Jump to content
-[HRAF]BubiHUN

I'm desperete

Recommended Posts

Had 1 Pretty good La-5 Sortie. Killed 2 Bf109s but it took a combined 47 Hits to bring both down. So, are 23-24 Hits with 20mm Rounds not a bit OP?

 

Also, concerning my point about Awareness. 2 Bf109s in Formation with Lights on in Enemy Territory. They never even saw us coming. 

 

http://72ag-ded.ru/en/sortie/161472/?tour=7

http://72ag-ded.ru/en/sortie/log/161470/?tour=7

Your sortie log...it doesn't say what you seem to think it says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your sortie log...it doesn't say what you seem to think it says

Well, it says that 5tuka and I pretty much did a Synchro Kill on the 67th guys. 

And made the mistake of following a 109 pretty much into the Ground and had to Glide back using excess speed. There is 1:10 Seconds between me wrecking my Prop and actually Crashing. 

And the Logger counted 47 Hits. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it says that 5tuka and I pretty much did a Synchro Kill on the 67th guys. 

And made the mistake of following a 109 pretty much into the Ground and had to Glide back using excess speed. There is 1:10 Seconds between me wrecking my Prop and actually Crashing. 

And the Logger counted 47 Hits. 

 

Correct, good tactics - nothing like a good bounce - that's how I make my living online.

 

Here is a sortie log where it took me 76 rounds to shoot down a Yak and a Lagg: http://72ag-ded.ru:8080/en/sortie/log/210613/?tour=16

 

Some of those hits were 17mm, but most were 20mm. Not all of those rounds were required to take them down, some of them just connected after plane is already killed - so I can't say it takes an average of 38 hits to take down a Yak or a Lagg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats not necesserily hits though, very unlikely even. One bullet can damage multiple parts and you will get multiple damage reports for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is my impression regarding the damage model from flying online:

 

1. The DM overall I think is very well done, with a few areas to address. Zebra already made a terrific post about this.

 

2. The VVS fighters seem to be either flying just fine with full power and control ... or completely destroyed ... with very little variety in between. Keep in mind this is from my perspective as a FW-190 driver. I never see a VVS fighter nursing his aircraft back to base with controls shot out...ailerons working poorly, elevator damaged or degradation in performance (speed and turn) with damage to skin surface or structural wing spars. They soldier on with plenty of holes and a lot of smoke with no change to turn rate or top speed...so it is perplexing to watch this happen constantly online. They seem to be either completely finished (destroyed) or flying just fine. No in-between.

 

Looking at my stats online through about 49 kills, they don't seem to take an inordinate amount of rounds overall to kill...it's just that they never seem to become disabled in any way.

 

3. Most problems I see are from dead six...they absorb a tremendous amount of punishment this way, especially Lagg-3 seems strong as IL/2...goodness that aircraft can take a ton of punishment from six o'clock.

 

4. Pe-2 is the hardest aircraft in this sim to take down and most rewarding kill of all VVS aircraft...I consider it a prize online. A high speed, high crossing pattern is necessary to take them down and spending more than two seconds behind one at any attitude means you are going to suffer egregious damage and most likely you will die or have to bail out. It's DM from 6 o'clock combined with it's talented gunner  :ph34r:  makes it very challenging to take down. If you shoot one of these down online by yourself and return to base, you've done something special. 

 

5. I don't see any advantage in this sim for having an air-cooled radial versus a liquid-cooled engine as it would seem historically.

 

6. I was amazed to see the vulnerable oil cooler on the IL/2 is modeled to perfection...very well done by the developers here.

 

7. Flying the Stuka online - if there were Red Army soldiers throwing rocks at it as it flew past they would have a good shot at bringing this thing down.

 

So - overall i think we have the best DM of any sim I've played. Very well done by developers, but as in all things there is room for improvement.


Thats not necesserily hits though, very unlikely even. One bullet can damage multiple parts and you will get multiple damage reports for that.

 

The sortie log records both percent of damage as well as number of individual hits...they are just listed separately on a different page:

 

http://72ag-ded.ru:8080/en/sortie/210613/?tour=16

Edited by CUJO1970
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't speak for Laggs, but I've nursed/attempted to nurse quite a few MiGs and Yaks back to base just this last week. Engine damage that's taken the odd 100kph off of my top speed, catastrophic fuel leaks, engine coolant running out, oil leaks, etc.

 

And it bears repeating: I'd sure hope that the different planes in the game have their historical, varying attributes, DM included. And I've never, ever in the whole of my life ever heard any kind of expert, be they a veteran pilot from either side, historian, etc. give the Bf-109 the distinction of being a sturdy plane that stood up well to battle damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who is primarily flying VVS, I can say for sure, that all kinds of damage definitely has effect. I quite often have to bail out after the first few hits in a dogfight in MP, not because my plane isn't flying, but because performance or handling is reduced to a point, where I cannot either turn the fight around or hope to escape.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who is primarily flying VVS, I can say for sure, that all kinds of damage definitely has effect. I quite often have to bail out after the first few hits in a dogfight in MP, not because my plane isn't flying, but because performance or handling is reduced to a point, where I cannot either turn the fight around or hope to escape.

Same for me. I have had plenty of times where I had to nurse my machines at least back into friendly territory before making an outlanding. Just today I witnessed someone Steaming and landing just like 3-5 km out of the Airfield. 

 

And I'm currently doing horribly bad as well, I've never had as bad a Record as right now. I bombed my Squadmate Midflight, I have lost my Life 3 times in 24 Sorties to pure greed and low Skill, tons of Outlandings etc. 

But so far Enemy Action has been a minor Factor in my Bad Luck. Am getting the Hang of the Laochkins though. The La-5 is a beast and a real 109 Killer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've flown both.

 

My opinion on the matter is that the game simulates the characteristics of each side's planes well.

 

German planes are more powerful and can maintain an altitude advantage better but are slightly more brittle when it comes to absorbing hits.

 

Russian planes are more durable in general but pay the price in the altitude game.

 

If a German fighter plays the altitude game and picks his attacks carefully, he can really do a number on Russians.

 

For Russians, you have to induce a mistake from the German, or if you can snap shot really well, you can nab that German when he swoops down.

 

I feel like this is all lines up well with what I know about the planes from historical accounts.

 

As far as anecdotal evidence, it's just not worth too much unless you have a lot of experience with something.

 

I've had German fighters shrug off consistent hits from my entire ammo supply before. I've also completely wiped out a Russian fighter with one good burst.

 

The best thing to do is after a fight, no matter how it went, consider what you did right and wrong. There's always some of both and you can use that to improve.

 

Outside of that, the only way we can really be sure anything is off with a DM are controlled tests in SP. Until this is provided, you can't really claim something is wrong with the DM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, can't agree that VVS aicraft are unreasonably sturdy.

 

I fly mostly red for two reasons. The hours And servers I fly at, majority of players play blue. So If I see 18vs7 numbers It's difficult to justify picking a 109.

Second, I consider the red fighters to be overall worse performers than the Axis ac and so I see it as more of a challenge.

 

Been shot down in the peshka at least 10 times by both 109 and 190's. But not even once has someone attacked me from my top/front/side or bottom. At best, a 109 has dived on me with excess speed before spraying away at my six. Pe-2 is very tough. But the way people impatiently attack it from the 6 as if deliberately lining up for the reargunner, without even any speed difference, I can understand where the "feeling" came from that many have.

 

As for fighters such as lagg-3. Perhaps they are. Difficult to know. But really, axis only pilots, try to fly that overbuilt underpowered thing in to combat to experience the fear you feel when on the other side. When you head out to your target area, slowly climbing, knowing the enemy can out climb, out speed, out turn or outgun you. You don't feel very much safer because your ac maybe might be able to take an extra shell to the wing.

 

I'm a mediocre pilot at best but sometimes amazed how axis pilots fly. You guys should be almost untouchable! Instead I'm shooting down a 190 that tries to turn fight my il2 at a 50meter altitude.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, can't agree that VVS aicraft are unreasonably sturdy.

 

I fly mostly red for two reasons. The hours And servers I fly at, majority of players play blue. So If I see 18vs7 numbers It's difficult to justify picking a 109.

Second, I consider the red fighters to be overall worse performers than the Axis ac and so I see it as more of a challenge.

 

Been shot down in the peshka at least 10 times by both 109 and 190's. But not even once has someone attacked me from my top/front/side or bottom. At best, a 109 has dived on me with excess speed before spraying away at my six. Pe-2 is very tough. But the way people impatiently attack it from the 6 as if deliberately lining up for the reargunner, without even any speed difference, I can understand where the "feeling" came from that many have.

 

As for fighters such as lagg-3. Perhaps they are. Difficult to know. But really, axis only pilots, try to fly that overbuilt underpowered thing in to combat to experience the fear you feel when on the other side. When you head out to your target area, slowly climbing, knowing the enemy can out climb, out speed, out turn or outgun you. You don't feel very much safer because your ac maybe might be able to take an extra shell to the wing.

 

I'm a mediocre pilot at best but sometimes amazed how axis pilots fly. You guys should be almost untouchable! Instead I'm shooting down a 190 that tries to turn fight my il2 at a 50meter altitude.

I fully agree.

 

If a German just plays the altitude game against a Russian, it's really hard for the Russian to have a real chance.

 

The guys in my squadron that are really good with the Yak almost always get their kills when in a relatively low and downward descending turn fight, and that's the German's fault.

 

It's too easy to stay above a Russian and then boom n' zoom them for me to give any real sympathy toward German pilots.

 

All they have to fear is the snap shot from an enemy if they don't climb away after the boom n' zoom properly. Then on top of that, they have the safety of slats plus a nice power to weight ratio to keep them stable in a decent turn.

 

Your Pe-2 comment was also a good point. My JU-88 gunners have killed more Russian fighters than my Pe-2 has killed Germans and with more sorties on the Pe-2, but for some reason Germans refuse to realize that their tactics are to blame. The two gunner kills I have with the Pe-2 are from me in the gunners seat firing a full burst in a German sitting on my 6 like he's trying to read my license plate.

 

Now I will say things change when you consider the Mig. If I have to dogfight, I prefer to use the Mig because it evens the play field a bit more, but I still feel the German fighters are slightly more powerful and stable. That may be my low experience in a Mig though.

 

I also can't comment on the Yak-1b. Haven't flown it. I hear it scares some Germans though, so I may have to give it a spin at some point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, can't agree that VVS aicraft are unreasonably sturdy.

 

I fly mostly red for two reasons. The hours And servers I fly at, majority of players play blue. So If I see 18vs7 numbers It's difficult to justify picking a 109.

Second, I consider the red fighters to be overall worse performers than the Axis ac and so I see it as more of a challenge.

 

Been shot down in the peshka at least 10 times by both 109 and 190's. But not even once has someone attacked me from my top/front/side or bottom. At best, a 109 has dived on me with excess speed before spraying away at my six. Pe-2 is very tough. But the way people impatiently attack it from the 6 as if deliberately lining up for the reargunner, without even any speed difference, I can understand where the "feeling" came from that many have.

 

As for fighters such as lagg-3. Perhaps they are. Difficult to know. But really, axis only pilots, try to fly that overbuilt underpowered thing in to combat to experience the fear you feel when on the other side. When you head out to your target area, slowly climbing, knowing the enemy can out climb, out speed, out turn or outgun you. You don't feel very much safer because your ac maybe might be able to take an extra shell to the wing.

 

I'm a mediocre pilot at best but sometimes amazed how axis pilots fly. You guys should be almost untouchable! Instead I'm shooting down a 190 that tries to turn fight my il2 at a 50meter altitude.

only one correction. Germans do not outgun the Russian, not in IL-2 right now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

only one correction. Germans do not outgun the Russian, not in IL-2 right now.

The Fw 190 with default armament (the historical default) and the later 109s with gunpods absolutely do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are many Metals Weaker than wood.

 

Take Salt we eat thats a Metal.

 

 

Salt is a metal now

Wow you are weak on your chemistry.

Edited by RoflSeal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Sodium is a metal.

 

Salt (sodium chloride, NaCl) is not a metal. Anyone who thinks salt is a metal does not understand basic chemistry. This is stuff that they teach you in Grade 9 science class.

 

I am 14 turning 15 and I learnt at school that Sodium is a metal and Table Salt is a salt, and not a metal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dihydrogen Monoxide is an Explosive.

 

I'm just going to assume you are being sarcastic...

 

Reading through this thread I'm at a point where I'd take anything as being meant seriously lol

Edited by JG4_Karaya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can agree that this DM is well, its maybe the best we have in this genre but it seems wrong when you are on dead six, not everytime of course.

Like i said before, the DM is good if you are on an angle but if you are dead six you need sometimes so much hits, i mean 8 exploding puffs of smoke means 8 HE hits but between HE rounds are AP rounds that dont explode so if you see 8 hits you mabye hit 12 or more times with a 20mm round and that really should be enough to kill any fighterplane no matter where these 8-12+ shots landed, just my opinion and of course i can be wrong.

I speak from an offline perspective so no lag and this clearly is only an issue for me on a dead six position, all other positions are fine and i often need just one little burst to disable a plane if i hit it, depends on the plane of course.

The 8 hits are just an example, it could be more but the last time i had such a case it where 8 visible hits and alot of smoke but the plane didnt go down, if you know the AI you know that you get not often that kind of shot without the AI turning like crazy as soon as you are in shooting range which ends in angled shots so its not happen often but when it happens its just frustrating especially when you being chased from 3 other AIs.

Dont take this as whining or hating, i just say what i see offline in IL2, it could be just a false observation but i read more then ones that i am not the only one who experience this and i dont talk about crashing planes where one is not damaged and the other flying, that never happend to me just dead six 20mm hits nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can agree that this DM is well, its maybe the best we have in this genre but it seems wrong when you are on dead six, not everytime of course.

Like i said before, the DM is good if you are on an angle but if you are dead six you need sometimes so much hits, i mean 8 exploding puffs of smoke means 8 HE hits but between HE rounds are AP rounds that dont explode so if you see 8 hits you mabye hit 12 or more times with a 20mm round and that really should be enough to kill any fighterplane no matter where these 8-12+ shots landed, just my opinion and of course i can be wrong.

I speak from an offline perspective so no lag and this clearly is only an issue for me on a dead six position, all other positions are fine and i often need just one little burst to disable a plane if i hit it, depends on the plane of course.

The 8 hits are just an example, it could be more but the last time i had such a case it where 8 visible hits and alot of smoke but the plane didnt go down, if you know the AI you know that you get not often that kind of shot without the AI turning like crazy as soon as you are in shooting range which ends in angled shots so its not happen often but when it happens its just frustrating especially when you being chased from 3 other AIs.

Dont take this as whining or hating, i just say what i see offline in IL2, it could be just a false observation but i read more then ones that i am not the only one who experience this and i dont talk about crashing planes where one is not damaged and the other flying, that never happend to me just dead six 20mm hits nothing else.

Maybe. Try recording some of what you're talking about and providing it for everyone and the Devs to see.

 

 

I can say though that the dead 6 DM for the IL-2 is fine. I've lost my elevator enough on one short burst to know that lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And i can say that its the other way around, i bet there are many people saying the opposite that IL2s are difficult to bring down from 6 o clock.

 

So why is your opinion right and i need visual prove that i am right, i dont want to prove anything its just my observation, i just wanna be part of that discussion.

 

If i had a track i would show it but like i said, you not get that often the chance against the AI and i dont record all my flights.

 

Next time maybe if im not forgetting it in the heat of battle but what if i show that, is one vid enough, or better 3, maybe 10 and if so, how do i proof that is not 10 out of 100 trys and only show 10 but say its 10/10 trys.

 

And one question, do you think Pe2s are fine from six o clock, i know that dead six on a bobmer is bad thats not the point, just the resistence of dead six o clock cannon rounds on the tail?

 

And what about vids where the Pe2 is flying over 37mm flak cannons and getting to many hits if you ask me, and just flys straight, black smoking engines, big holes all over the place, that is not right in MY opinion but do i need to proof it and if yes, how to proof it?

 

So maybe i have a point but its not on me to proof anything, why should i, get i payed for that or will i get famous on this board for doing that, i saw so many discussions about FM issues and these discussions are full of insults, many got closed, that is not what i want, i just say my opinion and look what other peoples opinions are but i dont invest my time to proof something to anyone and get slapped for being a luftwhiner or whatever, you know what i mean.

Edited by Ishtaru
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Burden of proof is on the accuser.

 

If you say the DM is bad and needs improving, then you are the one under obligation to persuade others that that is the case.

 

In my case, I claimed the DM was fine for the IL-2, and so you're right in saying that I need to provide proof. Next time I record my elevator or tail getting ripped off, I'll be sure to provide the video.

 

IL-2s ARE difficult to bring down from any angle, and they're supposed to be. However if one loses an elevator, just as with any other plane, it's going to hit the ground at some point. As long as I keep that from happening, I can fly 109s all the way back to base as long as I have enough altitude to glide back if my engine gives out.

 

I can see what you're saying about HE shells not doing enough damages to control surfaces though. I've felt for a while that they don't really do as much damage as I originally thought they should. However, I can't really say it's wrong because I have absolutely no knowledge of HE shells, the aircraft durability, or the history of it all.


As far as sample size on tests, it's not about some magic number, it's about convincing the developers that something needs changing. A bunch of anecdotal evidence on a forum full of high emotion isn't going to do that. You're going to need some form of tangible evidence and in the case of this game, video is the best way aside from recorded statistics in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that and i dont say that the DM is bad, its mabye the best one in this genre, but anyway i dont feel the need to proof something because i dont say this have to be changed or i will not play/pay anymore and i dont claime to be 100% right about it.

 

If this is not an issue its ok for me, like i said i get not often this kind of shooting angles on the AI so most of the time it dosent bother me and if its not an issue online, ok fine, not my bisnuess.

 

I would prefer better AI over dead six DM if i could choose, AI is so important, i cant imagine why the devs dont see this as important as i do but im not a programer so i dont know much. : )

 

I will keep an eye open for such situations and try to look more into it and push the record button, maybe i should move it to my hotas instead of default combo which i never remember correct, shift r, or alt r or was it strg r hehe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would prefer better AI over dead six DM if i could choose, AI is so important, i cant imagine why the devs dont see this as important as i do but im not a programer so i dont know much. : )

 

 This is always brought up in every game.

 

Everyone always wants better AI. AI is always to easy to beat. AI never acts realistically. The list goes on and on and it's the same for every game.....

 

It's not that the Devs DONT care about AI, it's just the simple nature of AI in software development. Not only is it extremely difficult, but it's also system resource intensive.

 

At some point you have to draw a line between better AI and Dev time/System resource usage.

 

I've never seen good AI in any video game. AI always has to be supplemented with some form of "cheating" by the system so that they can actually compete with a player.

 

But who knows, maybe now that they improved the efficiency of the AI last patch they will consider improving their "logic" to some degree in a future patch.

 

One thing I will say though is don't expect the AI to be very good at anything other than turn fighting for a good while

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reds are arguing towards reds. Blues are for blues. Middle grounders try to stay in the middle :)

 

I really wish the devs would perform and post some tests for each aircraft and the most likely cannon to damage such aircraft.

 

Its funny how warthunder had similar issue to il2 community with tanks, with many players complaining about unrealistic behaviour of rounds and armour models. When the bullet cam was introduced players were actually able to identify and isolate related bugs and inaccuracies in the tank models for the devs to redeem them. Complaints of bias were narrowed down from sweeping accusations to particular design decisions, such as some shell physics supposedly favouring the russians - a lot more constructive if you ask me.

 

IL2 devs are humans too and they too likely make mistakes both on the red and the blue side. We as players can only rely on anecdotal experience and poor statistics. The data is further degraded by synchronisation errors and packet loss over the network. 

 

 

Having no transparency on the dev's design documents, actual designed models and the physics of the damage the Red vs Blue argument cannot stop even if all things are fair. The only way to deal with this is to ask for more transparency and ability for us, players, to test things.

 

I would love to have the ability to say to myself something like "Oh I was shot down in the bomber so quickly because he was firing 37mm, one of them hit my wing spar which caused the wing to break off". Or "Oh I shot 10 37mm rounds into the bomber but it did nothing because they all missed the vitals and only did some minor skin damage which degraded the performance but allowed it to still fly".

 

 

And just to support that devs actually do not perform regular DM tests - FW190 engine armour ring was not present originally, and was still missed after update claiming to have fixed it (after a player brought up their own tests)

BF110-g2 armour is another example of dev's lack of testing - the rear gunner gets knocked out easily in comparison to E2 and the front guns get disabled by hits from 6.

 

 

TL;DR

 

DM is great in theory. Devs make mistakes. They lack consistent test bed to check DM or transparency to let players do it. Likely errors are difficult to spot and prove. Results in abnormal behaviour that people complain about on both sides.

Edited by JaffaCake
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the AI thing - I am a proponent of the AI flying a super simplified FM until it gets close to an enemy (pick a range - maybe 5 or 10 km).  That would consume a whole lot less CPU and allow for more planes in the air, as long as they were not all in combat at the same time.

 

I am also a fan of gunner AI shutting down completely unless an enemy is within a certain range (say 1-2 KM).  That may already be happening as I have no idea what the code is really doing.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Online and from the LW perspective only?

 

Yes...that's why I stated "online" and "from my perspective as a FW driver".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am also a fan of gunner AI shutting down completely unless an enemy is within a certain range (say 1-2 KM).  That may already be happening as I have no idea what the code is really doing.

Best I can tell, this is indeed what happens already. The range at which he really activates is the guns max range it seems, because if I don't modify what range he engages, he'll start shooting as soon as he grabs the gun.

 

I'm not so sure the Gunner AI is the difficult one to design though. Right now his aim seems to be entirely based on a hard coded probability and he just shoots wildly off target until it's time for him to actually hit, and then he's laser accurate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 This is always brought up in every game.

 

Everyone always wants better AI. AI is always to easy to beat. AI never acts realistically. The list goes on and on and it's the same for every game.....

 

It's not that the Devs DONT care about AI, it's just the simple nature of AI in software development. Not only is it extremely difficult, but it's also system resource intensive.

 

At some point you have to draw a line between better AI and Dev time/System resource usage.

 

I've never seen good AI in any video game. AI always has to be supplemented with some form of "cheating" by the system so that they can actually compete with a player.

 

But who knows, maybe now that they improved the efficiency of the AI last patch they will consider improving their "logic" to some degree in a future patch.

 

One thing I will say though is don't expect the AI to be very good at anything other than turn fighting for a good while

But thats how it is since the beginning, the AI changed not much, it just got a dampening effect it seems, so the controlsurfaces dont act like an industrial robot swinging around like crazy but they decisions look the same as ever, turn, turn and turn and maybe a dive or a climb and inhuman accuracy, try to evade high deflection shots with pulling high Gs in a breakturn, they will hit you so often no matter if they are able to see you or not, it seems they have not an engine in front of there plane which could block the view so they can make sometimes long tracking shots a human with a cockpit could not do.

 

The 1946 AI would do the job just fine, the problem is, the devs dont see AI as important and does not have an AI specialist, thats just sad and Jason said that the AI gets no overhaul just a minor fix that we already have now.

 

For me the AI is one of the most important things in this genre, a good AI should be the Basis for programming a Combat Flight Sim to fill the skys with all kind of planes, planes that nobody ever would seriusly fly or big bomber formations or some squadrons who fly CAP for a longer period of time, people get bored fast and thats where we need AI.

 

How many bombers or fighters you will find online in a relatively small area, did you ever see a bomber formation of more than 3 planes escorted by more then one fighter, i dont know how often this happen but i imagine not very often.

 

Only with AI we can get realistic scenarios where plenty of bombers fly and fighters do have enough targets to not get bored after a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I remember correctly, the last AI update did more than just what you said, they also reduced the needed system resources for them significantly so that more of them can be in a mission. That's not only a good step in and of itself, but it also can help pave the way for making the AI more complex at some point.

 

This will also help mission makers add larger bomber formations like you're asking for, and servers have already started adding in some AI controlled planes.

 

Would they really be able to get an "AI specialist"? Someone with that specific skillset is probably not only hard to come by but also expensive. The best they could probably do is hire someone to specifically work on the AI, but from what I know about Comp Scientists and Software Engineers that specialize in that line of work, they're either in high demand or working in research at universities.

 

You have me interested now though and if you'd like to start your own thread for this issue, I'd back you up there. The issue wont get noticed here very well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again - DM is the best I've seen in any flight sim.

 

There are no game-breakers here, but there are always room for tweaks and small improvements. Simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the AI thing - I am a proponent of the AI flying a super simplified FM until it gets close to an enemy (pick a range - maybe 5 or 10 km). That would consume a whole lot less CPU and allow for more planes in the air, as long as they were not all in combat at the same time.

 

I am also a fan of gunner AI shutting down completely unless an enemy is within a certain range (say 1-2 KM). That may already be happening as I have no idea what the code is really doing.

Problem is, that with big bomber formations we're still talking many dozens, potentially over 100, aircraft within that bubble of "advanced" FM. And what's worse, those dozens of advanced AI and hundreds of AI gunners would all become activated more or less at once, when you approach the formation, which could potentially lead to massive stutters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again - DM is the best I've seen in any flight sim.

 

There are no game-breakers here, but there are always room for tweaks and small improvements. Simple as that.

Agreed.

 

I'm always for looking at ways to improve the DM. I personally think the visual damage effects could use an overhaul and there are occassional oddities that happens infrequently in MP which would be nice to have adressed in some way.

 

What rubs me the wrong way are people claiming that the DM is fundamentally broken or deliberately biased in favor of one side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not one of those, i just say that the DM from dead six looks not right to me but i also say that i could just be wrong.

 

Anyway, i agree that the visual damage effects are not so nice, i wish something like CloD has, it looks so awesome to me.

 

Looks like the term "AI specialist" was not right, i just mean someone who have knowledge in game AIs what our devs seems not to have and see no need for it, just from a few postings about AI and why it just get some AI tweaking but no overhaul and this includes maybe AI performance costs on CPU cycles and thats why we could have more AI active but i dont really know.

 

I am sry for the AI discussion brought by me, it was not my intention and there are enough AI threads i think so i better leave it out here from now, anyway thx for the nice discussion. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again - DM is the best I've seen in any flight sim.

 

There are no game-breakers here, but there are always room for tweaks and small improvements. Simple as that.

 

This is your opinion, DM in CoD for me, it's much better, smoke and oil leak, it's beautiful!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem is, that with big bomber formations we're still talking many dozens, potentially over 100, aircraft within that bubble of "advanced" FM. And what's worse, those dozens of advanced AI and hundreds of AI gunners would all become activated more or less at once, when you approach the formation, which could potentially lead to massive stutters.

 

Definitely a possibility and definitely a pitfall of implementing large planes and large formations.  The decision to optimize the performance of gunner AI would immediately become a top priority, whereas if you stayed tactical it might not really be that big of a deal.

 

One of the most important things to do to make AI perform is to rapidly eliminate branches that will bear no fruit.  You have to optimize the decision tree such that incorrect responses are discarded quickly.  

 

I like thinking about this stuff even if my ideas are less than optimal, so here goes:

A gunner does three things - see, track and shoot.  He does them in sequence and not in parallel, which makes things easier.  First decision is to see - that is a quick and easy check and you might be able to shut down the rest of the AI tree with a simple decision - the gunner has not seen the target.   Next is track - probably the most labor intensive of the bunch.  There you optimize for reasons not to track, again trying to shut down the decision tree ASAP.  Last is shoot.  Here the difficulty is making the AI both as good and as bad as a human.  

 

Hopefully not more than a couple dozen gunners ever get to track mode and fewer than that get to shoot.  The code could be further optimized to prevent more than n number of gunners from ever getting into track mode.  As systems get beefier the number of gunners allowed into track mode could increase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely a possibility and definitely a pitfall of implementing large planes and large formations.  The decision to optimize the performance of gunner AI would immediately become a top priority, whereas if you stayed tactical it might not really be that big of a deal.

 

One of the most important things to do to make AI perform is to rapidly eliminate branches that will bear no fruit.  You have to optimize the decision tree such that incorrect responses are discarded quickly.  

 

I like thinking about this stuff even if my ideas are less than optimal, so here goes:

A gunner does three things - see, track and shoot.  He does them in sequence and not in parallel, which makes things easier.  First decision is to see - that is a quick and easy check and you might be able to shut down the rest of the AI tree with a simple decision - the gunner has not seen the target.   Next is track - probably the most labor intensive of the bunch.  There you optimize for reasons not to track, again trying to shut down the decision tree ASAP.  Last is shoot.  Here the difficulty is making the AI both as good and as bad as a human.  

 

Hopefully not more than a couple dozen gunners ever get to track mode and fewer than that get to shoot.  The code could be further optimized to prevent more than n number of gunners from ever getting into track mode.  As systems get beefier the number of gunners allowed into track mode could increase.

Maybe something could be done to make AI gunners be a collective if in a certain range to each other, maybe this way the cpu intensive stuff could be less intensive because not every gunner has his own decision tree but im not sure if its working that way hehe, just an idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...