects?

 

I get what you mean, and I agree, but if we want complex FMs and DMs that work the same for human players and the AI, that's naturally going to put a cap on the number of planes we can posibly have in the air at any given time.

 

That being said: I'd love larger formations, and I definately think BoS can handle it on a wide range of systems. The biggest air battles I've seen in SP involved some 20 aircraft and did not slow my 3 year old system to a halt. My CTDs don't seem to happen based on the number of aircraft but always seem to either come out of nowhere or be directly linked to specific game functions like respawning in MP or getting hit by debris from another aircraft.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Let's hope this sim stays around for the next 10 year, that way when we all have cosmic quantum computers all the above will be possible

[IckyATLAS]

I am wondering about the comments on above posts about the CPU/GPU power issue for having say 30-50 planes. We had this capability in other and older flight sims before. The previous IL2 could handle that. Graphics level and detail, textures etc. were not the same but since  7 or 8 years ago there has been also a big leap in CPU/GPU power.

I have really difficulties accepting the fact that computer power limits the number of planes you can have on BOS, or maybe the reason is related to the code that is not performant enough and does not use as much as possible the multiple cores and the GPU capability of the day. Maybe this can improve in future releases.

Edited March 24, 2015 by IckyATLAS

[Quax]

.... We had this capability in other and older flight sims before......I have really difficulties accepting the fact that computer power limits the number of planes you can have on BOS, or maybe the reason is related to the code that is not performant enough and does not use as much as possible the multiple cores and the GPU capability of the day

 

 

This other simulators, that you are talking about, didn´t have the abillity to have 50 AI steered planes. BoS and RoF are the only sims (maybe DCS as well), where the AI planes have real FMs, and an AI pilot is actually flying them.  The other sims just have AI drones without FM in the air. That way you can have as much "planes" in the air, than houses on the ground. On the other hand it is kind of stupid to fly against this "objects". 

 

I don´t like AI very much, but if there is AI, it should at least fly planes.

Edited March 24, 2015 by Quax

[Juri_JS]

Given the fact that it is mostly the AI calculation that puts a limit on the number of planes in a mission, I would guess that it's mainly the CPU and not the GPU that's the bottleneck. My system specs are only the games minimum requirements and for me the limit for AI planes in a mission is 20. I am curious how many aircraft people with more up to date systems can have in a mission before they experience negative performance effects. For me as a mission builder this would be a useful information.

[Comes]

DCS does not use the real FM etc. for AI planes either. I think RoF and BoS are the only sims doing this.

[heinkill]

I guess there could be an element of GPU/CPU load but using Lupson's simple mission editor I wanted to test this a few weeks ago and so I made a mission with 80 aircraft in it and measured FPS via Fraps.

 

I don't think the problem is solely the GPU/CPU load, because at no point in this mission did FPS go below 20 fps on my two year old machine - specs in my sig - and averaged 30. (Note: no ground objects, just 80 aircraft. So I guess including ground units would also hit the FPS).

 

I think the reason you don't see more than a few aircraft in any single flight is that the AI has serious trouble flying in formation.

 

I have now created dozens of missions in the SME and have learned that if I put more than six aircraft in a single flight:

 

- aircraft collide on spawn

- aircraft collide when trying to turn at a waypoint

- aircraft crash on takeoff or drive into each other on the runway

- not all aircraft in an AI group follow the waypoints. Not sure what the max number is, but it seems about half of a group of 20 aircraft will follow the waypoints while the others head off in a random direction in a straight line.

 

Lupson increased default separation of the aircraft in his SME on spawn to 150 metres which helped a little but aircraft still collide on spawn, and when trying to turn in formation (not just sharp dogleg turns).

 

So to make a mission of 80+ aircraft is possible but you need to do it in multiple small flights of say max 6, preferrably flying at each other in straight lines.

 

As I said, my experience is solely based on observations in the SME, so maybe missions created in the FME can be fine tuned to help with some of these issues.

 

H

Edited March 24, 2015 by heinkill

[Feathered_IV]

And ended up with a quite un-impressive sim in most other aspects?

 

Thats not what I meant. If developers set themselves a target for a realistic and entertaining number of AI aircraft, they might have a chance of working it into their other goals. However it seems that no particular thought is given to this until the game is all but finished and it turns out the software can barely handle a single squadron at full strength. It's a dull environment, and a boring game.

 

Personally I don't mind and do not care if the AI Heinkel I am firing at is not using the same FM as Billy Bob over in MP. What I care about is running into a huge bloody mass of them and causing the maximum amount of damage when I get there. If I do venture online, I want to see a magic carpet of Ju-52's and it wouldn't hurt you, me or anyone else if they had a simplified AI and appropriate DM.  Certainly not just two or three before the software begins to crap out.

[Albino]

Given the fact that it is mostly the AI calculation that puts a limit on the number of planes in a mission, I would guess that it's mainly the CPU and not the GPU that's the bottleneck. My system specs are only the games minimum requirements and for me the limit for AI planes in a mission is 20. I am curious how many aircraft people with more up to date systems can have in a mission before they experience negative performance effects. For me as a mission builder this would be a useful information.

 

In the campaign I've been surrounded at low altitude by close to 30 AI aircraft without a subjective effect on FPS. There were at 4 or 5 different types of aircraft present (and thus different geometries to store). 

 

This being on a Haswell i5 CPU and GTX 970 with ultra settings, typically running above 60 FPS. My point being it seems like there is some room to move, at least on more capable systems. Does anyone agree?

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, however it seems like the best way to improve calculation efficiency would be to move to a newer Direct X API?

Edited March 24, 2015 by Albino

[Feathered_IV]

Given the fact that it is mostly the AI calculation that puts a limit on the number of planes in a mission...

 

I wonder how Rise of Flight's AI figures into this.  In combat the AI can do little more than a diving turn to the left, yet the game can hardly tolerate more than twenty aircraft in the air at once.

[Quax]

 

I think the reason you don't see more than a few aircraft in any single flight is that the AI has serious trouble flying in formation.

 

I have now created dozens of missions in the SME and have learned that if I put more than six aircraft in a single flight:

 

- aircraft collide on spawn

- aircraft collide when trying to turn at a waypoint

- aircraft crash on takeoff or drive into each other on the runway

- not all aircraft in an AI group follow the waypoints. Not sure what the max number is, but it seems about half of a group of 20 aircraft will follow the waypoints while the others head off in a random direction in a straight line.

 

H

You are right. This is, as it was in RL. The maximum number of a formation in the Luftwaffe was 4. Any bigger number of aircraft (Staffel, Gruppe) did fly divided to Schwarms. It is just impossible to fly a formation of 8 aircraft. Blue Angels can do that, but their seperation is not suitable for war. If you have 8 bombers in a formation, and the leader does a 10 degree turn, the inner plane stalls, and the outer one can't keep position. Even flying straght, the last one would fight with stall and emergency power.

 

So why complaining about the inabillity of BoS AI pilots to stay in those unrealistic formations ? RL pilots would be perhaps a bit better, but surely not all of them. It is the other way around. A sim, where you could set up a 20 plane bomber formation shows how unrealistic those AI "objects" behave.

[unreasonable]

Well that is true in the sense that a large formation has sub-units, wingmen form up on leaders, leaders form up on other leaders etc., so in one sense the building block of a bomber formation was three aircraft: but that never stopped either the LW or USAAF from launching massed bomber raids in formation. It may be unrealistic to expect the sim to be able to take off and form up a massed bomber raid - a difficult and time consuming task without a doubt - but I see no reason why it should be impossible to see a formation of 20+ bombers appearing in the distance at combat altitude.

 

IIRC IL-2 1946 "cheated" a bit by having AI formations in lockstep: planes would "warp" into locked position on forming up and then "break" and go about their individual way under the right circumstances. This was occasionally obvious, but it did allow larger formations to appear: I think 12 was the limit in DCG campaigns.

 

The problem in BoS is that the code seems to be incapable of making even a single AI pair act as though they had ever flown in formation before. My guess is not so much that this is impossible, just that the effort has gone into the dogfighting AI.

[Juri_JS]

I wonder how Rise of Flight's AI figures into this.  In combat the AI can do little more than a diving turn to the left, yet the game can hardly tolerate more than twenty aircraft in the air at once.

But what else could be the reason, if not the AI calculation? In multiplayer my PC has no problems with more than 40 aircraft in a mission, in offline missions this number is completely impossible on my PC.

[heinkill]

So why complaining about the inabillity of BoS AI pilots to stay in those unrealistic formations ?

 

I was not complaining. I was explaining, in context of the OP. There is a difference.

 

This...

 

 

Is what the OP was talking about I guess, and not currently featured in campaign or easy to achieve in mission builder(s) unless I am wrong.

 

H

[Feathered_IV]

But what else could be the reason, if not the AI calculation? In multiplayer my PC has no problems with more than 40 aircraft in a mission, in offline missions this number is completely impossible on my PC.

 

Thats what I'm wondering.  It can't be the AI's tactical complexity, as they have less moves than Derek Zoolander.  The engine management must be what is eating into the cpu usage so badly.   

[Juri_JS]

Thats what I'm wondering.  It can't be the AI's tactical complexity, as they have less moves than Derek Zoolander.  The engine management must be what is eating into the cpu usage so badly.   

And probably a lot of other thinks too, like spotting, execution of mission parameters, etc.

[Trooper117]

as they have less moves than Derek Zoolander

 

 

How friggin dare you... that deserves a dance off!

[Phant0m]

I guess there could be an element of GPU/CPU load but using Lupson's simple mission editor I wanted to test this a few weeks ago and so I made a mission with 80 aircraft in it and measured FPS via Fraps.

 

I don't think the problem is solely the GPU/CPU load, because at no point in this mission did FPS go below 20 fps on my two year old machine - specs in my sig - and averaged 30. (Note: no ground objects, just 80 aircraft. So I guess including ground units would also hit the FPS).

 

So to make a mission of 80+ aircraft is possible but you need to do it in multiple small flights of say max 6, preferrably flying at each other in straight lines.

 

 

I just made a test mission on the Lapino map with no buildings or other objects. I can have 40v40 dogfights with fps between 25-30 but it is like I am playing the game at 1/4 speed.

 

It's strange because the fps is borderline acceptable and smooth but the game is slow.

 

Not sure where the problem lies. 

[Quax]

 Is what the OP was talking about I guess, and not currently featured in campaign or easy to achieve in mission builder(s) unless I am wrong.

 

H

The three ship formations, that I see on that pic, work rather good in BoS. But there is no routine in BoS, where the leaders of those formations could form up to build the next level etc.

 

I don't see the need to add this for the Stalingrad scenario. It is already possible to let several of 4 ships go the same route in close distance. For the BoG (Germany) the devs would take care of that task, I guess

[Juri_JS]

I just made a test mission on the Lapino map with no buildings or other objects. I can have 40v40 dogfights with fps between 25-30 but it is like I am playing the game at 1/4 speed.

 

It's strange because the fps is borderline acceptable and smooth but the game is slow.

 

Not sure where the problem lies. 

The slowdown effect is also the problem for me. Just looking at the FPS is useless when testing the performance with high numbers of planes in BoS. What I do is to compare the passed time on the cockpit clock with a real clock. With much more than 20 planes in a mission one minute passed in real life becomes around 50-40 seconds in the game on my PC.

 

What I like to know is, at which number of AI planes in a mission this slowdown effect becomes noticeable for people with different system specs.

[Comes]

I just made a test mission on the Lapino map with no buildings or other objects. I can have 40v40 dogfights with fps between 25-30 but it is like I am playing the game at 1/4 speed.

 

It's strange because the fps is borderline acceptable and smooth but the game is slow.

 

Not sure where the problem lies. 

I am having that Problem, too.

[KodiakJac]

Maybe instead of new maps we should get new more lively campaigns. I have no problem with snow. It is the scenario that is THE main plaything.

 

+1000

[FS_Fenice_1965]

Thats not what I meant. If developers set themselves a target for a realistic and entertaining number of AI aircraft, they might have a chance of working it into their other goals. However it seems that no particular thought is given to this until the game is all but finished and it turns out the software can barely handle a single squadron at full strength. It's a dull environment, and a boring game.

 

Personally I don't mind and do not care if the AI Heinkel I am firing at is not using the same FM as Billy Bob over in MP. What I care about is running into a huge bloody mass of them and causing the maximum amount of damage when I get there. If I do venture online, I want to see a magic carpet of Ju-52's and it wouldn't hurt you, me or anyone else if they had a simplified AI and appropriate DM.  Certainly not just two or three before the software begins to crap out.

 

+1

[heinkill]

 One minute passed in real life becomes around 50-40 seconds in the game on my PC.

 

It's like that for me when I am at the in-laws place, only in reverse.

[SharpeXB]

I am actually impressed by the AI in RoF and BoS when they make mistakes. Aerial collisions. Stalling and crashing. That's an impressive thing. Have you ever seen an AI opponent in another sim stall and recover their plane? Or crash?

The AI will retreat when damaged.

In DCS fighting the AI is like going up against the T1000 they fly perfectly and ignore any danger or damage to their own plane.

The AI in CoD are completely abysmal and you can just fly through a formation of enemy fighters shooting them down and they don't motice you or maneuver at all.

So BoS AI is pretty good.

[VR-DriftaholiC]

Honestly I think the DEVs put to much emphasis on making the game playable to a wide range of hardware. It blows my mind how ancient some of your PCs are yet there is still the expectation that the game should run on your system. Meanwhile the rest of us only get 1/2 the experience we could if newer hardware was targeted. 

[Sim]

I just made a test mission on the Lapino map with no buildings or other objects. I can have 40v40 dogfights with fps between 25-30 but it is like I am playing the game at 1/4 speed.

 

It's strange because the fps is borderline acceptable and smooth but the game is slow.

 

Not sure where the problem lies. 

 

See Hans post: http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/9152-ultimate-fw190-photo-evidence-thread/page-4?do=findComment&comment=227078

[Urra]

See Hans post: http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/9152-ultimate-fw190-photo-evidence-thread/page-4?do=findComment&comment=227078

a little bit more of this is experienced now than in 1.01...

[SharpeXB]

Honestly I think the DEVs put to much emphasis on making the game playable to a wide range of hardware. It blows my mind how ancient some of your PCs are yet there is still the expectation that the game should run on your system. Meanwhile the rest of us only get 1/2 the experience we could if newer hardware was targeted.

Well certainly the number of aircraft in missions is easily scaled whereas the game engine is not. The Pat Wilson Campaign in RoF gives the player a setting for controlling the numbers depending on their system.

[Feathered_IV]

I am actually impressed by the AI in RoF and BoS when they make mistakes. Aerial collisions. Stalling and crashing. That's an impressive thing. Have you ever seen an AI opponent in another sim stall and recover their plane? Or crash?

The AI will retreat when damaged.

In DCS fighting the AI is like going up against the T1000 they fly perfectly and ignore any danger or damage to their own plane.

The AI in CoD are completely abysmal and you can just fly through a formation of enemy fighters shooting them down and they don't motice you or maneuver at all.

So BoS AI is pretty good.

Accidentally upvoted this when I didn't mean to.

 

Il-2 1946 currently does all those things and has a much larger repertoire of actions.

[6./ZG26_McKvack]

Big bombing missions took place during the initial phase of Stalingrad when the Germans were bombing out every single building. Later time(the time BoS is in) there were only a few planes(1-3) bombers max. Most of the planes were focused on the transport duty to supply the 6th army. 

 

I hope we can see transport missions in the campaign. In RoF there were recon mission and bombing mission. In BoS there is only bombing. Transport role would be pretty cool and welcomed in BoS. 

 

Imagine you have to scout an area and find friendly units then drop small packages via parachutes. 

[FS_Fenice_1965]

Accidentally upvoted this when I didn't mean to.

Il-2 1946 currently does all those things and has a much larger repertoire of actions.

Again +1

[Porkman]

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/14340-it-just-me-or-are-they-tweaking-campaign-actively-which-goo/?fromsearch=

 

In that thread some of us discussed the campaign and I gave my experience with the campaign. What I experienced is that before pilot level 7 pretty much nothing exciting happened except at action point and exit point. Very repetitive and borderline boring.

 

Pilot level 7-10 things got more interesting with more ground units enroute and much higher chance to come across AI planes, friendly and enemy.

 

After finishing campaign, the biggest formation I came across was a flight of 6. The most planes I encountered during one mission was around low to mid 30s.