I don't like the AI

[BraveSirRobin]

So you care that a member of the developmemt team validates your observations.

Cool. That must be a nice feeling.

 

It is.

 

In the meantime, there are lots of other people, that clearly fly a lot more SP than you do, that have different observations.

Yeah, that actually makes it even better that I was right and they were wrong.

 

But, of course you couldn't possibly accept that other players might have seen something that you didn't.

I don't have to accept it. The developer confirmed that I was right.

 

So, as you've made clear on many occasions, your experiences trump all others and everyone else must be stupid.

The BoX community are fortunate to have you.

Thanks for taking the time to grace us with your presence.

You're welcome! Maybe next time you'll listen when I tell you what I think is happening.

[DD_Arthur]

Er...anyway; Han has told us the a.i. has no way of knowing who or what is flying a. n. other plane.  However, he has also told us the a.i. behave according to a complex algorithm that takes lots of different factors into account when deciding what is the optimum target/threat.

 

How does this work out in a mission involving a Breather leading a flight of a.i.?   Mr. Breather is flying along in harmony with his a.i. wingmen enjoying the view.

Suddenly the enemy a.i. show up.  Mr. Breather orders his wingmen to attack.  They immediately break off and maintain formation.

 

This leaves Mr. Breather as tail-end charlie and therefore the optimum target.  The enemy a.i. merely obey their algorithm?     

Edited September 23, 2016 by DD_Arthur

[Cybermat47]

Yeah, that actually makes it even better that I was right and they were wrong.

Wait a second, didn't you say that you were an adult earlier in this thread?

 

[BraveSirRobin]

Wait a second, didn't you say that you were an adult earlier in this thread?

 

 

Yes.  Is there something about being right than makes someone less of an adult?  It would be interesting to hear a child's perspective on that.

[Cybermat47]

Yes.  Is there something about being right than makes someone less of an adult?  It would be interesting to hear a child's perspective on that.

Oh, nothing wrong with being right... it's just extremely childish to declare that you're right and everyone else is wrong

[BraveSirRobin]

Oh, nothing wrong with being right... it's just extremely childish to declare that you're right and everyone else is wrong

 

I didn't declare it.  The developer declared it.  If you think that is childish, what do you think of people who call the developer a liar with no evidence whatsoever to support that claim?

[Cybermat47]

I didn't declare it. The developer declared it.

I must have missed the developer diary where they said that you were the most intelligent person ever to exist, and that you word was law... may I have a link?

 

If you think that is childish, what do you think of people who call the developer a liar with no evidence whatsoever to support that claim

Oh, those people are ridiculous. You can tell that they're biased against the game.

 

Fortunately most people will provide proof, such as in this thread.

Edited September 24, 2016 by Cybermat47

[BraveSirRobin]

I must have missed the developer diary where they said that you were the most intelligent person ever to exist, and that you word was law... may I have a link?

 

He didn't say that.  He said that the AI are not biased to attack humans.  Just as I observed.

Fortunately most people will provide proof, such as in this thread.

 

So far they have provided no such proof.

[Cybermat47]

He didn't say that.  He said that the AI are not biased to attack humans.  Just as I observed.

Hmm, seems I wasn't clear enough in my post. I wasn't actually talking about the AI issue. Sorry about that, I'll just quote someone who put it a lot better than I did

 

So, as you've made clear on many occasions, your experiences trump all others and everyone else must be stupid.

The BoX community are fortunate to have you.

Thanks for taking the time to grace us with your presence.

[BraveSirRobin]

Hmm, seems I wasn't clear enough in my post. I wasn't actually talking about the AI issue. Sorry about that, I'll just quote someone who put it a lot better than I did

 

 

Right.  But I'm just talking about the AI.  So comments like that are just immature, childish, sour grapes.

[unreasonable]

Hate to have to do this, but I have to admit that I agree with BSR on the substance here, if not his delivery.

 

I have played more RoF career mode than I care to admit, and BoS up to "pilot level" 9 (or 10) - I forget, it was a while ago.

 

In RoF, I never had any difficulty in using my wingmen as bait, if I so chose. In large fights - 4-5 a side - it was easy to avoid the attention of the AI simply by retaining height better than anyone else. The Ai was clearly attacking the enemies in front of it, not trying to ignore them and climb up to me.

 

I might often find myself chased by 3-4 enemy, but this usually happens because your own wingmen have been hit and are diving away, crashed into one another etc.

 

In BoS I find it hard to be so certain, simply because the speeds of the action and the distances make it hard to be sure what has happened to my wingmen, but I never recall thinking "No, that cannot be right, they are all after me..."

 

If people have had this experience there may well be a rational explanation other than that the player is tagged as such.

 

So when Han said what he did I was not surprised.

[C6_lefuneste]

It is surely possible that the AI do not care if the chased plane is human or AI too, because we will hardly see what is going on for AI vs AI fight,  we are often too busy to fight with AI during action...Or maybe by analysing tracks...

But the problem is not there. Whatever the AI does yet. there are major flaws to improve in order to allow a good SP  gameplay. And nobody in 777 states that devs will work on it, or even that this improvement is important...

Edited September 24, 2016 by lefuneste

[F/JG300_Gruber]

AI not ganging on player ?

Might be a myth, might be a reality.

 

 

So this picture might not be the result of AI targeting human.

But it might be the result of wingmen not doing their job then.

You never get any kind of assistance from your wingmen, each time they encounter any kind of plane, it's "let's go after him"

So if you try to keep on with the mission, you'll be on your own, hence the target of choice. If your ****** number 2 would at least stick with you instead of going for mushrooms each time a dot appear on the horizon, that may help at least.

 

BUT

 

Get a yak on your 6 and any number of your wingmates shooting at him, he'll break off when his plane is totally out of control our you are dead.

Get a yak on your wingmen's 6, and start following that yak, he will usually break of even before you start shooting at him.

 

I don't see any logical reason that might explain this difference of behaviour

 

ALSO

 

There was one mission, I flew with the E7, after hitting the objective, I was chased by 7 i16

I wish I had a record of that because that was soooo stupid.

 

My wingman was (once again) not with me so I ran away, of course no big deal to escape from ratas.

Then I saw my wingman tailing the i16 group, which was approx 1.2km behind me. He was gaining on them, perfect for getting one of them at least.

 

But no

 

He went THROUGH the whole i16 formation, and back on my wing. Neither him or the i16 gave a single f*** about each other.

Not a single round was fired even when my wingman was just in front of the sight of 7 red planes.

 

So something IS obviously wrong on how AI prioritize their targets, and switch behavior depending on situation, and despite what Han said about the matter, I still have big doubts about them making no difference between the AI and the player

[Extreme_One]

...

So something IS obviously wrong on how AI prioritize their targets, and switch behavior depending on situation, and despite what Han said about the matter, I still have big doubts about them making no difference between the AI and the player

Sorry, but your observations are wrong because BraveSirRobin has observed something different, and Han agrees with him.

 

 

 

Anyway, I think video evidence is required... Maybe then the developers (and others that seem to have some axe to grind in disproving the idea) will acknowledge that something isn't quite right.

I'll try and put a video up when I get some time in the next week or so.

[coconut]

The AI has to choose between following orders set by the mission designer and the current situation it finds itself in. Too much situational awareness and players complain that AIs don't follow orders. Too much following orders and people complain the AI's behaviour is stupid and unrealistic.

Blend in the fact that orders to the AI come from both the mission design and the player, and you get many situations that just look wrong from the player's point of view.

[F/JG300_Gruber]

Agreed that a balance between those two extremes have to be found.

But from what I see each time I dare launch a SP campaign is that there is a lot of room for improvements for the AI to act credibly.

 

One thing just came into my mind :

 

Could it be that the AI just completely lack of any randomness in their behavior ?

I mean ganging up on someone's tail, collectively ignore this or that plane, breaking together like a bunch of bugs.

 

Now that I think of it, it looks to me like all AI in the same zone have the same intel about the situation, and they all decide the same thing, that "that plane is the highest threat so I need to chase him down"

Their analysis of the current situation is so similar that they end up with the same reaction, but each on their own.

 

That could explain a lot.

 

If that was one source of the problem, devs should quickly improve by :

1) add (or increase) randomness in the algorithm so that they don't always take "the best decision". Real players can't have their eyes everywhere like the AI do and many of us actually make a lot of bad decisions when flying.

2) Increase the link between decisions and feedback about what other AI in the group are doing. The fact that you can have 6 planes chasing the same aircraft clearly shows that they are not really taking into account their own teammates' decisions.

(and yes, humans do that too, but on Berloga, not in campaign)

Edited September 24, 2016 by F/JG300_Gruber

[unreasonable]

 

Now that I think of it, it looks to me like all AI in the same zone have the same intel about the situation, and they all decide the same thing, that "that plane is the highest threat so I need to chase him down"

Their analysis of the current situation is so similar that they end up with the same reaction, but each on their own.

 

 

I am as sure as I can be without understanding the actual code that this is not the case for RoF, (have video strongly suggesting this), but it may be the case in BoX.

 

BoX AI was obviously based on RoF ideas but rewritten and, I suspect, simplified like a number of other areas. For one thing, wingmen in your flight in RoF Career would often be a mix of novice, veteran and ace, which would affect behaviour in some ways. I am not sure this is the case in BoX campaign, where the wingmen are anonymous.

 

Sorry, but your observations are wrong because BraveSirRobin has observed something different, and Han agrees with him.

Anyway, I think video evidence is required... Maybe then the developers (and others that seem to have some axe to grind in disproving the idea) will acknowledge that something isn't quite right.

I'll try and put a video up when I get some time in the next week or so.

 

Not sure if you are referring to me, but the only "axe to grind" that I have is to make BoX SP as immersive and plausible as possible. If the developers say the AI does not ID the player aircraft as such it is hard to say "no, you do not know what is in your own code, or you are lying".

 

What may be the case in BoX is that the AI prioritizes the enemy flight leader differently irrespective of whether it is AI or player - since you are always the flight leader, the effect would be identical to prioritizing the player. 

[coconut]

 

 

Their analysis of the current situation is so similar that they end up with the same reaction, but each on their own.

 

I think so too. Maybe there is no group-level decision making procedure. Each AI analyses the situation on their own and take decisions without taking into account what other AIs are doing.

[F/JG300_Gruber]

If the developers say the AI does not ID the player aircraft as such it is hard to say "no, you do not know what is in your own code, or you are lying".

 

What may be the case in BoX is that the AI prioritizes the enemy flight leader differently irrespective of whether it is AI or player - since you are always the flight leader, the effect would be identical to prioritizing the player. 

 

You are most likely right, if they say that there's no difference made between Human and AI, that must be the case.

I just want to find a plausible reason why AI behaves so much differently with the player than with other AI planes.

 

I think I read somewhere that the "target flight leader" bit was indeed part of the code.

If that is the case and part of the problem, then less emphasize should be put on that criteria once the dogfight develops for more than a couple minutes. It's already hard enough to keep track of 4 planes in the melee, so keep track of which one is the flight leader would be just highly unrealistic.

Edited September 24, 2016 by F/JG300_Gruber

[BraveSirRobin]

I think so too. Maybe there is no group-level decision making procedure. Each AI analyses the situation on their own and take decisions without taking into account what other AIs are doing.

It would be nice if each AI could determine if their primary target was already being attacked, but that might be too difficult. Or they're already doing it and there are no other significant threats, so they chase the same target anyways. There really is no way to know what is going on without seeing the code.

[Nocke]

...

I think I read somewhere that the "target flight leader" bit was indeed part of the code.

...

I am pretty sure about that. Since, playing PWCG missions, I don't set up myself as flight leader anymore, they don't gang up on me anymore. Easy to try, and a game changer.

[BraveSirRobin]

I think I read somewhere that the "target flight leader" bit was indeed part of the code.

If that is the case and part of the problem, then less emphasize should be put on that criteria once the dogfight develops for more than a couple minutes.

It may already be working that way. That would explain why some people have seen the AI focus on them, and others have not seen that.

[Blutaar]

But this is not the main problem, its the AI itself, all they can do is pull in to the enemy, no variation.

They know allways where everyone is and never lose sight even clouds are no problem and if they focus on someone they will not give up the chase even when youre out of render range and when they do, they often (not allways) just fly in a wide circle and do nothing anymore, you can then pick them up one by one without that strange behavior when you are in shooting distance.

No wonder when they think AI is not important enough to have a specialist for AI programming in the team.

 

I play IL2 1946 alot in the last few days and the AI is not really good but more enjoyable then BoS/M AI, even when they overperform because of simplified FM and things like no overheat and no Black/Redouts.

You can command all the AI through the raidio menu and they will mostly do what you want them to do, for example you can tell your wingman to stay with you and he will and if you get a six you can easily rely on him shooting that six down from youre tail, so they are enjoyable enough to give a good SP experience much more what BoS/M AI can offer.

 

Its important to understand that a good AI is a must, you cant expect to fund the project with a few MP tryhards when you complete forget the SP guys, maybe this works for the first 2 or 3 addons but on the longrun, the SP guys wont give you any money if you ignore them and thats it then, no money, no new content, thats a truth, MP is important too but without a good AI to fill the sky its not a good sim, just a dogfight game without balance.

For now, BoK is the last IL2 game that im willing to pay for if they dont prioritise on SP, its my third preorder in this series and i allready regret it, not so much to wanna get a refund because of slight hopes but i really need to see improvement, im not funding the game to make 100 people happy online.

[JtD]

even when they overperform because of simplified FM and things like no overheat and no Black/Redouts.

In the stock version 4.11 and up, they don't have FM simplifications relevant to fighting (they do for landing), they overheat and black/red out.

[Blutaar]

Hmm are you sure?

I play with 4.12.2m + HSFX 7,2 and the AI seems to have no Black/Redout, not sure with the overheat thing because im in Antons and stay allways fast so no prob with catching enemys.

But if i think about it, my teammates sometimes have problems staying with me when im at 80-90% throttle, can be a issue with heat but im not sure.

About the Black/Redout, the AI can pull insane Gs that i cant follow because of Blackout if i try to stay with them, with Blackout off in options you really can see how hard they can pull.

[Wiesel01]

I understand that fixing the AI is difficult and painful.
And I understand that time is always short.

But should I buy into another (3rd) title without the developers committing on fixing the AI seriously? Not just as some kind of optional
undertaking "if" or "when" there is time or a dedicated team to do it, but as a part of what has already been offered to the players
with the 2 first titles - a "WWII combat flight sim game that recreates the great battles of WWII, letting the players become a participant
of these events".

Unfortunately, and despite all recent updates, it is still exactly in that characteristic where IL-2 BoS/BoM fail due to all the AI issues in single
player mode. It's a pity. And from what I read here, I'm not the only one who is disappointed.

This is not meant as an offense, the game is great in all respects for me - apart from AI in Single Player Mode. And
it has a lot of potential to become the best ever made. So far I'm grateful for what the developers have created, really I am.

But fixing AI is not something to be shifted onto long term lists of things to be done...some day...eventually...sometime...somehow..


In addition to the AI issues already reported here: working radio commands, more versatile command options and radio responses by AI comrades
would also do a lot for "becoming a participant" in battle.

[Blutaar]

Dont know how it looks for others but can it be that this thread is not shown on the first page if someone reply.

This thread is on the 3rd page now for me. :o

[C6_lefuneste]

Dont know how it looks for others but can it be that this thread is not shown on the first page if someone reply.

This thread is on the 3rd page now for me. :o

because it has been moved (and renamed)  by Jason from the "general" forum to the "developer suggestion" forum

[EAF_51_FOX]

I understand that fixing the AI is difficult and painful.

And I understand that time is always short.

 

But should I buy into another (3rd) title without the developers committing on fixing the AI seriously? Not just as some kind of optional

undertaking "if" or "when" there is time or a dedicated team to do it, but as a part of what has already been offered to the players

with the 2 first titles - a "WWII combat flight sim game that recreates the great battles of WWII, letting the players become a participant

of these events".

 

Unfortunately, and despite all recent updates, it is still exactly in that characteristic where IL-2 BoS/BoM fail due to all the AI issues in single

player mode. It's a pity. And from what I read here, I'm not the only one who is disappointed.

 

This is not meant as an offense, the game is great in all respects for me - apart from AI in Single Player Mode. And

it has a lot of potential to become the best ever made. So far I'm grateful for what the developers have created, really I am.

 

But fixing AI is not something to be shifted onto long term lists of things to be done...some day...eventually...sometime...somehow..

 

 

In addition to the AI issues already reported here: working radio commands, more versatile command options and radio responses by AI comrades

would also do a lot for "becoming a participant" in battle.

Agree 100%!!... A.I. is very bad, especially in FM manouvers of the planes: they make continuos and unnatural shaking/wobbing/scissors ..endless. This is not even near a aceptable basic output A.I. in a sim game released recently like il2 BoS/BoM is.

And yes: there are hundreds of people who fly offline in Sp only!. If developers still understimate the problem of fixing A.I. behaviour then should be better if they only have released a MP Bos/BoM sim without the Sp feature.

just my 2 cents.cheers.

Edited November 19, 2016 by EAF_51_FOX

[Uriah]

I have been playing quick mission one on one.  In the servers with people it does not take long before I am shot down.  Fighting just the A.I. - I noticed something like what Fox wrote "they make continuous and unnatural shaking/wobbing/scissors ..endlless".  I am convinced that even at the ACE level the AI is making rooky mistakes that I just don't see the ACE humans make.   A 109 just should not dive for the deck after I do a head on with it in a Yak.  The ACE humans I have flow against just seem never to do that.  And I have seen the AI try to do maneuvers  that just get him into trouble that cause the wobbling and flopping about.  Way to much like I too often fly.  It is true when I first started doing these endless one on ones that the AI often got the better of me.  I am much improved but I still believe the AI could be better on these one on one dog fights.  I hope the devs can improve the AI smarts.

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

i think its like a lot of games with single player modes.

There will still be people who find it way to easy.
Just like people who find Extreme or hardcore modes in games like Call of duty of battlefield (1 shot, 1 life and they play through it without dying)

Or like my friend on Left for Dead Plays the Entire game on Hard mode Solo and clocks it.
 

[Nic727]

I started playing the campaign the other day.

 

AI are stupids. Daidalos Team did a great job with improving AI, but now in BOS/BOM It's weird.

I ordered my allies to form-up in V, but they are so slow to join me... It take all the mission before they can actually join formation. Not talking about they are randomly attacking enemies without my order to attack (or they are seeing enemies through clouds or far away). Sometimes they are going so far to follow enemies that they are like 3-4 squares from me on the map. Also, for some reason, if they decide to stop following, they just don't join formation again, but just go to the next checkpoint by themselves or return to base.

It's a bit weird no?

 

Also, what about a quick order for "Help me" like in 1946?

 

They need to rework AI intelligence.

 

Thank you

 

PS: I'm playing in Hard difficulty, but I don't know why, but why does my allies or enemies are showing or disappearing on the map?

Edited January 11, 2017 by Nic727

[Uriah]

They are now flying better after the latest patch.  But I can tell something is fundamentally not there yet.  When I do a 1on1 and I say fly the Yak against a 109-f4, if I lower my nose a bit so he is clearly seen above the gun sight and then pull up to the right or left just as the 109 is covered by the front bar of the windshield the AI always does a dive and turns back and climbs back up.  In the mean time I gain altitude and turned too.  It always ends up that I can meet him and give him a blast and sense I have the height advantage I am on his tail.  Now it seems to me the AI is not playing to its strength.  I think a 109 should climb after the head on pass.

[Gambit21]

In this case, I actually do care. I flew a lot of SP missions to unlock all my mods and weapons and I was not seeing the "gang" behavior directed at me that others were reporting. So it's good to have my observations confirmed by a developer.

 

I'm in the middle of building a Ju52 campaign - testing mission over...and over...and over.... and I can confirm that the player get's a bit more attention that is realistic.

For instance in my latest mission there's a flight of 6 Ju52's, followed by a flight of 4 which is the players flight.

The Player is number 2 in the second flight, but both flights are close together.

 

The flight is covered by 4 109's

 

A spawned flight of 4 P-40's attack enroute.

The P-40's, despite being engaged by the 109's, still manage firing passes on the player AC, even though it's tested in autopilot mode.

First test, the player aircraft was shot down...the only Ju52 hit. Coincidence? Sure why not.

 

I lowered the AI settings of the attacking P-40 flight, and raised the AI of the covering 109's.

 

Second test, the player aircraft was not hit, however the P-40's still managed several firing passes, despite being harried by the 109's.

I didn't see any firing passes on any other aircraft.

 

Third test - same thing...a few firing passes, impotent this time..but still odd that they spend so much time near the player aircraft with 9 other Ju52's, not

to mention having the 109's to deal with.

 

So while I appreciate your own personal experience, it's still limited...and there does indeed appear to be something going on...and it doesn't appear

as though he player aircraft needs to be the flight leader. In fact the flight leaders of both Ju52 flights were not attacked.

The developers are often not aware of these things until specific examples are provided...that's why guys like Habu are hard at work bug testing all the time.

 

I found a bug whereby AI Ju52's will not take off with certain weather settings (Habu narrowed it down to wind over 4KPH)

Would you have guessed that? Nope.

[BraveSirRobin]

I found a bug whereby AI Ju52's will not take off with certain weather settings (Habu narrowed it down to wind over 4KPH)

Would you have guessed that? Nope.

 

What does that have to do with the AI?  A situation where the AI knows who the human player is and then targets them would require 2 different bugs (1. AI know which aircraft is human 2.  AI targets human).  The second bug would probably require lots of complex code from a programmer who should know that the AI doesn't know which aircraft has a human pilot.  Why would a programmer write lots of code for a situation that isn't supposed to exist?  

 

Or maybe Han is lying to us.  You should call him a liar and see how that goes.

[Gambit21]

What does that have to do with the AI?  A situation where the AI knows who the human player is and then targets them would require 2 different bugs (1. AI know which aircraft is human 2.  AI targets human).  The second bug would probably require lots of complex code from a programmer who should know that the AI doesn't know which aircraft has a human pilot.  Why would a programmer write lots of code for a situation that isn't supposed to exist?  

 

Or maybe Han is lying to us.  You should call him a liar and see how that goes.

 

 

FFS

 

I know you love to be a professional contrarian (I'm using the nicest word that comes to mind...and many words come to mind)...but you have zero clue what you're talking about.

If you actually read my post (and comprehend said post) you'll see that the mission was tested on autopilot...not human flown.

 

Further, the way the logic in the editor often works is based on the identity/name of the unit in question.

I can make any number of things happen based on object or target linking the player aircraft, whether it's autopilot of being flown by a human doesn't matter.

The player aircraft AI setting in the editor MUST BE SET TO PLAYER...thus that aircraft is tagged in the logic of the editor whether being flown by human or AI autopilot and within that logic is apparently (feel free to look up the definition of "apparent") not the same as other AC.  Unless I'm witnessing a string of coincidences. 

 

Sometimes bugs or strange behavior might exist with a certain AC that slips though...which is why I pointed out the example above that rocketed over your head

at several hundred KPH.

 

As fun as it might be for you to rudely attempt to someone who's done testing and is seeing certain behaviors, maybe think a second?

Maybe you don't know everything? Maybe being the board wet blanket isn't a worthwhile pass time?

Maybe make one positive or even neutral post for every 5 rude, condescending, arrogant and abrasive posts? 

 

I have no idea what's going on under the hood - I just know the behavior that I observe.

Maybe it is just a serious of coincidences...yet to be determined for sure...I'm 75% sure at this point.

But yeah thanks for insinuating that I'm calling Han a liar - constructive and necessary. 

Edited February 4, 2017 by Gambit21

[BraveSirRobin]

FFS

 

I know you love to be a professional contrarian (I'm using the nicest word that comes to mind...and many words come to mind)...but you have zero clue what you're talking about.

 

30 years of programming experience gave me some clue, actually.  In any case, I'm not the problem.  You need to confront Han with the fact that he's a liar.

 

Here's the thing, a bug like this would be obvious.  That is why I believe Han.  But you've done tests.  Good luck with that.

[Gambit21]

Hey I'm still testing...but the point really is that we can talk about it rather than bicker.

What I do know is that the game knows which aircraft is 'player' - that's now the editor works.

So we can't base anything on the notion that the game can't differentiate...it must, that's how the logic works.

 

Whether the AI uses that logic to pick on the player is the question.

I've seen more than one person claim to have this experience...and I'm fairly certain (not 100% yet) that I'm seeing it in my testing.

TBD.

[Gambit21]

Oh Look - what do you know...4th test.

All those Ju52's in the sky, the P-40's under attack by the defending 109's, and in very short order

one of the P-40's crashes into the player Ju52 while attempting to make a pass.

 

Lesson - listen to the guy doing the testing.

 

 

[BraveSirRobin]

Oh Look - what do you know...4th test.

All those Ju52's in the sky, the P-40's under attack by the defending 109's, and in very short order

one of the P-40's crashes into the player Ju52 while attempting to make a pass.

 

Lesson - listen to the guy doing the testing.

 

What happens when the guy who has access to the code tells the guy doing the testing that he's still wrong?

Edited February 4, 2017 by BraveSirRobin