Jump to content
fogpipe

Does the ai know about clouds?

Recommended Posts

Or is everything just clear blue sky for them?

Any use ducking into a cloud when chased by ai?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AI can see through the clouds - unfortunately.

 

It’s really a shame, because in Rise of Flight they actually managed to make the AI’s LoS be blocked by clouds (it was really effective for shaking a persistent pursuer) But since this sim got new clouds way back early in its development, we are back to AI having on-board radar.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whhhaaaaaaaaaaaatt!!!?????

i don’t really play single player that much but I never even realized this...  this makes Spartan85 sad

Edited by spartan85
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Finkeren said:

AI can see through the clouds - unfortunately.

 

It’s really a shame, because in Rise of Flight they actually managed to make the AI’s LoS be blocked by clouds (it was really effective for shaking a persistent pursuer) But since this sim got new clouds way back early in its development, we are back to AI having on-board radar.

 

Do you know if fixing this is currently under consideration by 1C,  or if for now is it a low priority thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, danielprates said:

Do you know if fixing this is currently under consideration by 1C,  or if for now is it a low priority thing?

 

We dont know, most likely a real low priority, since its been this way since day 1 of release....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Willy__ said:

 

We dont know, most likely a real low priority, since its been this way since day 1 of release....

Well thats a shame, takes some of the shine off flying the career in expert mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been said that the team lacks a proper AI coder and the one that originally did the code is not there anymore, I truly hope that after they slow down on the content creation they tend to some of the more neglected areas on the sim. Unfortunately the devs aren't a large team, and don't have the backing of a billion dollar game company, without new content the money dries up and once the money dries up the support stops. So unless EA or Ubisoft buy out the team (which would kill the game at the same time) it's going to be tough to do both. If you guys want to help buy as much content as you can possibly afford. I know I have.

Edited by 15th_JonRedcorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, spartan85 said:

Whhhaaaaaaaaaaaatt!!!?????

i don’t really play single player that much but I never even realized this...  this makes Spartan85 sad

 

AI has been in a complete state of disrepair for some time now. AI fighters on ace are nothing but a turkey shoot. Some of their maneuvers are just complete buffoonery, my favourite being the 5 second straight inverted flight defense. I don't know what they were thinking coming up with that one. 

 

Yet the gunner behavior and accuracy is infamous on multiplayer for being inhumanly accurate and all-seeing. Don't know how it has gone so far backwards from il2 1946 AI to be honest.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bilbo_Baggins said:

 

AI has been in a complete state of disrepair for some time now. AI fighters on ace are nothing but a turkey shoot. Some of their maneuvers are just complete buffoonery, my favourite being the 5 second straight inverted flight defense. I don't know what they were thinking coming up with that one. 

 

Yet the gunner behavior and accuracy is infamous on multiplayer for being inhumanly accurate and all-seeing. Don't know how it has gone so far backwards from il2 1946 AI to be honest.

 

Probably because the people who did the AI coding for 1946 had nothing to do with the coding in BOX. Also 1946 was a much simpler game and pumping out content was "easy" in comparison to the stuff we have today, simplified flight models, low poly models, low res textures, everything took far less time than it does today. More time could be dedicated to other parts of the sim, I'd say it's a similar trend throughout the gaming industry at large. We have some of the best looking games ever made these days yet things like AI have taken a huge backseat. Just look at almost ANY game out today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

Probably because the people who did the AI coding for 1946 had nothing to do with the coding in BOX. Also 1946 was a much simpler game and pumping out content was "easy" in comparison to the stuff we have today, simplified flight models, low poly models, low res textures, everything took far less time than it does today. More time could be dedicated to other parts of the sim, I'd say it's a similar trend throughout the gaming industry at large. We have some of the best looking games ever made these days yet things like AI have taken a huge backseat. Just look at almost ANY game out today.

 

That's true. AI across all platforms seems to be rubbish these days, however, most genres now are marketed for online multiplayer use. The developers of this sim however claim the majority of players are alone on single player, therefore you would think AI is a critical component.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Bilbo_Baggins said:

 

That's true. AI across all platforms seems to be rubbish these days, however, most genres now are marketed for online multiplayer use. The developers of this sim however claim the majority of players are alone on single player, therefore you would think AI is a critical component.

You would think, I think the lack of a AI engineer is what's really holding them back. Jason's mentioned it a few times when he's responded to the topic. It definitely sucks, I'd certainly play a LOT more singleplayer than I do currently if the AI was even at IL2:Clod levels. I put about 90 hours into that game and that was all singleplayer. AI seemed better in it or it could just be my rose tinted glasses.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Bilbo_Baggins said:

 

AI has been in a complete state of disrepair for some time now. AI fighters on ace are nothing but a turkey shoot. Some of their maneuvers are just complete buffoonery, my favourite being the 5 second straight inverted flight defense. I don't know what they were thinking coming up with that one. 

 

Yet the gunner behavior and accuracy is infamous on multiplayer for being inhumanly accurate and all-seeing. Don't know how it has gone so far backwards from il2 1946 AI to be honest.

 

I like the BoS ai better, what ever flaws it may have. With 46 every new patch made the ai a little more inhumanly murderous.

Pulled off incredible deflection shots and if you flew through a furball every single opposing ai aircraft would break off what ever fight it was in and follow the human guided plane. I have had as many as 8-10 chasing me around in a conga line. It was ridiculous, ruined the game for me. Most if the problem i think being that the ai in 46 used a different flight model than players. I-i6's moved like they were being jerked on wires or caught an elevator (sorry couldnt resist).

Edited by fogpipe
failing cognitive powers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AI should be fixed before Bodenplatte.

 

Think about 262 of example in current AI level.

It will lose to I-16 (which in fact usually wins AI vs AI battles)

 

262 starts to circle around like rest of the AI used planes.

 

Well if you doubt this try it your selfs put quick mission like Bf-109 F2 ( or others ) 8vs8 I-16s

 

Test it 10 matches and see results.

 

 

Developers make new content very fast pace but some core features are still level of 2014-15 bad.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pilot AI as opponent or squad mate need overhaul or even new code. SP Career together with scripted campaigns suffer because of it. AAA has inhuman properties like tracking through static objects, terrain futures, clouds plus big guns calliber low alt hit accuracy , where they should not even try to shoot low level fast flaying target. More- Human AAA gun operator would stop firing at enemies if friendly plane is engaging. There is ton of work to do. Buy more copies or send them 1 mln check ;)

Edited by 307_Tomcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another question regarding clouds, in multiplyer are the clouds the same for everyone, IE is a cloud in my game in the exact same position in someone elses games?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -DFA-Retrofly said:

Another question regarding clouds, in multiplyer are the clouds the same for everyone, IE is a cloud in my game in the exact same position in someone elses games?

 

They are in the same position: but not the same for everyone. If you fly "Red" they are small and transparent, if you fly "Blue" they are huge and opaque.  ;)  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

S!

 

 AI sees you 360deg sphere flawlessly. AI shoots thru clouds and forests thus evading AAA by flying low is useless for the most part. Imagine driving a tank and AI AT gun shoots you thru forests and you are left wondering what just happened. AI could use an overhaul with proper LOS adjustments.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bilbo_Baggins said:

 

That's true. AI across all platforms seems to be rubbish these days, however, most genres now are marketed for online multiplayer use. The developers of this sim however claim the majority of players are alone on single player, therefore you would think AI is a critical component.

 

I both agree and disagree with this statement. What I agree with is the word 'seems' in your second sentence. The rest, I basically disagree with.

 

AI is a very tough subject. It always has been, but I agree with you that things seem to be getting worse as time progresses and games evolve. Many of today's games that feature AI in single player seem to have it executed worse than we used to remember things from 'back in the day'. Many players agree: AI has gotten worse overall. And this is a statement I have to strongly disagree with.

 

Yes, I do agree that AI more and more tends to feel lacking. But this has nothing to do with it not evolving or even becoming worse. It is all about games evolving faster than AI does. As time progresses, games become more and more complex, to give players a better and more detailed environment to play with. Unfortunately this also gives the AI the task to deal with the same mechanisms, which is hard to code at times, especially giving the technical limitations of a home computer system.

 

Just go back in time and have a look at one of the very first games that allowed a human player to play against an AI opponent: Pong.

 

The AI basically had only two things to do there, namely A) to realize the 'ball's' direction and calculate its' further path and B) move the paddle accordingly. And now compare this to the complexity of our flight sim.

 

I agree with you when you say that the AI in BoX has alot of quirks and that there's quite alot of room for improvement. What nags me personally the most is the 360° view of AI pilots and the godlike aim of AAA and gunners on higher levels. But I still do admire the devs for what they have created so far and especially for chosing the hard way by deciding to give the AI the very same tasks and limitations the player has to deal with.

 

They could have just taken the easy way out, like it happened back with classic IL2, where the AI had a different, much more favorable flight model that allowed it to pull off manouvers that made them look like TIE-Fighters instead of WW2 planes.

 

Another good (or should I say 'bad'?) example for a favored AI is Sid Meier's Civilization series, where the AI doesn't get smarter on higher levels, but will be granted with several boni (like more starting ressources, more ressources from new conquered sources, shorter building times for units and cities, etc.) that the player doesn't get. One could basically say, that human players are playing against bad players that compensate their lack of skill by cheating.

 

Giving the AI artificial advantages over the human player only 'improves' the situation until the sharade is discovered by players. From there on, all it creates is disappointment and frustration. Because flying a WW2 plane against TIE-Fighters just isn't fun, even though Lucas Art's 'Secret Weapons over Normandy' literally tried to convince us otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DCS got rubbish AI too , I think it is the most difficult thing to get "right"

Anyway a AI coder that is not there anymore make me a bit sad, SP is a feature that suit me,.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion they (1CGS) should track down the person/people who developed and coded the AI for Rowans' Battle Of Britain II Wings Of Victory, perhaps the most believable and complex AI routines ever seen in a Combat Flight Sim. Track em down and give em a reasonable salary to completely re-write IL-2 Great Battles' AI

 

Any thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Algy-Lacey said:

In my opinion they (1CGS) should track down the person/people who developed and coded the AI for Rowans' Battle Of Britain II Wings Of Victory, perhaps the most believable and complex AI routines ever seen in a Combat Flight Sim. Track em down and give em a reasonable salary to completely re-write IL-2 Great Battles' AI

 

Any thoughts?

What one AI engineer does to make AI code work may not make sense or work for another set of devs, this causes an even bigger hurdle since the entire AI code will need to be thrown out and a new one written. All this takes lots of time, and lots of money. It's a real shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

What one AI engineer does to make AI code work may not make sense or work for another set of devs, this causes an even bigger hurdle since the entire AI code will need to be thrown out and a new one written. All this takes lots of time, and lots of money. It's a real shame.

 

Yeah fair point. I just hope they can find the money to rework AI. Hopefully they won't have to start from scratch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why developers (Jason) don't contact the genius of Battle of Britain II sim to collaborate with? He has created the most smart A.I. ever seen in any combat sim definitely. Jason should contact him.

Edited by EAF_51_FOX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EAF_51_FOX said:

why developers (Jason) don't contact the genius of Battle of Britain II sim to collaborate with? He has created the most smart A.I. ever seen in any combat sim definitely. Jason should contact him.

 

Because...(wait for it)...they are entirely two different sets of code.

 

Seriously, guys, this notion that Jason and the others on the team are just totally oblivious to features the community would like improved is patently absurd. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

personally, I don't think that Jason and others on the team are totally oblivious to asked for features... but in a vacuum of knowledge like we have seen by players such as myself, questions will arise, naturally.

 

Of course they are two different game engines with different code, but that doesn't alter the community's desire to help, suggest, and influence 1CGS's decisions around the topic of AI. I don't know if AI that works in a similar way to Rowan's BOB II could be achieved in this engine, but it would be worthwhile to find out imho

 

Algy

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, =TBAS=Sshadow14 said:

Same Game Engine (almost identical) - Just Was Re-Branded

 

What the hell are you talking about? What games, what engines? Digital Nature was developed in-house by Neoqb way back in the day and eventually morphed into Digital Warfare.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Because...(wait for it)...they are entirely two different sets of code.

 

Seriously, guys, this notion that Jason and the others on the team are just totally oblivious to features the community would like improved is patently absurd. 

 

Algy-Lacey  has give you the same reply I'll give to you m8..(read above). Seriously I think that jason simply never have had this idea. hope someone will adress him about this as to give a right and needed spin to A.I. in this game.

Edited by EAF_51_FOX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange, you mightn't loose ai in a puff of cloud but that would be the same for a human opponent but, in heavy clouds with direction changes and alt changes, I have on numerous occasions lost my AI attackers in campaign.

 

Next best thing is to use topography on the deck to loose them.Valleys and such or tree lined roads.

 

My only goat in campaign is when AI decides to break off when pursuing you over your lines, they despawn within visual range.  Bit of an immersion killer and if you have laid shots on them it would be nice to have them have to try and make it back to their field and land in one piece.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, blitze said:

...

 

My only goat in campaign is when AI decides to break off when pursuing you over your lines, they despawn within visual range.  Bit of an immersion killer and if you have laid shots on them it would be nice to have them have to try and make it back to their field and land in one piece.

 

This used to happen frequently in RoF career and I have now seen it twice in BoX as well. In RoF I think what was happening was that the "action radius" in which AI planes stay spawned is dictated by their distance from your flight leader.   So for instance you are attacking one AI and forcing it into a turning fight that goes on for some time, and your own AI leader is heading back to base, the AI you are firing at can disappear 100m in front of your nose.  Happened to me with a MiG right in my gunsight just last week.  

 

BoX might not work exactly that way, but if you either stay with your flight leader or are your flight leader yourself this may not happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In any case that logic is a mission design decision and can easily be changed.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

In any case that logic is a mission design decision and can easily be changed.

 

 

 

Maybe, but it needs to be changed in the career mission generator in the Kremlin. Nothing us proles can do about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've definitely lost enemy AI by flying through the clouds. I guess maybe it was a fluke.

On 8/18/2018 at 10:37 PM, LukeFF said:

 

Because...(wait for it)...they are entirely two different sets of code.

 

Seriously, guys, this notion that Jason and the others on the team are just totally oblivious to features the community would like improved is patently absurd. 

Also BoBII was releasted like...what, a decade ago? More? The guy who coded the AI for that sim could be:
-Retired
-Dead
-Otherwise left the industry 
-Moved  to another specialty/gotten rusty on this aspect of programming

On top of just not being familiar with the game engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

Also BoBII was releasted like...what, a decade ago? More?

 

Oh yeah, it's been a long, long time. I believe I bought it when it was first released in 2004. 

 

1 hour ago, RedKestrel said:

The guy who coded the AI for that sim could be:
-Retired
-Dead
-Otherwise left the industry 
-Moved  to another specialty/gotten rusty on this aspect of programming

On top of just not being familiar with the game engine.

 

All very good points, yes. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds right. In any case MiG Alley and BoB had great (realistic) AI. Even EAW had some realistic routines such as escorts that would only attack an enemy fighter when it was was close to a bomber group, then break off and return to their escort duties if the attackers were beyond that range.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He went by the name of Buddye. I think part of the strength of the AI was the variety of manoeuvres that were triggered. That gave it much more the feel that you were playing against a human opponent instead of a canned response.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...