Game version 2.004 discussion: New features and improvements

[Menacing_Ferrets]

L cntl 1, 2, and 3 are flares

L cntl tilde is put away flare gun

[GunnyHighway]

Very cool. 

 

I'm taking a break from gaming for the foreseeable future but it will be nice to come back to all of the changes/additions that are going to happen.

We will miss you!

[No601_Swallow]

L cntl 1, 2, and 3 are flares

L cntl tilde is put away flare gun

 

Great! Thank you, MF! Now I know how to light that cigar when I finally shoot down a 190!

Edited October 25, 2016 by No601_Swallow

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

I have noticed that i'm riping off one of my enemies wing more often than before. DM model change or gun (15mm) or placebo?

[LukeFF]

I have noticed that i'm riping off one of my enemies wing more often than before. DM model change or gun (15mm) or placebo?

 

placebo

[Dave]

A possible explanation for the perception of improved aircraft performance that some players are reporting:

 

Rather than your aircraft turning harder without stalling or otherwise departing from controlled flight, I suspect it is simply your AI opponent is not pushing the envelope as hard as before the patch. This would tend to make your aircraft "feel" subjectively better.

 

I noticed in a few cases that people reporting improved 190 turn performance were flying against AI P40s and vice versa. Those who haven't noticed any performance improvement are likely people who fly their own envelope rather than chasing their opponent's.

 

At least this seemed like a reasonable explanation to me without putting it all down to placebo effect.

Edited October 29, 2016 by Dave

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

I don't know what to think, but my friends who are fighting in Berloga said that they noticed less woobly 109s, better P40 handling and they confident about it ....

[Shepherd]

I don't know if this was mentioned before, but here is a hint that worked pretty good for me:

Try your first exercises in the Mig 3 on wintermaps!

 

- First of all, the colder air makes it easier for the engine to accelerate the plane. This should bring you in the air a little sooner before the end of the runway.

 

- Second (and most important) on wintermaps you will see, even at best weather conditions, some high altitude clouds which you can monitor through your cockpitwindow during take off and landing. Using these clouds as an "aiming point" makes it much easier to instantly react on movements around z-axis of the plane.

 

I cannot really say I like the difference brought to us with patch 2.004, but at least I am now able to start and land the Mig nearly without ground loops. (Haven't found a method for the clear-sky summer condition though)

 

Maybe this might be a little help...

 

[Edit] Sorry guys, wanted to post in another thread

Edited October 29, 2016 by Shepherd

[SCG_motoadve]

So is outside air temperature modeled in this sim?

It does make a big difference in performance in real life.

[Hoots]

So is outside air temperature modeled in this sim?

It does make a big difference in performance in real life.

Yes it is, performance changes between winter and summer

[LLv24_Zami]

I have been experiencing big difficulties lately with AI ganging up on me and chasing my plane relentlessly in stock campaign and PWCG. They seem to ignore everyone else in many cases no matter how you fly. I can`t help feeling that this is worse now than before last few patches. It`s effectively ruining many missions in SP, I think there has to be something wrong with their targeting priorities. Anyone else noticing same issues? 

 

Bando has made a bug report about this and it would be appreciated if devs would take a look at it as soon as possible, it`s crucial for SP side of the game at the moment 

Edited November 6, 2016 by Zami

[Finkeren]

I have been experiencing big difficulties lately with AI ganging up on me and chasing my plane relentlessly in stock campaign and PWCG. They seem to ignore everyone else in many cases no matter how you fly. I can`t help feeling that this is worse now than before last few patches. It`s effectively ruining many missions in SP, I think there has to be something wrong with their targeting priorities. Anyone else noticing same issues?

 

Bando has made a bug report about this and it would be appreciated if devs would take a look at it as soon as possible, it`s crucial for SP side of the game at the moment

Funny, I've had the exact same experience. The AI only goes for someone else, if they're sitting right on top of each other.

[Yogiflight]

I had a strange experience in PCWG, flying the 110. I had a Yak behind me and was staying bejond treetop level, as AI is really bad in attacking there, when I saw a second 110 circling around. I turned to it and lead the Yak directly in front of my AI 'comrade', but what was happening, was the 110 was going on circling and the Yak stayed behind me. They simply ignored each other. The bad thing about AI behaviour is, we will get a real campaign with BOK, but the fun with it will be quite low, when AI behaviour is not improved a lot, because the immersion rises and falls with the way AI acts.

[SCG_motoadve]

This is totally ruining immersion for me too, no matter how good a campaign if we have this with AI its a waste.

Tried to enjoy PWCG but cannot do it witht he current AI.

[Jade_Monkey]

Another thing that the AI does that bothers me is that they take the fight to the ground immediately. No matter how high you start the fight they will automatically dive and take the fight to the deck.

[actionjoe]

Yes, a "real" career could be a good thing only if there is a serious upgrade of the AI.

[Gambit21]

Another thing that the AI does that bothers me is that they take the fight to the ground immediately. No matter how high you start the fight they will automatically dive and take the fight to the deck.

 

That's what ruins every single fight in RoF too.

I would LOVE, finally to see AI demonstrate something resembling energy management - extending, climbing, not diving for the deck.

[FuriousMeow]

It's a fantasy to expect AI to behave anything like humans. That's why they had to cheat before. They either have an edge to provide a challenge through cheating, or they fly believably and those that have hundreds of hours in sims swat them like flies while those that just start out complain the AI is too hard.

 

There won't be AI that can pull off human/believable anything for a long time.

 

Unless you want to throw millions of dollars to get a Watson which requires a supercomputer to play just Chess.

[Gambit21]

It's a fantasy to expect AI to behave anything like humans. That's why they had to cheat before. They either have an edge to provide a challenge through cheating, or they fly believably and those that have hundreds of hours in sims swat them like flies while those that just start out complain the AI is too hard.

 

There won't be AI that can pull off human/believable anything for a long time.

 

Unless you want to throw millions of dollars to get a Watson which requires a supercomputer to play just Chess.

 

Yep, although AI in general is already at a scary level FYI, just not in our sims.

I'd settle for a knee-jerk climb response sometimes instead of a knee-jerk dive response all the time.

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

In 1946 (late patches) you can see AI climbing to altitude, doing vertical maneuvers and extending if they have a better perfoming plane. They are not human player level but their tactics go beyond turn fighting. If you are fighting a group some would even present themselves as bait for you to engage as it's wingman tries to get on your tail. Also if they are rookie level they have a higher chance of panicking which results in lack of reaction while being fired at or even bailing out when hit for the first time (without significant damage to the plane).

[LLv24_Zami]

It's a fantasy to expect AI to behave anything like humans. That's why they had to cheat before. They either have an edge to provide a challenge through cheating, or they fly believably and those that have hundreds of hours in sims swat them like flies while those that just start out complain the AI is too hard.

 

There won't be AI that can pull off human/believable anything for a long time.

 

Unless you want to throw millions of dollars to get a Watson which requires a supercomputer to play just Chess.

I don`t expect perfect AI, I know it is impossible. 

 

But it has to be good enough to enjoy the campaign and that gang up thing is really painful now and it should be investigated. Devs have made a good job on bringing constant updates to the AI and I have no doubt that they will continue to do so.

[StG2_Manfred]

It's a fantasy to expect AI to behave anything like humans. That's why they had to cheat before. They either have an edge to provide a challenge through cheating, or they fly believably and those that have hundreds of hours in sims swat them like flies while those that just start out complain the AI is too hard.

 

There won't be AI that can pull off human/believable anything for a long time.

 

Unless you want to throw millions of dollars to get a Watson which requires a supercomputer to play just Chess.

Wrong statement

 

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2016/06/29/this-ai-can-beat-a-top-fighter-pilot/#.WCN4HnMxnqA

 

And on top of that and to show that you obviously know very little about that subject the following article from the German Spiegel magazine from 1998!

 

http://m.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-7898339.html

 

Please insert the url into google translator. It doesn't work with my smartphone

Edited November 9, 2016 by StG2_Manfred

[mort]

Wrong statement

 

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2016/06/29/this-ai-can-beat-a-top-fighter-pilot/#.WCN4HnMxnqA

 

And on top of that and to show that you obviously know very little about that subject the following article from the German Spiegel magazine from 1998!

 

http://m.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-7898339.html

 

Please insert the url into google translator. It doesn't work with my smartphone

 

I couldn't find a follow up on the Cyberlife system from 1998, the article leaves it at "in a few weeks they'll compete with RAF pilots". Presumably if this was a solved problem in 1998, by a gaming company no less, it would be standard fare for sims.

 

The recently demoed system seems to be more about modern BVR engagements for now. There's a whole different class of problems involved with a WWII era dogfight. It's interesting work, but it's not something anyone should expect to see in their off the shelf WWII flight sim, at least in the short term. This summary from a commenter on Ars Technica (naxes) covers this better than I could.

 

 

 

You should read the source article, most of the secondary reporting has been slightly misleading in its use of the term "dogfight", leading people to assume that ALPHA outmaneuvered people in 1v1 WVR ACM. According to the original, the system is simulating full engagements starting well beyond visual range and with AWACS support and superior range BVR weapons for the blue fighters (Alpha was red). I didn't see any examples where any serious visual range ACM actually happened, it was all strategic employment of maneuvering and weapons to force opponents into situations where they ended up in no escape zones for missile shots. The ALPHA system showed an impressive tactical ability, for example using low pK shots against the Blues to force maneuvers that put them into no-win situations for later follow up kill shots. The ALPHA aircraft did have one unrealistic condition, which was perfect coordination between aircraft. When ALPHA was controlling four ships, they went exactly where ALPHA told and expected them to go.

I would like to see the system's ability post merge. The history of modern air combat says that people will end up at eyeball range more often than the sensor technology would imply.

 

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/ai-bests-air-force-combat-tactics-experts-in-simulated-dogfights/?comments=1&post=31464757

[StG2_Manfred]

Jep, you're right. I was just remembering about the Creatures and looked if I could find anything about it. Seems the only article on the net. Don't know if it worked out. I just thought it was interesting because it was in 1998.

 

Thank you for the Ars Technica link. It throws a different light on it, admitted. I also didn't want to say that AI in a computer game have to be that perfect, because they have to simulate a lot of entities at the same time. But it's a difference if you need a room filling super computer or a Raspberry.