Improved A.I

[LeRocket]

So how noticable is the difference? Is the fish tailing gone and do they perform new maneuvers?

 

Still haven't played the new update, probably should soon.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

So how noticable is the difference? Is the fish tailing gone and do they perform new maneuvers?

 

Still haven't played the new update, probably should soon.

 

I've still seen a little fishtailing (especially AI P-40s) and I also had a P-40 fly inverted for 3-4 minutes and climb inverted into a stall.

 

Slightly off topic: should a P-40 be able to fly inverted for minutes/climb inverted under negative G without the engine cutting out?

[Finkeren]

An overall improvement I think, but nothing that completely changes the game.

 

The AI is less prone to weird jerky movements and its flying seems more "fluid", but odd thing still happen.

 

It seems to me, that the AI has become far more dangerous, especially when flying aircraft which previously were very "jerky" in the hands of the AI. In particular I've found the AI LaGGs and La-5s to climb way better than before.

[Scojo]

I've still seen a little fishtailing (especially AI P-40s) and I also had a P-40 fly inverted for 3-4 minutes and climb inverted into a stall.

 

Slightly off topic: should a P-40 be able to fly inverted for minutes/climb inverted under negative G without the engine cutting out?

LOL That would be hilarious to see

[smink1701]

Still could use some tweaking but it's much better than it was.

[Rjel]

I think the AI looks much more fluid in flight. Much more realistic movements. Perhaps down the road the AI routines will get more tweaking. I'd bet that will come to be.

[taffy2jeffmorgan]

I realize that pulling tight turns in combat was an often used maneuver but the A.I constantly only seem to use this ! , more often than not, it's a predictable merry-go-round, but the only good thing with this, is that it is good deflection shooting

 

practice. I seem to remember with IL-2 Forgotten battles that it was also used, but on occasions they would sometimes disengage, dive and head for home jinking with you racing after them.  Happy days !!

 

 

Cheers

[Finkeren]

I realize that pulling tight turns in combat was an often used maneuver but the A.I constantly only seem to use this ! , more often than not, it's a predictable merry-go-round, but the only good thing with this, is that it is good deflection shooting

 

practice. I seem to remember with IL-2 Forgotten battles that it was also used, but on occasions they would sometimes disengage, dive and head for home jinking with you racing after them. Happy days !!

 

 

Cheers

The AI very often disengages in BoX. They will turn home in case of low fuel, pilot wounded, engine damage, oil- and coolant leak or lack of ammo.

[Thad]

The AI very often disengages in BoX. They will turn home in case of low fuel, pilot wounded, engine damage, oil- and coolant leak or lack of ammo.

They sound like intelligent and reasonable pilots.

[unreasonable]

The AI very often disengages in BoX. They will turn home in case of low fuel, pilot wounded, engine damage, oil- and coolant leak or lack of ammo.

 

Maybe - they do that in RoF too from time to time: but I have seen AIs chasing one another around the battlefield trailing multiple streams of white and green stuff - they do not always look like they are trying to disengage.

 

But it is hard to tell what is going on in the heat of the moment.

[Finkeren]

Maybe - they do that in RoF too from time to time: but I have seen AIs chasing one another around the battlefield trailing multiple streams of white and green stuff - they do not always look like they are trying to disengage.

 

But it is hard to tell what is going on in the heat of the moment.

If I understand it correctly, the AI has to put a certain distance between itself and the nearest enemy in order to trigger the rtb-function. If it is in a close dogfight, it will try to fight its way out and not immediately head for home and be a straight-flying sitting duck. That's how I remember the explanation, but I might be wrong.

 

The fact remains, that when I fly campaign missions, It is almost never a clean sweep with one side completely wiping out the other (as was so very often the case in the original IL-2). When I fly escort, I like to stick to the mission and therefore only shoot at an enemy until he is damaged and breaks away and then I turn to the next target. The result is, that the enemy often only suffers 1-2 losses (which often pop up on the screen long after they have disengaged - poor chap never made it home) out of 6 - 10. The rest of them return home, I can often spot them on the distance, as they put on their nav lights for landing.

 

This is still not completely realistic and casualties on both sides in missions are still much too high compared to historical reality, where a continuous loss rate above 10% was considered catastrophic and unsustainable. Flights still don't engage and disengage as a group or look out for each other, and both escorts and interceptors regularly forget all about their mission and just fight each other to the death.

 

Still I think it's a lot better than the original IL-2, but I still think fondly about the ancient European Air War, where interceptors would make one or two pasning attacks, then split-s and dive and head home as soon as there was an escort fighter behind them, and on sweep missions you'd go from fighting 12-24 planes in a giant furball (just to think, the standard flight size in that game was 12 aircraft) and then all of a sudden the skies would be clear because all planes on one side had broken off and were heading home (I hope I'm not over-Selling this, but that's how I remember it)

Edited February 2, 2017 by Finkeren

[216th_Jordan]

I had Mig-3s in a mission of mine and they never hit the target before the patch. Now they do, and they come more aggresively. Before they would attack one after one with about 1 or 2 minutes delay..on ace, now they have a delay of about 30 seconds. great. 

[unreasonable]

 The rest of them return home, I can often spot them on the distance, as they put on their nav lights for landing.

 

 

Still I think it's a lot better than the original IL-2, but I still think fondly about the ancient European Air War, where interceptors would make one or two pasning attacks, then split-s and dive and head home as soon as there was an escort fighter behind them, and on sweep missions you'd go from fighting 12-24 planes in a giant furball (just to think, the standard flight size in that game was 12 aircraft) and then all of a sudden the skies would be clear because all planes on one side had broken off and were heading home (I hope I'm not over-Selling this, but that's how I remember it)

 

That is another thing that irritates me - it is like radioing on all frequencies "Come and Shoot Me!" I am convinced that this is an MP affectation and that in war nav lights would only have been used by aircraft in formation in low light conditions.

 

Still, it is a detail. Overall the experience is good: just finished an escort mission in Juri's campaign, and there is no doubt that the AI IL-2 know their stuff. They totally wrecked Pitomnik.

 

I loved EAW too - pre head tracking days, murder to keep track of what was going on with those squadron on squadron fights. We are getting there - I am feeling better about BoX than for ages.

[Finkeren]

Sure enough. BoX is on a roll with pretty much nothing but positive development for over a year.

[LLv24_Zami]

AI has definately improved it's behaviour as mentioned in this thread. They are more 'human' now in a good way. I've played scripted campaigns recently and it is noticeable after 2.007. It is nice to see that even devs have no specific guy for AI, it is getting constant improvements almost on every patch. This patch is great in every way!

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

The P-40 AI is definitely a tougher fight than before but I've also had the P-40 AI blow its engine twice trying to evade my gunfire in a dive.

 

Any word on the inverted flying thing? Am I the only person seeing this?

[Finkeren]

Any word on the inverted flying thing? Am I the only person seeing this?

I've seen the La-5 do it once or twice, but not for very long and always ending by pulling into a dive. Not pushing nose "down" to pull up in a stall as you described

[Gambit21]

AI Ju52's no longer dive immediately to the altitude of the next waypoint - but now make a more realistic gradual descent.

Many thanks to Han and the boys.

[[APAF]VR_Spartan85]

Had one interesting situation in qmb flight of Lagg vs ju52's, up at 3km and a damaged 52 was limping home, on wingman decided to dive on it, must have gotten control lock because it wasting to pull out of dive and ended up in a crater underneath the 52..

I thought it was lawn darting but it was trying to pull out of dive and failed, I almost felt bad, it was epic.

[Jade_Monkey]

AI Ju52's no longer dive immediately to the altitude of the next waypoint - but now make a more realistic gradual descent.

Many thanks to Han and the boys.

Glad they fixed that. It'll be very useful for mission builders!

[Frequent_Flyer]

The P-40 AI is definitely a tougher fight than before but I've also had the P-40 AI blow its engine twice trying to evade my gunfire in a dive.

 

Any word on the inverted flying thing? Am I the only person seeing this?

Maybe with P-40's you are. However it is routine for the 110's to fly inverted after they drop ordnance when attacked. Additionally, the AI do not fire defensively when priority set to "high"  for Attack waypoint. This should be fixed . 

[Sgt_Joch]

wel, never saw this before, QMB, 190A3 (still learning the new FM) vs AI Lagg. Exiting a loop, he dives on my tail, opens fire and overshoots me right in front of my gunsight!

[Uriah]

Finkeren mentioned the ancient European Air War.  I sure wish BoS.M.K could do something like this as far as planes in the air:

http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/4334024/Bomber_attacks_and_how_it_is_i#Post4334024