AI Constantly Turning

[LuftManu]

4 minutes ago, Karamazov said:

 

How can AI development be evolving if there is no one there to work on it? I don't understand.

 

Do they have someone on board now who can change the AI/decisions? If not then there are two paths :

 

a) someone comes in at some point - good, things can change (evolve)

 

b) no-one comes in - bad, nothing will change (not evolve)

 

If there is someone there now, then that is brilliant!

 

If it is the case that there wasn't anyone for some time, then why wasn't the new recruit announced? That would give people a boost of hope in what they seek and should be celebrated "we have recruited someone to work on AI, hooray! Don't expect miracles immediately but we're really glad, blah blah..."

 

 

 

 

 

They already said one programmer was going to come, glad it is like that so for me this issue is being looked at. So evolving. We might end up in a loop here. Language barrier I guess

Edited August 24, 2018 by LF_ManuV

[JonRedcorn]

19 minutes ago, LF_ManuV said:

They already said one programmer was going to come, glad it is like that so for me this issue is being looked at. So evolving. We might end up in a loop here. Language barrier I guess

If they've managed to find somebody that would be really great. I try to check the Russian forum on my phone since it translates everything very easily. I didn't catch anything about it though, I find the Russian side of the site to be a bit better. On topics of serious discussion anyways. I'd mainly point out that the devs themselves are mostly Russians or Russian speaking. So they post a lot more on that site. Just replace .com with .ru to check it out.

Edited August 24, 2018 by 15th_JonRedcorn

[JSOflyer69]

The trouble is most people computers just can’t handle where and what they won’t from this sim yet.

i give it 5 more years, before we have the graphic cards and powerful enough computers to handle what we all want ( ie epic battles with lots of planes in the sky that act life like ) that’s just the way it is,this sim is years ahead of its time

[EAF_51_FOX]

4 hours ago, meplanes1969 said:

The trouble is most people computers just can’t handle where and what they won’t from this sim yet.

i give it 5 more years, before we have the graphic cards and powerful enough computers to handle what we all want ( ie epic battles with lots of planes in the sky that act life like ) that’s just the way it is,this sim is years ahead of its time

 

 

A more complex A.I. Routines (behaviour)  than we have now in BoX don't need any upgrade on supercomputer as it is drive by simple text strings (codes). Just dev shoud keep in mind that upgrade a better A.I. routines is better than have 10x new planes every two weeks or new tank or new terrain objects.

[Feathered_IV]

On ‎8‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 12:24 AM, Space_Ghost said:

 

I would not pay an additional $20 for something that should be included with the game and simply, unquestionably needs to be worked on.

 

To think of it another way, it would certainly be a much cheaper option than spending hundreds of dollars over a period of years, just in the hope that it one day gets seen to. 

[unreasonable]

31 minutes ago, Feathered_IV said:

 

To think of it another way, it would certainly be a much cheaper option than spending hundreds of dollars over a period of years, just in the hope that it one day gets seen to. 

 

A philosophy that also applies to other objects of desire.

 

TBH I have almost given up thinking about this series as a "game" as such, in the way IL-2 46 was when using DCG, for instance.  It is more an interactive art work, zen concentration exercise and a source of stimulus to guide my choice of historical and technical reading.  It is not so much that I have "fun playing" as I will come across something that makes me think "Ooh, that is interesting!" and then make me want to find out why it works like that: historical representation or program artifact? 

 

That is not to say that some of the suggestions here are not good ones: if I thought that I would not have been making similar ones for years.  It is just that having given up all hope, I can now enjoy the software for what it does, rather than for what I thought I wanted it to do.  Which also increasingly applies to other objects of desire....

Edited August 25, 2018 by unreasonable

[1./KG4_ArthurMimo]

On 8/21/2018 at 12:45 PM, Tomsk said:

As someone who really loves SP and coop, the poor quality of the AI ended up being something that has meant I've not flown much IL2 BoX of late. In particular as sniperton says the decision AI is terrible. There are lots of simple things that would greatly improve it, for example:

• If the AI would not chase you all the way across the map, deep into your territory, even when they are badly damaged.
• If a flight of enemy AI would not all immediately "lock on" to the nearest target, and all chase it forever, no matter what else is going on around them. 
• If they would not crash into each other all trying to get a shot on the same target. I once single handedly defeated a whole squadron of them this way.
• If they ever decided to let a target go, or switch to flying defensive because they are being shot up from behind.
• If the AI would ever decide that it didn't actually want to fight, and that it was out numbered and should retreat.
• If the AI would ever employ a tactic other than just circle turning after each other forever. Especially in planes that are bad at turn fighting.
• If you could ever sneak up on the AI, or have them fail to detect you.
• If the AI ever stalled, or lost control, or misjudged an opponent's position, velocity or angles.

The extreme tunnel vision of the AI is the worst aspect, and very frustratingly, it shouldn't even be that hard to improve it substantially.

Well my pain with the AI is that my wingmen tend to shoot me down more often than the enemy, by trying to shoot at them through me.

[Adger]

54 minutes ago, 1./KG4_ArthurMimo said:

Well my pain with the AI is that my wingmen tend to shoot me down more often than the enemy, by trying to shoot at them through me.

Haha im not laughing at you 1./KG4_ArthurMimo im laughing with you pal..yep its happened to me on more than 1 occasion but TBF it happened in real life also.

[JSOflyer69]

Yes I know it’s just text code for AI bots,what I mean is what’s the limit to how many planes can be in battle at one time,if we had b-17 bombers proberly 2 with a good computer before bringing it too a snails pace.

i think about 20 fighters in the sky at once is about the limit?

[Semor76]

21 hours ago, Karamazov said:

 

 

 

To be clear again, this game is not garbage and the developers should be very proud of it, I still smile when just sitting in some of the aircraft (109E7 for example ) but, it has AI decision flaws that are more apparent now because you can actually follow your stats/life in the SP career. And the dissapointment and frustration personally or me comes from the official line being seemingly 'no word until there is something to say', this gives little hope because little has been done on AI decisions in the last 3 years.

 

 

 

 

+1

[Lensman]

If money is the problem then crowd fund the development. Tell us how much it would cost and see how many people chip in to pay for it. I'd happily (small part) finance it with the end result that everyone gets a better simulation. Communication about objectives and progress would have to be excellent for those who buy in to get value though. I wouldn't throw cash into a void (although that's kind of what I HAVE done by purchasing undeveloped parts of the sim like tanks and WWI).

[Tapi]

9 minutes ago, Lensman said:

If money is the problem then crowd fund the development. Tell us how much it would cost and see how many people chip in to pay for it. I'd happily (small part) finance it with the end result that everyone gets a better simulation. 

1

I would like to support crowdfunding with my money as well. But unfortunately, IIRC Jason stated some time ago, that the problem is not only money but primarily the absence of sw engineer capable to work with the rest of the team. He said he must 1) speak Russian (in order to communicate with the rest of the team), 2)  he has to live not far away (to be able to personally consult with the team) and 3) he has to have (of course) the ability to complete such demanding task...

[Feathered_IV]

Sounds like any significant AI improvement is officially unlikely then.

[Blutaar]

I only read half of the thread but there is something i have to add. The problem is not just the decision making like many of you say. When was the last time you saw a stable formation in BoX or when did you saw the last time your ace 109 AI was able to shoot something down in carrer mode? And what about different commands to each individual AI like differnt groundtargets or different air targets to attack? Stuff like that plus the decision making are the main problems of this game in my opinion. Not just decison making. Also the AI dont know the strength and weakness of its own plane against the opponents aircraft. If you allways come from a certain postion at similar speeds, the AI will allways do the same no matter what plane they fly. Just watch ace AI 190s versus novice AI Lagg3s and how they behave against each other in career mode. Its ridiculous!

 

I spent most of the time leveling up my AI comrades last time i played. Just to get some ace AI comrades so im not the only one killing all the enemy planes. It took forever and was like grinding in an MMO to achieve that. Only taking one wingman at the time so you dont have to baybsit and protect all the other useless AI wingmates. They need missions and kills to levelup just like the player has to. You can also assign them to generated flights which will be faster then doing it manually but you also can lose them so it is a bit risky. And guess what happend after i leveled 3 of my squadmates to ace AI? They are still useless against novice AI at the lowest difficulty setting for career. They also struggle to kill medium bombers no matter if we fly 190s or 109s. Its so frustrating to watch how they just cant kill anything. You have to constantly pray to god that they hit something when they get one of the few chances but most often they just miss and getting a six on their own.

 

If you dont believe me, just play a german campaign lets say Kuban and use a 109 fightersquadron. Every rank has a set skill level. the lowest 2 are allways novice and then it goes up for every rank. So only the highest rank, which is major in case of the germans, is ace AI from the beginning of a new campaign. Keep that in mind. So when you start to level non ace AI it is possible that they gain a skill level without getting promoted to the next rank. You can easily check it when you open your last mission in the FMB. So after knowing that, just fly an intercept mission with a 4 ship formation and take the lowest ranks with you. Then do the same with all ace AIs and you will see how bad the AI really is. They cant do shit and it is allways the player who have to secure their asses and shoot the enemy down. If you are lucky one of your AI comrades shot one plane down while no one died and you as the player killed all the rest alone. If you are not so lucky, which is most often the case at least for me, you lose wingmates without any plane shot down by them. The difficulty setting just determines what AI skill level your opponents have and also your own non squad AI flights. At the lowest level, all friendly AI flights outside of your own squadron of course are ace AI while all enemy AI flights are novice. That is the only difference i know of between the campaign difficulty settings.

 

Also just watch them do ground attacks. The initial attack is allways ok but is concentrated on AAA units. So you cant just fly in and drop on the primary targets. No, if you dont be able to destroy the missiontarget yourself, you have to reattack with guns and that is when the AI shows its incompetence in decision making and target selection. They all focus on the same target just like they done and still do it in the air. And in the end, only one have attacked groundtargets while the others just followed him and start talking about destroyed groundtargets, whenever the attacking one destorys a target. You all should very well know what im talking about here. Same in the Air but there it seems because of the varying distances in aircombat, that they also choose different planes to attack at some times. Just listen to the voices when an enemy planes gets destoryed. Most often you hear more then one of your AI wingamtes telling you that the target is destroyed. Thats how you know when the AI focuses on the same targets. But on the ground it seems to allways be the same target after the initial attack for everyone.

 

These are my expeirences with the career mode and it is gamebreaking for me. There is absolutely no enjoyment left for me espeacially after the many hours of grinding my AIs to higher skill levels which needed so many restarts and /facepalms. They die alot by just crashing into the ground for no reason. Attacking low flying and forever circling IL2s is nearly a garantee you will lose most of your wingmates to groundcollision. While high flying bombers are rarely downed by them because they just dont hit ebough or they break off attacks for aboslutely no apparent reason. I watched it many times how they refuse to shoot while having the perfect position. They also love to fly barely fast enough to close the distance which opens them to enemy gunners for way to long. And there are so many other shortcommings already mentioned here and in other threads, that it astounds me that there are still people who seem to enjoy singleplayer. Im very jealous on them. ?

 

I mean the AI cant even do the simplest things like formation flying. Take a 190 and look how your wingmates fly miles behind you. Or make it worse and take a duck formation. I dont know what the problem here is exactly but it seems the AI refuses to use higher boostsettings then the leader. I you watch them and play with the throttle, you will see that they only use full power when you yourself uses higher powersettings. You can see it on the exhaust flames when flying the 190. at 70% throttle you will get blue flames. The AI will not use much higher settings for closing in just some cautios increases while isntantly powering down and then up again. Its so aweful to watch how your formation flys allways way behind you. The longer the mission, the wider the distance become. Maybe it has somethng to do with the engine destruction timers. Maybe we should get rid of them for AI when not in combat but this would not really fix all the other problems. And in the end, when you send them home they often fly so dangerously close to each other that they crash into each other often enough. Sometimes the are so close to each other that they do a formation landing with a big crash in the end.

[40plus]

This thread makes me sad ☹️

[Willy__]

Ishtaru summed up exactly my experience with the sp career. One thing that i loved doing in the old 1946 was leveling my squad mates, but here It seem pointless because they cant hit a broadside of a barn. Ive watched a flight of jabo e7s that we were escorting all lawn dart into the ground, and they were flying not that high, around 500m.

Its things like these that makes me play the sp portion of the game less and less

Edited August 28, 2018 by Willy__

[dburne]

I am sure not having any trouble with AI turning only in my current PWCG Spit Campaign, those pesky 109's are using their vertical advantages for zooming and booming I guess it is called quite well. They are giving me fits.

[Semor76]

58 minutes ago, dburne said:

I am sure not having any trouble with AI turning only in my current PWCG Spit Campaign, those pesky 109's are using their vertical advantages for zooming and booming I guess it is called quite well. They are giving me fits.

It´s more or less the same in PWCG. Maybe Pat can bypass some of the AI weird "features" but the main problems in the AI code is still there.

 

The scripted campaign builders can also bypass some of the AI flaws to make the missions enjoyable,but the workload for this is already very high. I talked with NETSCAPE yesterday,and he is short of giving up to do more single player stuff....

 

For the crowdfounding idea: Sorry, but I dont like the idea to put more and more money in something that should be part of the core game. A working AI and propper radion commands are  basics of every combat flight sim. This is the part for the development team...not ours.

 

I kow I play a risky game now, maybe the bann hammer hits me soon, or this thread get closed in a few hours, but in I still enjoy the IL-2 series like I did in the old Oleg Maddox times!

 

As quoting from the already closed (!) Dev. diary 200 is not possible I Copy&past Ishtaru´s post. Why? because it fits perfect in this topic and I would subscribe to every word he said what goes wrong in the IL2 development, at least from my point of view:

 

 

"If you are mainly a SP guy, how can you enjoy the game then? And how can you still support the game when there are no AI changes planned like forever? The devs made it clear at some point that there will be no AI overhaul because they are not willing to pay for a dedicated AI guy. It seems they think it is not worth the money and that they should focus on new content to keep the money flow. I kind of understand them but im not willing to pay them anymore for that and i hope many people will do the same. Only when the money stops flowing they might change their prioritys and the importance of good AI in a Flightsim. And i supported the game long enough patiently waiting but without a change in AI, there is no reason for me to further support the game. So why should i? To not letting them get bankrupt? Pff i dont care because im not a good samaritan. If they cant deliver me the product i deserve for my money, i wont give a damn. Thats how it goes for every buisness.

 

When playing the campaign it gets so obviuos how bad the AI really is, that it astounds me how people can enjoy the game. Are my standards really to high? I dont think so. I mean it is not so that i didnt try. I played so many hours in the campaign since its release and i really tried hard to enjoy it but the longer i played, the deeper my frustration got. In my opinion it would be a good idea to make a great AI so people who only purchased BoS and stopped playing the game because of reasons, could come back and enjoy the game again and maybe buy more. Sure it sounds like a risk but ignoring the AI completely is also a risk in my book. Im still surprised that they made it so far with all the issues like the AI, short render distance, cloud issues, inconsistent FMs (subjective) and ridiculous engine destruction timers (lol). I guess it is the luxury to not have any competition. I hope this will change in the future. Because i like WW2 Flightsims the most but im not stupid enough to pay more and more money for a product i cant enjoy. And it is not so that im not interested in tanks or ww1 planes but with the current AI, no way for me i could enjoy it. Just saying.

 

Can you explain to me what is so over dramatic about it when you cant enjoy a product and therefore stop buying it? For example if you stop lifting weights in the gym because the gym lacks quipment, do you still gonna pay the membership fees because you like the owner or do you stop your membership and invest that money elsewhere? I bet you stop the membership like every normal person would do. But here you make an excuse even when you dislike many things it seems. I mean do what you want and keep supporting but this will not fix any AI problems.

 

And in case a dev read this. I dont hate you or your game! I just hate what you call AI and i disagree with your decisions you made when it comes to the AI. So please dont be confused. Overall i can enjoy the game enough when it comes to flying and shooting at stuff in the QMB but this gets boring really fast and will not be enough to make me buy more. Because im not a fanboy. I can overlook all the other issues i have with your game but not the lack of AI anymore. Sorry! I can of course only speak for myself and maybe i am in the minority and can be ignored. You know best what the actual numbers are. And delete my post if you want to just like my previous post got deleted, i dont care but it will not fix any AI problems for me or anyone else! "

 

just my 2 cents..like always

 

Edited August 28, 2018 by Semor76

[JonRedcorn]

2 minutes ago, Semor76 said:

It´s more or less the same in PWCG. Maybe Pat can bypass some of the AI weird "features" but the main problems in the AI code is still there.

 

The scripted campaign builders can also bypass some of the AI flaws to make the missions enjoyable,but the workload for this is already very high. I talked with NETSCAPE yesterday,and he is short of giving up to do more single player stuff....

 

For the crowdfounding idea: Sorry, but I dont like the idea to put more and more money in something that should be part of the core game. A working AI and propper radion commands are  basics of every combat flight sim. This is the part for the development team...not ours.

 

I kow I play a risky game now, maybe the bann hammer hits me soon, or this thread get closed in a few hours, but in I still enjoy the IL-2 series like I did in the old Oleg Maddox times!

 

As quoting from the already closed (!) Dev. diary 200 is not possible I Copy&past Ishtaru´s post. Why? because it fits perfect in this topic and I would subscribe to every word he said what goes wrong in the IL2 development, at least from my point of view:

 

 

"If you are mainly a SP guy, how can you enjoy the game then? And how can you still support the game when there are no AI changes planned like forever? The devs made it clear at some point that there will be no AI overhaul because they are not willing to pay for a dedicated AI guy. It seems they think it is not worth the money and that they should focus on new content to keep the money flow. I kind of understand them but im not willing to pay them anymore for that and i hope many people will do the same. Only when the money stops flowing they might change their prioritys and the importance of good AI in a Flightsim. And i supported the game long enough patiently waiting but without a change in AI, there is no reason for me to further support the game. So why should i? To not letting them get bankrupt? Pff i dont care because im not a good samaritan. If they cant deliver me the product i deserve for my money, i wont give a damn. Thats how it goes for every buisness.

 

When playing the campaign it gets so obviuos how bad the AI really is, that it astounds me how people can enjoy the game. Are my standards really to high? I dont think so. I mean it is not so that i didnt try. I played so many hours in the campaign since its release and i really tried hard to enjoy it but the longer i played, the deeper my frustration got. In my opinion it would be a good idea to make a great AI so people who only purchased BoS and stopped playing the game because of reasons, could come back and enjoy the game again and maybe buy more. Sure it sounds like a risk but ignoring the AI completely is also a risk in my book. Im still surprised that they made it so far with all the issues like the AI, short render distance, cloud issues, inconsistent FMs (subjective) and ridiculous engine destruction timers (lol). I guess it is the luxury to not have any competition. I hope this will change in the future. Because i like WW2 Flightsims the most but im not stupid enough to pay more and more money for a product i cant enjoy. And it is not so that im not interested in tanks or ww1 planes but with the current AI, no way for me i could enjoy it. Just saying.

 

Can you explain to me what is so over dramatic about it when you cant enjoy a product and therefore stop buying it? For example if you stop lifting weights in the gym because the gym lacks quipment, do you still gonna pay the membership fees because you like the owner or do you stop your membership and invest that money elsewhere? I bet you stop the membership like every normal person would do. But here you make an excuse even when you dislike many things it seems. I mean do what you want and keep supporting but this will not fix any AI problems.

 

And in case a dev read this. I dont hate you or your game! I just hate what you call AI and i disagree with your decisions you made when it comes to the AI. So please dont be confused. Overall i can enjoy the game enough when it comes to flying and shooting at stuff in the QMB but this gets boring really fast and will not be enough to make me buy more. Because im not a fanboy. I can overlook all the other issues i have with your game but not the lack of AI anymore. Sorry! I can of course only speak for myself and maybe i am in the minority and can be ignored. You know best what the actual numbers are. And delete my post if you want to just like my previous post got deleted, i dont care but it will not fix any AI problems for me or anyone else! "

 

just my 2 cents..like always

 

Just like to point out that thread got closed because Jason said no more talking about AI in that thread, since we have this thread obviously. Yet everyone continued to ignore that post and keep talking about it. Life has rules.

[Gambit21]

On 8/21/2018 at 4:12 AM, Feathered_IV said:

 

Hey I've been buying and supporting the team's products since 2009 in the hope that a well crafted singleplayer experience will evolve.  Surely it must be just around the corner now.

 

Would someone send me a mission where AI is “flying in circles” on attack please.

 

I don’t have this problem in my missions.

[dburne]

My next PWCG mission had both a flight of 109's and couple flights of 190's giving us fits, I wish they would have just turned in circles, both flights flew to their obvious advantages. We had our hands full and ended up having to high tail it to our home base.

[Thad]

Perhaps the AI was set to Ace level. Hopefully, that actually makes a difference in the performance of AI controlled craft. ?

[dburne]

8 minutes ago, Thad said:

Perhaps the AI was set to Ace level. Hopefully, that actually makes a difference in the performance of AI controlled craft. ?

 

Maybe - I actually have them dialed back a little in PWCG, but there is still some small odds of an ace flying.

[Dakpilot]

Why repost this 

 

"And how can you still support the game when there are no AI changes planned like forever? The devs made it clear at some point that there will be no AI overhaul because they are not willing to pay for a dedicated AI guy. It seems they think it is not worth the money and that they should focus on new content to keep the money flow"

 

Clearly BS and breaking forum rules

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

[Feathered_IV]

4 hours ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

Just like to point out that thread got closed because Jason said no more talking about AI in that thread, since we have this thread obviously. Yet everyone continued to ignore that post and keep talking about it.

 

So the chatter was becoming so repetitive that it began to spoil the experience?  

[Adger]

The problem seems to be that to some people ANYONE who calls out the AI seems to be "seen" as hating the BOX series..That couldn't be further from the truth.

Have a look at some of the posters they own ALL the series and still have preordered BOBP because they love the series and want to continue to support the Devs. They've said including myself that the majority of the time it's an excellent sim,but in all reality some of the time (Personnally speaking) the AI lets it down it really does. It's all well and good having new maps/aircraft or new features but for single players Ai is one of if not the most important features. I totally get from a Devs PoV that income is probably the number 1 priority..i.e new maps (BOBP) Anew Flying Circus and Tank Crew in development I get it,but personally speaking..I think there'll be quite a few SP flyers that will move away from this series if the current AI "stays as is" and that'd be a real shame

 

Just because we post about the subject doesn't mean we're slating the BOX series..we just want SP to be " better"

If some people are currently happy with the AI then fine..that's their choice but some of us arnt..that's OUR choice. 

I took the P40 up over Kuban last night in a quick mission/free flight..the "feeling" of flight is still incredible ,the sound the little details ,the superb graphics I loved my 20 mins up there. I then continued my A20 campaign ..again my teammates dropped no ordinance sit there like lame ducks..it's annoying and bloody sad to me to see the AI behave at times like that.

 

Ive put nowhere near as many hrs in like some of you guys have especially testers like Lukeff and Gambit (who both of you btw I have a great deal of respect for.Its guys like you that continue to test for us that improve this sim)that's what's so frustrating..you guys surely cannot be happy with the current AI? If you are then fair enough if not what if any changes would you Personnally like to see?

 

Im honestly hoping that Jason can at some point get somebody in to help with this situation,it'd benefit all I believe. I'm certainly prepared to wait to see what happens regarding AI but..I'm not gonna wait forever.

 

Good Ai can make or break not just a sim but any game title..imagine playing say Baldurs gate and your party ( who you gave orders too) just "stood" there? Would it be the classic RPG then? Nope course it wouldn't and that's all I want from the BOX series..I want it to be THE classic MP AND SP sim that there's ever been. A sim that'll get talked about for years and years to come.Nowt wrong in wanting that is there?

 

 

 

Edited August 28, 2018 by Adger

[Gambit21]

18 minutes ago, Adger said:

The problem seems to be that to some people ANYONE who calls out the AI seems to be "seen" as hating the BOX series..That couldn't be further from the truth.

 

 

This is just simply not the case.

The problem is when short-sighted, erroneous and ignorant statements are made about the Dev's intentions or desire to fix these things.

[dburne]

Regarding Single Player.

 

Just look at all the hours, all the time and effort these Devs put into totally creating a whole new style of single player with the new Career Mode.

They did not do all that work to sell it as they would a new map or a new plane, no they did it to further enhance the single player gameplay which it really needed. And it works well with all the existing maps. 

 

Have faith, there will be more done going forward to further enhance it I am sure. While certainly the AI has some weaknesses, I personally do not find it so bad that I just can not have fun flying in SP. I am having a blast with the new Career, and a blast flying a PWCG campaign. Some missions I shake my head at times at the AI, other times I give them a nod on a job very well done. Some missions I have my hands absolutely full with the enemy AI and have been in some incredible dogfights.

 

 One thing I think 1CGS has shown us, is that they will continue to improve this sim under the hood whilst at the same time delivering more content for us and continuing to grow the franchise. Just the whole Singer Player aspect alone, has become leaps and bounds better in the past several months. 

 

 

 

 

 

[BraveSirRobin]

2 hours ago, Karamazov said:

Someone asked about turning off the background sound in another thread, a response given was (to paraphrase): ' spend less time in the menu then', yet, SP is about being in the menu as well as flying; they added newspapers to read, let alone the idea that the player may want to spend sometime looking at the squad, the stats, the map, aircraft set up. It is this sort of jumped response that can give the impression that positive criticism is not welcome, or, that how some people use and enjoy SP is not understood by some.

 

It is a bit like the whole 190 thing; valid points, and reasonable discussion can be drowned out by those who raise their criticisms in an impolite way, and those who simply reject what is being said and fail to show any empathy or refuse to understand what is being said.

 

The sounds of war in the menu are “immersion”.   People who prefer SP often seem to complain about the lack of “immersion”.  Apparently they also like to complain about too much “immersion”.

[Adger]

15 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

The sounds of war in the menu are “immersion”.   People who prefer SP often seem to complain about the lack of “immersion”.  Apparently they also like to complain about too much “immersion”.

"Immersion" maybe to you,to other folks it may be a distraction. I Personnally don't mind it playing..

" Lack of immersion"? I haven't seen that ,I've seen calls for better radio commands,improved AI in certain conditions.

" Complain about too much immersion"?. The OP asked a question about the main menu music I Personnally wouldn't categories that as complaining..each to our own though

[unreasonable]

Sometimes you want immersion for yourself - and sometimes you wish certain other people could experience it: perhaps in the North Atlantic. 

[BraveSirRobin]

I’m ok with you getting all the Battle of Stalingrad immersion that you can handle.

[Feathered_IV]

42 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

The sounds of war in the menu are “immersion”.   People who prefer SP often seem to complain about the lack of “immersion”.  Apparently they also like to complain about too much “immersion”.

 

Possibly a 20 second sound loop repeated over and over isn't as immersive as you would think.

[BraveSirRobin]

It’s background noise, not a symphony.

[Feathered_IV]

You are background noise.

[Diggun]

Fixed. 

[InProgress]

29 minutes ago, Feathered_IV said:

You are background noise.

Gold

[dburne]

What in the world does the menu background sound and inability to turn it off have to do with a thread about the AI constantly turning?

[theOden]

3 minutes ago, dburne said:

What in the world does the menu background sound and inability to turn it off have to do with a thread about the AI constantly turning?

FlightSim forum thread longer than 2 pages. Some things will never change. :)

[JtD]

18 minutes ago, dburne said:

What in the world does the menu background sound and inability to turn it off have to do with a thread about the AI constantly turning?

 

Both are doing endless 20 second loops.