Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Bearfoot

On Balancing the "Game" While Keeping the "Sim"

Recommended Posts

So what is the difference?

The difference is that the rest of the AI isn't flying the planes that we're trying to shoot down. And shooting down other planes is really what the game is about for people flying fighters.

 

Btw, I would love to have humans controlling the trucks, tanks, and AA guns.

Let is keep this really, really, really simple.

 

It is not either/or.

 

It is for me. Is that simple enough for you?

You do get to vote by blessing or not blessing a particular server by your hallowed presence, of course.

 

We all get to vote. So far the AI on Wargrounds is losing.

Edited by BraveSirRobin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said, my previous question was a rhetoric question, just to exercise your brain to think outside of a box. I will offer another exercise, for free.

So, people are not supposed to fly against humans, if there is any kind of AI involved? Does it only concern planes or any other AI? Now ask yourself, why you have come to this conclusion. Then can ask why again. Ask yourself, could there be any other alternative to this line of thought. 

Just some simple exercises to help  you open up your mind to new thoughts.

I've spent many years pondering the deep meaning of playing against AI pilots versus human pilots, and I've concluded that the evidence overwhelming supports the view that AI aircraft in MP missions is sucktacular. Nothing you have posted here has changed that view. If anything, posts like the one I quoted here only confirms it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... and shooting down other human-driven planes is really what the game is about for people flying fighters me.

 

Fixed that for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I can easily ignore the AI in multiplayer and have no problem with letting other people fire away on them.

 

I don't see the issue.

 

I think slick and clean stat and leaderboards for epeen tracking seem to have more impact on server population than the presence of lack of AI.

Edited by hrafnkolbrandr
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

If anything, posts like the one I quoted here only confirms it.

 

Unfortunately it only confirms that you have built too thick of a box around your head to be able to see things beyond your nose.  :)

But good luck with that, I wont force any more exercises on you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fixed that for you.

You did nothing of the sort. I want as many people as possible and as little AI as possible. Right now we have hardly any AI aircraft on WoL. There are significantly more AI aircraft in Wargrounds. Wargrounds is usually empty. If you were looking for an indication of what people prefer, that should make it pretty clear.

Unfortunately it only confirms that you have built too thick of a box around your head to be able to see things beyond your nose. :)

Lol...

 

Physician, heal thyself.

I think slick and clean stat and leaderboards for epeen tracking seem to have more impact on server population than the presence of lack of AI.

This sort of nonsense about stats always amuses me. Why would people with crappy stats be more likely to fly on a server where their crappiness is on display for all to see?

Edited by BraveSirRobin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This sort of nonsense about stats always amuses me. Why would people with crappy stats be more likely to fly on a server where their crappiness is on display for all to see?

Because it is nice to have some numbers to track progress.

 

But beyond that, it isn't "crappy" players who make up the core of server populations. It is the veterans, those who are consistently logged on, who make up the core of our hobby. These are the dudes who consistently keep some numbers on the servers which entice the "crappy" players to choose to log onto those servers out of the 20 or 30 available.

 

And for a lot of those veterans, being able to follow their own stats is part of the fun. Just because you never take a look at your stats doesn't mean that others don't. For some, that is the best part.

 

Presence of AI just isn't relevant for most people, as long as there are still real players around. You like to mention wargrounds being dead because of AI:. Meanwhile NFF 1 and 2, as well as the J99 lake (when it is up) are the only other servers besides wargrounds that have people on them at peak times. They have AI, and its presence is irrelevant.

Edited by hrafnkolbrandr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because it is nice to have some numbers to track progress.

Lol

 

So you're doing it for "noble" reasons, while everyone else is epeening...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol

 

So you're doing it for "noble" reasons, while everyone else is epeening...

No, it's epeening. It's just being able to admit that my epeen isn't as big as yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 There are significantly more AI aircraft in Wargrounds. Wargrounds is usually empty. If you were looking for an indication of what people prefer, that should make it pretty clear.

 

 

 

While i may not agree with everything said here, this is just true. 

Clearly it is the minority that want AI filling the skies on multiplayer servers. If thats your thing, i really suggest flying on one of the server that are arranged like this. Rather than try to make a popular server (its popular for a reason) imitate the servers that fail to attract players. Its just bad business (luckily i think WOL admins realize this).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's epeening. It's just being able to admit that my epeen isn't as big as yours.

They didn't paint kills or bombs on the sides of their aircraft out of modesty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly suspect the online numerical imbalance will self-correct once the 'Spitfire' becomes available.  In fact, depending on individual server rules, I suspect the imbalance may even reverse. 

 

I'm not a fan of online AI and I don't like imposed maximums either.

Edited by Wulf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow....

THIS IS NOT AN MMO

There is no adjustments made for balance and hope there never is.
The devs are not building a balanced game they building a historical sim.

No planes has been buffed or nerfed (and never should be), based on its stats and which side is winning they only been corrected based on more historical info provided and new information,
Not even in next patch are and planes being nerfed or buffed they are being CORRECTED.
No plane in IL2 should be adjust even if it wins 9/10 sorties if thats how it was historically

GAME BALANCE IS NOT IMPORTANT, HISTORICAL ACCURACY IS ALL THAT MATTER.
IMHO Multiplayer server should loose ALL Ability to balance the game (Ai/AAA & Gunner skill levels) should be hard coded by the devs and preset to historical values unlike now...

Also Devs already clearly stated that there is NO Russian bias (which is a legally binding statement)
 

Edited by =R4T=Sshadow14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow....

 

THIS IS NOT AN MMO

 

There is no adjustments made for balance and hope there never is.

The devs are not building a balanced game they building a historical sim.

 

No planes has been buffed or nerfed (and never should be), based on its stats and which side is winning they only been corrected based on more historical info provided and new information,

Not even in next patch are and planes being nerfed or buffed they are being CORRECTED.

No plane in IL2 should be adjust even if it wins 9/10 sorties if thats how it was historically

 

GAME BALANCE IS NOT IMPORTANT, HISTORICAL ACCURACY IS ALL THAT MATTER.

IMHO Multiplayer server should loose ALL Ability to balance the game (Ai/AAA & Gunner skill levels) should be hard coded by the devs and preset to historical values unlike now...

 

Also Devs already clearly stated that there is NO Russian bias (which is a legally binding statement)

 

 

Ah, yes.

 

Because historically, pilots would hop into their aircraft one by one at random times and then take off and flying toward some place where they see a bunch of little dots in a furball buzzing around and then they would join in as they wish to joust and up their scores at their own whim doing their own thing.

 

Gimme a break.

 

See, there's in realism and there is realism. 

 

This is a realistic historical simulation ... but one which is used by most people to play quake-ish games on MP most of the time.

 

Fact is, only in a well-crafted SP mission or campaign do we see much attempt at using this simulation historically. Otherwise, much as I enjoy MP as the next guy, let's get rid of this silly notion that most MP servers captures the operational realism of any era of combat, especially for the air-to-air jockeys (while I do not do ground attack myself, I see some effort at realistic operations there). MP is not just the most game-like this great simulation gets in terms of operations, but it is where it is most game-like most of the time with most people on most servers, with its "wild wild west" come-when-you-may go-where-you stay-for-as-long-as-you-like operations. And, no, sprinkling in some ground objectives with points and scores in an effort to encourage cooperation and coordination does quite the opposite from making the sim less game like. EDIT: and before you go quoting me passages or anecdotes where historical missions did indeed have lone pilots take-off willy-nilly at random times to go a-jousting, let's talk about the norm and standard practice. Which can be gleaned from, e.g.: any of the red star/black cross books, or the more recent "War over the Steppes" etc.

 

You go out a create an MP mission that supports realistic operations, AI or not, and I'll be there, balance or no balance. 

 

But you know what else? If you actually get an MP mission that supports realistic operations, over time the balance will naturally be there. Because IRL, while one side or the other always had some sort of superiority in some aspect or another in any localized time and space (we all have read the history books about the imbalance in 1941 or, going the other way, in 1943/1944), on a larger scale of time and space there was balance because otherwise the war would not have lasted as long as it did.

 

Ironically, if you will indulge me a major simplification, you know what balanced the odds in 1941, at least long enough for a turn around? On the Red side, numbers. Huge numbers of poorly-trained-to-the-point-of-gross-incompetence pilots who took the sky to be shot down in similarly huge numbers. (If you need me to spell out it out: the irony here being that AI would be perfect stand-ins for these masses of poor pilots.) The few who survived long enough to learn their skills on the job joined the aces from before who became the vanguard when the pendulum swung the other way.

Edited by Bearfoot
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why an AI bomber flight would be a bad thing, it just makes for another moving attack/defense objective. 

 

Make its launches player controlled when the Air Marshall thing comes out and it becomes just another strategy piece for the guy at the helm, as far as I'm concerned.

 

No need to feed the folks who are pretending to make this more extreme than it is or needs to be, they argue for the sake of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used AI flights too good effect when building CoOps in 1946 - constantly.

They have their use, and add life the mission. 

 

Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't know what's what in my opinion, and clearly wasn't flying with us.

On "air quake" types of servers...just depends on what you're after. Room for both mentalities there.

 

When we have CoOps again in this sim I'll again make good use of AI flights in the missions that I design.

Edited by Gambit21
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

When we have CoOps again in this sim I'll again make good use of AI flights in the missions that I design.

 

That might even get me, who swore of multiplayer of any type many years ago, to even try it once again... maybe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used AI flights too good effect when building CoOps in 1946 - constantly.

They have their use, and add life the mission. 

 

Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't know what's what in my opinion, and clearly wasn't flying with us.

On "air quake" types of servers...just depends on what you're after. Room for both mentalities there.

 

When we have CoOps again in this sim I'll again make good use of AI flights in the missions that I design.

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why an AI bomber flight would be a bad thing, it just makes for another moving attack/defense objective.

Well, looks as if objectives are only for bomber pilots. You can't put them at above ground level, it appears to physically hurt some fighter jocks. :lol:

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll happily fly with or against AI.

 

Not knowing who is who would be fun IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More ze germans planes on the map - more target to destroy for VVS :)

 

BTW since it's​ a dogfight type missions with ground objects try make local superiority to win and let them be Hartman's :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing wrong with AI in MP servers.. I think, atleast in clod.

Edited by icecream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahem, don't you dive-bomb in he111s?...

Shallow dive just like they did in WW2 attacking shipping and industries

There were many many many He-111 raids done under 250m Alt

 

Still irrelvant to my point ..

 

NO BALANCE PASS SHOULD EVER BE DONE TO PRESERVE GAME BALANCE AT THE COST OF ACCURACY AND GOING BY THE DEVS LEGALLY BINDING STATEMENT THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO ANY MORE.

 

IMHO multiplayer mission makers shoud NOT have the ability to choose AI skill/ AAA Skill these values should be hardcoded by devs and locked to intended histroical accuracy

Edited by =R4T=Sshadow14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NO BALANCE PASS SHOULD EVER BE DONE TO PRESERVE GAME BALANCE AT THE COST OF ACCURACY 

 

Sure. That was the whole point of this modest proposal.

 

 

IMHO multiplayer mission makers shoud NOT have the ability to choose AI skill/ AAA Skill these values should be hardcoded by devs and locked to intended histroical accuracy

 
I am not sure you recognize how hilarious this perspective is.
 
You want to avoid game-like and go for historical by setting AAA/AI skill level according to historical accuracy??
 
Exactly what is a historically accurate AI skill level? You realize "AI skill level" is the most ridiculously extreme game abstraction possible?
 
It is so abstract that talking about "historically accurate" AI skill level is like talking about setting historically accurate 2-bit color for the landscape.
 
It is so abstract that talking about "historically accurate" AI skill level is like talking about setting historically accurate lag between player death and player spawning time.
 
It is so abstract that talking about "historically accurate" AI skill level is like talking about setting historically accurate colors for the text in chat.
 
It is so abstract that if an abstract horde of Abstractions invaded us from the Planet of Abstraction and come across "AI skill level" they would immediately recognize that their job here was done and go back to their abstract home. 
 
Not to mention that there was simply not one single skill "level" to be found anywhere, right? IRL, on different fronts and different times of the day and different units and different sides and even different people, you would have the "AI skill level" ranging from "I am a human not a f**king game" to "someone is trying to kill me and I am don't know what my skill level is!". So how does one quantify a skill level to be locked into that is universal for the entire war for all units for all time? Sheeessh .... 
 
P.S. As for "legally binding", yeah, you either don't understand how words work or how law works. Tell you what, let me know when you decide to take legal action against 1C for lack of historicity in the AI skill level, and I will be sure to make sure I have enough oxygen to breathe through my laughter.
Edited by Bearfoot
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While we are at it, making no concessions to nothing but historic accuracy why not make it so German planes don't work in the cold, cold, months of winter? Just have the German planes spawn in on the parking area and not start up. Sounds fun, right? Also no re-spawning, I'm fairly sure that wasn't part of the war.

Edited by Disarray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While we are at it, making no concessions to nothing but historic accuracy why not make it so German planes don't work in the cold, cold, months of winter? Just have the German planes spawn in on the parking area and not start up. Sounds fun, right? Also no re-spawning, I'm fairly sure that wasn't part of the war.

 

Just German planes?

 

Everybody was lighting fires under their aircraft to preheat the engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd read that this was more keenly felt on the German side of the line, something about the tighter tolerances of their engines not coping with the cold as well as the more loosely built Soviet engines. But hey, if it is "realistic" why not have it for both sides?

Edited by Disarray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In multiplayer air combat games I have played, on servers that have AI aircraft, I always feel a genuine sense of letdown when I find that the airplane that I shot down was an AI, because that isn't what I'm playing in a multiplayer environment for.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In multiplayer air combat games I have played, on servers that have AI aircraft, I always feel a genuine sense of letdown when I find that the airplane that I shot down was an AI, because that isn't what I'm playing in a multiplayer environment for.

 

Them's the shakes. ;) Just the same sense of a letdown when you crash on landing or get shot down by AA or find the objective already destroyed when you get there. Some of which might emulate, if not simulate, the "historical reality".

 

Think of shooting down the AI like shooting down a volunteer with a training regime consisting of a few days of blackboard instruction followed by a single solo take-off/landing supervised from the ground, followed by "OK, good to go, Vassily. Just one more thing, this here is the gunsight. Put the dot on the fascist and press this button here." 

 

Which, also, would not be entirely inconsistent with reality.

 

I am sure those experten would have preferred to have known that they had taken on a "worthy" opponent, rather than poor Vassily who was trying to figure why he could not fire, not realizing his fire safety was on.

 

Or maybe, just maybe, those experten did not care that much because they were just doing their job, and their job was whatever it took, whether it was up against Vassily or Ivan Kozhedub. And if Vassily let them live a little longer and gain a star on their scorecard, so much the better, while the glory of going mano-a-mano against Kozhedub could wait for another day  ;)

 

More seriously, yes, I get what you mean.

 

But the extra AI just will make it harder, and thus more rewarding ultimately, for you to get to those humans. If nothing, because you will have less ammo or spent your energy. 

 

And if the AI are actually that dumb, they will be cleared out of the air so quickly that by the time you get to the scene (given the willy-nilly every-pilot-for-him/herself-whenever coordination of the wild wild west ahistorical operations/planning that characterize MP) that you will have only humans to focus on. Or, alternatively, it might be you who clears the air of the AI for your "team" mates (loosely referring to other people who just happen to fly the same colors as you and shoot at the same colors that you do) to profit. 

Edited by Bearfoot
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as others have said, if people want to create new servers and maps they can obviously fill up the skies with AI aircraft as they wish.  I primarily fly on WoL, and I would be very disappointed if WoL started putting a bunch of AI aircraft in there.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In multiplayer air combat games I have played, on servers that have AI aircraft, I always feel a genuine sense of letdown when I find that the airplane that I shot down was an AI, because that isn't what I'm playing in a multiplayer environment for.

 

I know exactly the feeling that you mean, but personally I never let it bother me too much.

AI is just necessary if you want a fleshed out mission. However I can completely understand the stance of "I'm online, I want human planes only"

The good thing is that both are easy to accomplish.

 

When designing a good CoOp, many times AI is just necessary in order to choreograph things properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well no the devs set gun accuracy @ 100% skill level to be close to what real gunners achieved (they are not morons)
The mission makers can not adjust settings allowing them to change AAA Ai Accuracy from 25% - 150% Accuracy

Why do they have the option to increase past what was possible

Dont even get me started on missions with pe2 gunners on Ace skill (150%) and He-111's on Low skill level (50%)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well no the devs set gun accuracy @ 100% skill level to be close to what real gunners achieved (they are not morons)

The mission makers can not adjust settings allowing them to change AAA Ai Accuracy from 25% - 150% Accuracy

 

Why do they have the option to increase past what was possible

 

Dont even get me started on missions with pe2 gunners on Ace skill (150%) and He-111's on Low skill level (50%)

 

Wait a minute ... I might be mistaken here ... but ... but ... are you saying that ... THE DIAL GOES UP TO 11???!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...