AI gunners way to accurate

[Lusekofte]

I will give my AI gunner Vodka when I see him next time. He obviously does a better job than I have experienced myself. Maybe a Hero of Soviet medal is appropriate in this case

[Lusekofte]

I have noticed it before, but today it was a bit over the top. I flew a PE 2 series 37 on Finnish server and jumped into the gunners position after trimming the plane for landing , and by luck I manage to damage two 109 attacking me, suddenly I was sitting in my pilot seat again. 

Apparently one of the 109 killed me on his last attack and I did not get killed I just was moved?

I find that a bit odd, should I not have been killed ? My plane caught fire in the same pass so I bailed out and survived the ordeal with two easy kills on my hands. 

It felt a bit unfair to be honest 

Edited February 5, 2017 by 216th_LuseKofte

[US63_SpadLivesMatter]

Well I've never had an AI gunner save my HE from an attacking fighter (piloted by a human).

 

I think that some people just expect that they should be able to swat bombers from the sky without taking a scratch.

Edited February 5, 2017 by hrafnkolbrandr

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

Little can be said by anyone until we have server stats showing total number of shots fired by gunners and total kills.

Even tho it will be well under 1 kill per 10-15,000 shots fired im sure the Nocebo effect many people notice

[Lusekofte]

Well I just asked if I am the gunner myself, and get killed by an attacking fighter, should I not die. It seems as for now we get zapped right back to pilot seat.

I am all for a solid defence for bombers. If you attack from six you are not a moving target and is easy to hit, ergo you should get hurt by doing that. 

I am totally fine getting shot down by two fighters and it give a good feeling give some return damage in the process. Mostly I get better success by manning the gunner position myself.

[DD_Arthur]

The rear gunner was killed by the attacking fighter but not the pilot.  Since the gunner is dead, the game puts you back in the cockpit as pilot.  

 

Seems logical enough to me.

[Lusekofte]

In old IL 2 you died and AI took over. In COD I think the same happened but since AI take over it will only fly for a short while and then crash. 

I just figured it would be the sam here, it is a risk going for turret, most exposed position in the plane

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Pe2 are hard to shot down and that's why you have to spend to much time trying, in the end you want be quick but prolonged attack couse lose of fighter initial energy and expose you even more to deadly gunners. I changed my tactics if he is going East I let him, unfortunately some bombers just want to do its job regardles of cost. I'm really scared of Pe2 more than any other VVS plane. In contrary I do not have that bad feeling attacking any of German bombers

[Lusekofte]

Well I find that my AI gunner cannot fend off most attackers and I usually go back and do it myself, but I hesitate , because in other simulators it bring with it a risk. If you get shot you are dead. But in this simulator you do not get killed in the turret , just get zapped. And that bring me to think WHY?

It should be a risk going in the turret, I find it pretty easy to hurt a attacking plane in this game, at least get them smoking. Personally I do this because people tend to chat CAP LOCK SNIPERGUNNER at me when hit. But they are so dedicated in their attack that they continue attacking after their smoking, making them unable to return to base. And therefor give me a kill, probably because they are deeply frustrated about what they think is AI gunners

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

Thats because other games do not make sense.

they have it like your plane is empty and the pilot must move.
Here the pilot does not move you just hijack the brain of your gunners

[Scojo]

Just want to say I no longer feel the Pe-2 Gunner AI is too accurate. I've recently started hopping in my gunner seat when coming across a fighter and I've been getting more kills this way.

 

Actually considering how many sorties I flew in a Pe-2 relying just on AI gunners with so little kills (2 kills for 100+ sorties, getting pounced by a fighter for half that), I'd say the Pe-2 Gunner AI is considerably worse than a player.

 

In fact, I'd regularly look back and my gunner would literally be shooting 5-10 degrees off target

I'd also like to say that all of the fighters I've shot down, gunner AI or myself, they're using absolutely awful tactics.

 

These are the people complaining about "Ridiculous gunner AI"....

 

even if you do a high speed pass on my but do it full on from the rear, that's 100% your own fault if you get shot.

 

I've only seen one 109 in the whole past month attack me from some other direction than my direct 6 o'clock and most will just hang out there and let me shoot them.

 

Stop complaining. Get better.

 

And I'd also like to say that even if you use good tactics, you may occasionally get shot down. It's the nature of the game.

 

However, if you want to complain, count how many bombers you attack and how many times they shoot you down while using proper tactics. I bet you'll find the Gunner AI is just fine

[Lusekofte]

I do not know if it is placebo, but in my mind the AI gunner is deadly in the 35 series, but not so much in the 87 with turret.

[Scojo]

I encountered a brave chap flying a ju88 at a nice high altitude, but unfortunately all alone. So I rolled in at what I thought was a pretty awesome angle, feeling a touch of guilt for attacking a lone bomber, I managed to set an engine on fire, then suddenly Boom, pilot kill by his gunner! How did that happen? Oh well, I gave the chap a S! for both killing me and for having bothered to climb so high to attack targets on WoL and later checked the recording of the attack.

 

Well on playback I could clearly see my ' awesome' attack angle had in fact involved flying straight past the ventral gunner at probably touching distance. No wonder I died, he didn't even need to aim at that moment!

 

So, ANOTHER lesson learnt for me, and once again it is essentially ' never stop thinking what you're doing during an attack on a bomber'!

This is good advice.

 

I see this every time a fighter attacks me from an angle other than my 6 o'clock. Fighters will sometimes set up a good angle but for some reason attack through the bomber in a straight line. This always puts them in view of either the rear guns or the pilot to turn on them.

 

Ideally when talking about the JU-88 and Pe-2, you want to start your attack at a 45 degree angle from the front of the craft either high up or low, attack the target but pull out of your attack and exit at the opposite side of the craft high or low with a lateral trajectory that keeps your plane to the 3 or 9 o'clock position of the bomber. Both the Pe-2 and JU-88 and even the He-111 can't reliably hit you there unless the pilot turns, but if he turns, he's also throwing off gunners or helping you get more separation anyway.

 

Every fighter I've been attacked by online this past month has attacked my Pe-2 or JU-88 from the rear. the 1 or 2(being literal here) that did not, did what I described as to not do

[Blutaar]

For me something has changed with gunner accuracy, i whatched how my AI gunner in the new 110g did not hit the Lagg3 just sitting behind me at perfect line, he just didnt hit him, after seeing this for maybe 10s we where fast and the ai didnt shoot at me so i lived long enough to whatch it.

I then jumped to the gunner and hit the enemy with the first salvo in the engine, we both goe down after he was really close and opend fire on me.

[Scojo]

For me something has changed with gunner accuracy, i whatched how my AI gunner in the new 110g did not hit the Lagg3 just sitting behind me at perfect line, he just didnt hit him, after seeing this for maybe 10s we where fast and the ai didnt shoot at me so i lived long enough to whatch it.

I then jumped to the gunner and hit the enemy with the first salvo in the engine, we both goe down after he was really close and opend fire on me.

That's the usual scenario. Sometimes the gunner gets really lucky and nails someone, but most of the time he's just shooting at nothing. This is why human gunners that have a little bit of gunner seat time are so much more deadly than the gunner AI as long as the bomber isn't doing crazy maneuvers.

 

AI gunner accuracy right now seems to be heavily based on just RNG. There might be modifiers that make the probability of hitting lower when accelerating, or when the fighter is attacking beyond certain angles, but I haven't noticed it if it's there. This is also why you have some moments where an AI gunner will occasionally "snipe" a pilot when the bomber is doing a wild maneuver.

 

I find it funny that the debate of AI gunner accuracy is just on accuracy and not on creating a better gunner accuracy model. The latter would benefit fighters much more as the bomber would have to consider whether it's worth it or not to do wild jinks because with a better accuracy model, jinks would heavily affect the gunners accuracy. 

 

Edit:

 

And something else that needs to be said is quite a few of you are experiencing this in MP. I'd encourage you to look into whether a plane you were shot down by even had AI gunners. If a bomber is flying level or banking consistently and not jinking, the pilot has usually moved to the gunner seat

Edited February 7, 2017 by 71st_AH_Scojo

[Blutaar]

I allways wondered about the shooting abillity ai gunners have when the AI bombers flys slaloms.

The thing is, whenever i am in the pilot position and holding the plane as straight as possible so the gunner have the best shot he just miss but if i attacking ai bombers, they just slalom and i get hit when i follow.

I konw its not how you should attack bombers thats not the point, the point is teh abillity to hit from a manuvering plattform on a moving target, of course i dont know how it is irl but im sure its some of the hardest things to do with guns.

[Monostripezebra]

AI gunners are absolutely useless most of the time. Even the arguably "best" reargunners in the 87series Pe2 with the turret on ace level can be beaten reliably, if you pay attention to what they do...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGc7M1Knudc

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTc4LpgsRNA

[Scojo]

I allways wondered about the shooting abillity ai gunners have when the AI bombers flys slaloms.

The thing is, whenever i am in the pilot position and holding the plane as straight as possible so the gunner have the best shot he just miss but if i attacking ai bombers, they just slalom and i get hit when i follow.

I konw its not how you should attack bombers thats not the point, the point is teh abillity to hit from a manuvering plattform on a moving target, of course i dont know how it is irl but im sure its some of the hardest things to do with guns.

Exactly, and that's what I mean by the accuracy model of the gunners.

 

Right now they are just on a probability to hit. They have the same probability to hit when flying level as when the Pe-2 and the target plane are both barrel rolling.

 

My argument on the probability is that it is actually decent. It's not too high or too low. However a gunners chance to hit should be higher when the bomber/attack isn't experiencing G-forces or G-force changes(the bomber isn't maneuvering) and lower, arguably much lower, when the bomber/attack is experiencing high G-forces or G-force changes(the bomber is maneuvering).

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

1:45 in Monostripe's second video is a perfect example of what happens to me most often in my Pe-2. The very few times I do get kills is when the enemy fighter stays longer than that on my tail, which usually means he's not shooting me in the right spots, he's just a bad shot, or he's not smart enough to pull away and come back for another pass.

 

My gunner nor I in the gunner seat have ever killed a fighter that does passing attacks or breaks off my tail quickly to return later. Even if it does happen sometime soon, it's a very small chance considering how many times I've been attacked correctly by enemy fighters

[unreasonable]

One of the missions in the scripted campaign Ivan's War is to attack 8 ju88s, it's really good (and fun) practice at attacking the tricky AI.

 

I really like that even IF it is OP, you are forced to think.

 

(I found the most success was had by coming head on. Less time to aim and fire but so much safer.

 

Oh and to always attack the lead aircraft to avoid the combined rear armament.)

 

The Ju88s are hard because they are fast - the other bomber intercepts against He111s are much easier. Head on against Ju88s is tricky because you have to get into a position to do it - depends on your intercept position - then having done the first pass you have to go around again, which can take a very long time with your small speed advantage.

 

 I do not think it is OP - you do not have to shoot down any of the bombers to succeed in the mission, and bombers flew in formation for a reason... IIRC by the time we closed with that group they were already turning for home, so I only managed to get a couple of Ju88s smoking lightly on that mission before my morale bar diminished to zero    and I headed home.

 

Not sure what settings Juri_JS used for the AI in that campaign - I was hit by the odd bullet by rear gunners a couple of times but never downed by any, but I did see AI fighters get shot down.  

[Scojo]

Aren't the JU-88 guns all forward and rear facing?

 

That would mean the ideal attack would be the side and after passing the JU-88, make a slight right turn to stay even with the JU-88's wingtip so you don't come into gunner view until you're out of range.

 

I'll have to try it sometime

[F/JG300_Gruber]

I don't think one can say that gunners are too accurate, or aren't accurate. The situation is a bit more complicated.

Here's a video of the so called "111 stormtroopers" in action. In this video, I'm taking out Hans and Gunter for a little ride, gunshipping a super noobish IL2 (AI controlled)

 

What you can see in the video is what I would call the 4 main problems of current gunners :

1. Gunners are shooting very precisely, all bullets going almost the same path (due to weapon natural dispersion). So either they all miss together (most frequently) or all hit together, yielding vast damages and reason for people to call for unfair sniping.
2. Gunners can't cope with ballistics and never correct for bullet drop. This is why imho the Pe2 is the most effective due to the UBS super flat bullet trajectory. Not because gunners are better than in other planes.
3. Gunners don't reload when they should (know issue for a long time now).
4. Gunners sometimes just go derp and don't shoot even though they have a perfect shooting window and a loaded weapon. (While sometimes they'll waste ammo on attempting stupid high deflection snapshots, but not in this vid).

 

 

 

 

For problem N°1, if you remember from the old IL2 1946, the simple solution taken was to create artificial spread by shaking the turret as the Gunner was firing. This resulted in a broader "cone" of bullets, more likely to hit the attacker at some point but decreasing the potential damage in case of a hit. So gunners were felt to be more reliable from the bomber point of view and less deadly from the fighter point of view. The problems, when they existed, were related to weapon/damage model issues and not to the gunners themselves (like the insane ability of the Ju87-B2 to set people on fire).

 

Overall I liked that better

Edited February 8, 2017 by F/JG300_Gruber

[Scojo]

I don't think one can say that gunners are too accurate, or aren't accurate. The situation is a bit more complicated.

Here's a video of the so called "111 stormtroopers" in action. In this video, I'm taking out Hans and Gunter for a little ride, gunshipping a super noobish IL2 (AI controlled)

 

What you can see in the video is what I would call the 4 main problems of current gunners :

1. Gunners are shooting very precisely, all bullets going almost the same path (due to weapon natural dispersion). So either they all miss together (most frequently) or all hit together, yielding vast damages and reason for people to call for unfair sniping.
2. Gunners can't cope with ballistics and never correct for bullet drop. This is why imho the Pe2 is the most effective due to the UBS super flat bullet trajectory. Not because gunners are better than in other planes.
3. Gunners don't reload when they should (know issue for a long time now).
4. Gunners sometimes just go derp and don't shoot even though they have a perfect shooting window and a loaded weapon. (While sometimes they'll waste ammo on attempting stupid high deflection snapshots, but not in this vid).

 

 

 

 

For problem N°1, if you remember from the old IL2 1946, the simple solution taken was to create artificial spread by shaking the turret as the Gunner was firing. This resulted in a broader "cone" of bullets, more likely to hit the attacker at some point but decreasing the potential damage in case of a hit. So gunners were felt to be more reliable from the bomber point of view and less deadly from the fighter point of view. The problems, when they existed, were related to weapon/damage model issues and not to the gunners themselves (like the insane ability of the Ju87-B2 to set people on fire).

 

Overall I liked that better

 

Nice analysis, Gruber. I hadn't considered their compensation for bullet drop and relative velocities, but now that you mention it, I think you hit the nail on the head there. This explains the Pe-2 "problem" pretty well

[Yogiflight]

Another issue with AI gunners, I notice again and again, when flying Ju88, is, I can tell my gunners to open fire on short distances, but the gunners of the other aircrafts open fire way too soon and shoot on everything in their range. When we then get attacked, they very often don't shoot anymore, because they are out of ammo.

[Scojo]

Another issue with AI gunners, I notice again and again, when flying Ju88, is, I can tell my gunners to open fire on short distances, but the gunners of the other aircrafts open fire way too soon and shoot on everything in their range. When we then get attacked, they very often don't shoot anymore, because they are out of ammo.

Do you mean you can't set gunner engage distance on other planes, or that their close engage distance is still too far?

[Yogiflight]

I think the close distance is still a bit too far, but it is OK. Gunners should by default only shoot, when it makes sense, not at aircrafts passing in a kilometer distance with 400+ km/h or so.

[Scojo]

I think the close distance is still a bit too far, but it is OK. Gunners should by default only shoot, when it makes sense, not at aircrafts passing in a kilometer distance with 400+ km/h or so.

Ah ok, yeah I feel the same way too, sometimes

[F/JG300_Gruber]

I think the close distance is still a bit too far, but it is OK. Gunners should by default only shoot, when it makes sense, not at aircrafts passing in a kilometer distance with 400+ km/h or so.

 

Close distance is kinda OK, but a bit too far and a bit too close at the same time.

 

Close distance is roughly 500m. It is a bit too far because, yeah 500m is quite a long distance for shooting at a fighter size target and 300-400 could be better if they want to hope doing some noticeable damages. But still it is quite OK for me because 300m is the distance fighters usually open fire on bomber sized targets. So if my gunners make them break away before that, I'm happy. 

 

But is is also too close because before the enemy reaches the 500m mark, the gunners stay in "beach relax" mode and don't even bother to warn you that something is incoming... And if the enemy is coming fast, by the time they drop their coffee mugs and grab the gun, you are often already on fire. 

 

 

That's another problem we should probably ask the devs for improvements : Dissociate actual shooting range from "get in combat stance and warn the pilot" range. For example, for close range, get ready to fire at 800m but start shooting only below 400m.

Edited February 9, 2017 by F/JG300_Gruber

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

-snip-

 

That's another problem we should probably ask the devs for improvements : Dissociate actual shooting range from "get in combat stance and warn the pilot" range. For example, for close range, get ready to fire at 800m but start shooting only below 400m.

 

I recall that this discussion was passed around some time last year and *apparently the developers tweaked this behavior.

 

I still think that a "Gunner - At Ready" command needs to be introduced to the command menu at some point.

 

*if they did, I certainly didn't notice it.

[Yogiflight]

To be honest, the gunners should be always ready. I always wonder about the belly gunner in the He111, sitting on a seat above his compartment. Who, do the devs think, will see aircrafts, attacking from below? The same for the navigator in the Ju88, he was sitting 99% of the flight in his seat, not behind the bomb sight.

[unreasonable]

To be honest, the gunners should be always ready. I always wonder about the belly gunner in the He111, sitting on a seat above his compartment. Who, do the devs think, will see aircrafts, attacking from below? The same for the navigator in the Ju88, he was sitting 99% of the flight in his seat, not behind the bomb sight.

 

Perhaps he was navigating?      Agree with you about the gunners though - they should be at their guns ready to fire from take-off. They are look-outs as much as gunners.

[F/JG300_Gruber]

Even though I don't fly fighters anymore, I still like the idea that gunners have a "navigating" position and take a little bit of time to get to their guns. It makes a surprise attack theorically possible. (And I don't want the front gunner standing up all day in the 88 !!!!! the MG alone is already annoying enough)

 

But once the enemy is spotted, they should never leave their guns until the enemy is dead or completely out of sight. 

[Blutaar]

I agree too, this anoying behavior is not only stupid but it is also confusing when you see your front gunner grabs his gun and 1 sec later leave it to take it another one sec later and so on.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

What I did observed for last week attacking red and blue bombers. Blue bombers jusualy go down just from one good pass and very rarely gunners damage my plane, this is opposite when I'm attacking red especially Pe2, if I'm lucky I set it a fire but most time I have to attack multiple times and end up deched. Yes I'm many times guilty to attack it from behind... But it do it regardles of site.

Edited February 10, 2017 by 307_Tomcat

[Scojo]

Even though I don't fly fighters anymore, I still like the idea that gunners have a "navigating" position and take a little bit of time to get to their guns. It makes a surprise attack theorically possible. (And I don't want the front gunner standing up all day in the 88 !!!!! the MG alone is already annoying enough)

 

But once the enemy is spotted, they should never leave their guns until the enemy is dead or completely out of sight. 

 

Idk about other nations, but American gunners were commanded to be in gunner positions and watching once they got within known patrolled airspace. Later in the war that range extended a bit further, especially since fighters would sometimes even hit them over the channel.

Not every gunner is a navigator

[Yogiflight]

BTW the front gunner in the Ju88 was not really called navigator but 'Beobachter' (observer), the navigation was mainly done by the radio operator with cross bearing different beacons. The 'Beobachter' was more for the final approach to the target. Most time he surely was sitting in his seat, viewing the air for enemy fighters.

[Gambit21]

In old IL 2 you died and AI took over. In COD I think the same happened but since AI take over it will only fly for a short while and then crash. 

I just figured it would be the sam here, it is a risk going for turret, most exposed position in the plane

Why would a dead turret gunner result in a dead pilot as well?

Youre talking as if you as the pilot are leaving the cockpit and running back to climb in the turret.

Makes no sense.

[ShamrockOneFive]

Why would a dead turret gunner result in a dead pilot as well?

Youre talking as if you as the pilot are leaving the cockpit and running back to climb in the turret.

Makes no sense.

 

It's sort of how the original IL-2 handled it. If the player died... you were dead and couldn't posses the pilot again after having an out of body experience with the turret gunners and bombardier. It was annoying because you'd be gunning, boom dead, and then your plane was finished too because your player was dead. I'm glad its not that way anymore.

[Gambit21]

I must never have died as a gunner - I have no memory of that odd feature.

[Lusekofte]

Well you get zapped, by my surprise, I do not know what is most unrealistic. I am used from other sims that taking on Gunner position is a risk, not in this game, so I will do it much more frequent. Despite what the general belief is. In IL 2 and PE 2 human gunner is much more effective than the AI

[Gambit21]

Gunner getting shot shouldn't kill the pilot - that's your indisputable answer.