Serious thoughts and feedback for Career & AI

[Godspeed]

Hi

 

I would like to share some thought about the career and why i think its not working well.

I have played it alot with different time frames and planes so i decided to make thread about it now.

Developer silence about AI & Career flaws makes me bit concerned about coming Bodenplatte and future of the career.

 

 

Worst career experience what i have got is sadly with my favourite plane Bf 110.

 

Been testing it since release of Kuban here are my findings. ( Least hundred careers )

 

Your flight get no escort on ground attack missions.

You are almost always out numbered.

 

Example your mission is to destroy railway junction with 4 planes with no escort. ( Death Sentence )

You meet 4-8 enemy fighter aircraft while your flight carries bombs to the target.

 

If you flight survives to target site they start bombing the target but game still thinks your teams has not completed the mission after drops. (This mission in progress is horrible)

Now your AI slowly starts new attack run but they are being eaten by enemy fighters and anti air.

 

Sometimes they manage to survive this long for second attack but it will be the last.

 

This is the worst example but even missions like artillery position strike will have similiar results.

 

If you are not flying the mission the "random generated" results are almost always 0 or few targets destroyed and usually amusing 1 "Heavy Plane" destroyed on ground attack mission.

( Mission Success! Yeah Good Job )

 

Only way to keep some AI pilots alive is to go full yolo and kill AA for them and fight all soviet planes without caring your safety.

( Almost Certainly this "survivor" who you saved will be gone in next mission)

 

If you manage to do this some AI 110 pilots will survive if you are lucky but doing this on every missions your luck runs out. ( Not very entertaining )

 

Only way to survive is to play your own "war" and stop caring about your flight because they will die on every mission.

 

On moderate difficulty AI fighters cant hit you very well when flying straight line so your tail gunner will shoot them down. ( Record 3 Fighters so far )

When playing Hard difficulty your flight turns into brainless zombies that have almost 0% life expectancy. ( Only Positive side is that now enemy fighters can hit your plane properly )

 

Some minor improvement could be option for difficulty level: All AI Hard what i have made on "complain" section.

This will not fix mutch but its improvement nevertheless.

 

I have not played Sturmovik mutch for month because got bored of the broken AI and Career mission flaws.

There are mutch more issues and i think you guys can share your findings here if you like..

Otherwise i would type whole night so i tried to make it somehow readable... Sorry its a mess.

 

[Nibbio]

The career is a joke, mainly due to the

clueless AI

However dynamic campaign servers like Coconut's can still be lots of fun, and the only reason I still play.

[InProgress]

Problem is, that campaign seems to be made for people who love action. You have fighters attacking you on every mission because actioooon. 

 

There is no deeper stuff than that, bf110 should often get some cover if possible to fighters should patrol area so you can fly alone to bomb something and not fly into unknown. Why enemy always know you are coming? I really want missions where you just patrol, attack ground targets and not having fighters attacking you every mission, especially with such a huge numbers. And then having them follow your back to Berlin.

 

I don't like idea of mission successful or failed as well. Should be reworked, also should count for damaged and not only kills.

 

Fights should be quick, if your team damage 3 planes, shoot one, enemy should just go, fighting to death is crazy. Ships needs to change speed, try to avoid attacks and not slowly move in straight line. 

 

I would like to see missions designed for different planes, hs129 would not be send behind enemy lines alone, it's death sentence. Quick attack to help your tanks fight enemy tanks and go home, no enemy magically know you are there.

 

Problem with ai is their FM. If everything fly the same one then you see german planes die all the time. We need to wait for that ai guy to get hired and make planes like fw190 deadly. 

 

Imagine me262 turning vs spitfire. AI in clod is not the best (during fixing process) but I love the way fight work. Enemy don't fly in circles, they climb, roll a lot, it's really hard to hit them. They are simply aggressive and unpredictable. They also disengage after some of them gets shot down and don't fight till the end.

 

 

People get more kills in less than a year or campaign than Hartmann did through entire war. It should be a challenge to shot down a plane, not only because they should be smarter but because they would give up and run, now you just shoot everyone because they won't go away. Or find enemy im every mission. 

 

Yeah, often you should find novice pilots, but they should just do more than turn right and do a circle.

 

Another thing I noticed if your flight abandoning mission because there is enemy flying somewhere near so my bf109 dropped bombs and went to fight them. Did not bother with order to destroy bridge.

Edited September 20, 2018 by InProgress

[Lusekofte]

I agree with InProgress here, developers are listening to their customers and believe they want more effects and more actions. The main reason for me not flying this sim is the lack of authentic feel to campaigns. It is only so many times you can fly Sea Dragoons . 

It is really  a shame for my sake , I find this simulator top notch , but the usage not so much

[Feathered_IV]

It is what it is in many respects, and I wouldn't expect the core gameplay to change.  I noticed that the .group files and templates for the career missions are contained within the SCG and SWF.gtp packages however.  Perhaps some of those who are savvy with the mission editor might be able to take a look and refine the missions so they play out better.

[Lusekofte]

My guess they  would work if they was acting like intended, if AI wingmen helped you and AI opponents acted like intended the missions probably would be superb. I think scripted campaigns like Sea Dragons, Han believed it was the most boring he ever made, worked because they was made with less actions, thus it is manageable. If you made a campaign with bad AI in mind, you might do it better, but if you get AI in order it might be superb

[InProgress]

41 minutes ago, LuseKofte said:

I think scripted campaigns like Sea Dragons, Han believed it was the most boring he ever made

It was really cool one. I don't see why it should be called boring because you don't shoot all the time at something. This game works nice when it comes to casual and hardcore players, full hud on, helpers, unlimited ammo etc. So why not to make action and realism difficulty choice in the future? Want to get bunch of shooting every mission? Just go action. Want something as closest to realisty? Go realism.

 

People vote with their wallets, i noticed quite a bit of whining about AI and single player lately. If things wont change, some people will probably switch to other games, like wings over the reich or maybe something new will come out one day. Seems like lack of competition is not the best for il-2. Having new content is great but what's the point of having 100 maps and 1000 planes if AI will still suck and SP won't be fun or realistic.

36 minutes ago, Karamazov said:

At least CloD (TF?) have said they hope to make changes to AI commands and behaviour.

I have hopes that CloD will go into SP patch. Multi is not that alive so the only advantage would be to make really great SP experience. Even if multi would be dead, people would still have reason to buy clod and expansions just for SP.

2 hours ago, Feathered_IV said:

It is what it is in many respects, and I wouldn't expect the core gameplay to change.

I remember times when this game had unlocks. People really hated it and after a while it was removed. I don't think it's good to ignore what fans want and try to bring new players with diffrent ideas like these unlocks or more action in gameplay. Dawn of War 3 pretty much proved that if you ignore fans and do something completly diffrent, while hoping people who never really cared about Dawn of War series will come and bring much bigger success than old fans. Well, everyone knows what happend to relic and their DoW3.

 

And for action, people play WT, i don't think they will come to il2. No matter how much hollywood would be here.

Edited September 20, 2018 by InProgress

[Lusekofte]

AI is the key, and AI is by my experience the hardest thing to get right. I do net expect too much of them. Look at old IL 2 , those where dumbasses for many years , but in all fairness becomes the best there is in this genre. DCS  got just as stupid AI as the rest. 

[Lusekofte]

WOTR crash my computer. I am really pissed at that game, feels like modding old IL 2 witch also could be a bitch. Do not have the patience at all. 

I think instead of giving a new plane every other two weeks , there would be something long lasting about improving AI. Everybody is nagging about new plane and 2 days after there is more nagging about a new plane. Tank and WW1 , never mentioned at all just a short while ago, next would probably be a FPS infantry version. I start to believe PTO never comes in this perspective. 

But to be honest I wish for improved AI more than PTO atm

 

[LeLv76_Erkki]

Old Il-2s AI had tolerable combination of cheating, dumbness, and believable behaviour such as randomness in evasions it took. It was clear they werent humans but at least they, especially in last incarnation, produce believable air combat, even disengaging at times.

 

I'd take 1946's AI over what we have now in a heartbeat.

[Feathered_IV]

13 minutes ago, LeLv76_Erkki said:

Old Il-2s AI had tolerable combination of cheating, dumbness, and believable behaviour such as randomness in evasions it took. It was clear they werent humans but at least they, especially in last incarnation, produce believable air combat, even disengaging at times.

 

I'd take 1946's AI over what we have now in a heartbeat.

 

 

Yeah, I was thinking about that earlier.  At the moment there seems to be either the choice of having an AI that is so complex it operates a plane just like the player does, but is consequently so limited by that complexity that it is a dumb as a stump.  Or there is the option of an AI that enjoys a simplified version of the player's flight model, but has a greater repertoire of action at the expense of certain liberties with combat performance.  Now that I've seen both options, I tend to think I too prefer the latter.

[JG27_Steini]

I would really like to know whether the team is really aware of this huge problem. I am tired of getting new grafic updates and no word about these concerns. 

[CountZero]

27 minutes ago, LeLv76_Erkki said:

Old Il-2s AI had tolerable combination of cheating, dumbness, and believable behaviour such as randomness in evasions it took. It was clear they werent humans but at least they, especially in last incarnation, produce believable air combat, even disengaging at times.

 

I'd take 1946's AI over what we have now in a heartbeat.

 

And you could use them in big numbers, here its bad AI and low numbers of them able to be used.

[LeLv76_Erkki]

8 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

 

And you could use them in big numbers, here its bad AI and low numbers of them able to be used.

 

Yeah that too, 40 bombers + escorts + interceptors + flak still runs smooth...

[C6_lefuneste]

As the dev team is not staffed to work on AI, they should open it to mod with a minimal documentation, instead of keeping it locked and inefficient.

[InProgress]

 

2:56,

 

 

31:24

 

I wish there was a way to make it in box. Hard to imagine pacific with battles where you see 20 planes. Don't know much about game making but if AI planes would get simpler which would allow for much bigger battles then why not. Don't think these changes would be visible for normal people anyway.

Edited September 20, 2018 by InProgress

[Lusekofte]

Problem with the AI heavies in old IL 2 was that when they dropped bombs you really got LAaAgGGg , but that was it, you really could feel the fear those German fighter pilots  had when attacking bomber formations. That is something I miss, that historical feeling seeing those big wings

[JG4_Sputnik]

I've stopped playing careers altogether. After a few missions your whole squad is dead and I have also all the issues you have postet.

 

Go for scripted missions (payed or freeware, especially the 110 scripted campaign "fire and ice" by netscape is very good - you can find it in the mission section of the forum), they work very good and are a lot of fun. I hope for future updates that fix the dynamic career and then will try it again. At the moment it is no fun though.

[=475FG=_DAWGER]

4 hours ago, ChiefWH said:

 

 

And if I do get some cash lying around, one day I will probably opt for one or two of the DCS WWII modules, just to scratch the 'graphics + detailed control' itch.

 

Get a jet. Old school F-86/Mig15/Mig 21/F-5 are awesome. Helicopters are a blast in DCS. Stay away from the WWII stuff. They are clueless when it comes to propeller flight modeling although it does appear that, since they released the Yak-52 and there are lots of people currently flying the real thing, they are getting an education. Can't hide behind the "you have never flown the real thing" defense anymore.

Edited September 20, 2018 by =475FG=DAWGER

[40plus]

My nostalgic desire for a proper WW2 sim made me break my golden rule for game purchases. "Don't buy a game that has multiplayer in it" not just multiplayer-only games, no game with multiplayer even as an add-on to single player.

 

The reason for my rule is that it is pretty much inevitable that the developers will let the single player experience suffer in exchange for effort on that MP segment. I don't blame them for this since the modern gamer demands MP, It's just me that hates it. I play games like this to get away from people, not get frustrated with new ones on the other side of the planet. ?

 

I love this title and have bought most every module and collector plane but for now I think I have enough content so my next purchase will be dependent on a proper improvement of the single player experience. I'm tired of my wingmen turning around to re-attack craters in the ground and getting shot to bits by enemy AI that was ported from a nascar game. left left left left left left . . . .hmm maybe I'll try turning right, he'll never expect that.

 

 

[bush_wizard]

not much to add here but definitely agree ai issues and the over restrictive career (always mia/capture on mission end, failure/success bogus) are killing sp

[blitze]

Having a better time of career when squad leader.  Still have pilots falling like confetti and it was so sad to see my last fight, so many 109's going down in smoke to P39's.

 

I copped some engine damage taking on the Il2's but bagged 4 of them before limping back to base.  My Wingman radioed he had been wounded but he didn't make it.

 

I do find my flight AI works better when I tell them to copy my actions and then direct the fight.  I usually on escort duty have them sitting 500 to 1k m above the flight being escorted.  Last escort flight though was also annoying as when directed to engage attacking fighters, my flight decides to go after the same Yak as I am and forget the other 2 playing with the 111's.  Least they all made it back to base on that one.

 

AI is a mixed bag but there is no way in hell I would want their flight models to go the UFO path il2 of old had.  I still have some good missions in career and now getting mixed bags of aircraft in missions including the Duck, 111's, 110's which were giving it to fighters as well as the usual Stuka's and FW's.  First half of the career was more just FW's and Stukas and that was it.  Also see sometimes upto 6 flights of aircraft at the same time which isn't bad.  Quite fun for firballs but then there are missions when nothing showed and that was not a problem either. 

 

More improvements are welcomed but it isn't as hopeless as some make it out.  What would be nice is target co-ordination or at least telling your flight members which direction to break and do their thing.  Also individual flight members return to base command for flight leader.

[Guest deleted@134347]

I simply got bored of escort missions where I had to orbit around the attacking group for 15-20 minutes...  only to turn around and head back home... even at x8 time speed it was still around 5-8 minutes...  It was a Mc202 career. Then do it again 5 times. The attack missions were fun, but it was 1 attack mission out of 5 escort ones where I barely saw any action, after a while I simply started wandering off to other areas just to get some contacts... Anyway, for some folks this does appeal to the 'immersion' aspect of the wwii air mission reality, however given my hectic lifestyle this wasn't up to my liking.   I totally understand the devs can't appeal to every single request, so this isn't a complaint, just a feedback...

[blitze]

My Kuban career dives me more diversity in the 109.  Escorts, Soft Column Attacks, Bomber Intercepts, Ground Air Support over objects and Recon intercepts.

 

Same career but in the Yak's on VVS give similar diversity but tangling with 190's and 109 escorts can be brutal if one is not careful. I am concentrating on the 109 career just to push through and finish it.  I also have a il2 Moscow career to work on.  Not sure how it is more recently but it seemed I had to take out AA for my flight to ensure their survival on missions.  Was fun to have an over zealous 109 or 110 attack from behind when I am tail.  I would hang back a little, watch my flight start ACM to avoid being hit, side slip and then line up the attacker as they over flew me heading to the others.  A short bust on the 23mm's would make the attackers life very dead.

 

Medium length careers with med density and difficulty.  I understand there will be more mission diversity as the series develops.

[Godspeed]

40 minutes ago, ChiefWH said:

109 career gives the 'best' SP experience

 

With single engined fighters you can enjoy flying career mutch more i agree on this. ( Jabo is not included )

Last time i played it was pretty boring nevertheless i got 120 kills less than 40 flights. ( Iron man always on my careers )

This has to do with AI and moderate difficulty because choosing Hard ruins your sides AI..

 

Choosing bad ai to your team or the enemy. ( Pick your poison )

 

And i also agree with blitze that you need to be squad leader to make it work somehow. ( Spamming commands is mandatory )

But being flight leader on bf 110 career it does not matter mutch.

 

 

[JonRedcorn]

?

[Tapi]

I just want to add my voice here (again): I love BOX with all its visuals and FM but because I am an SP guy, dumb AI slowly ending my interest to play this game. I am sad a lot about that and I still have some hope for AI rework and improvement. IMHO it is the only way how this game can survive... New eyes candy stuff cannot keep the interest for a long time, but good AI can...

 

I wish the devs at least talk with us about this serious and huge problem.... 

Edited September 21, 2018 by Tapi

[Sandinourcoffee6]

21 hours ago, lefuneste said:

As the dev team is not staffed to work on AI, they should open it to mod with a minimal documentation, instead of keeping it locked and inefficient.

I really do agree with all these comments,I fired up cfs1 yesterday and really the AI was better even for a game that old.

what needs to happen is we get a AI package with reworked code,they need to be lower resolution within reason ( do we need to see high res textures only in your plane is good)

these things need to be looked at ASAP or I am sad too say I can see no future for this sim, as most people will paying for future products,no funding will mean only community members to try keep the game alive

[Feathered_IV]

I’m pretty sure that the developers already think that the issue of varied and convincing AI is important to the success of the game.  I just hope that one day they will appreciate that it is vital.  

[JG4_Sputnik]

I wonder what the percentage is of people flying MP vs SP... 

Has anybody a clue? 

30% SP 70%MP?

[Feathered_IV]

In the live interview that was recorded on November 18 last year, Jason said that the single players are 90% of the customers.  

[Herne]

I've had lots of of moscow iron man careers. I disagree with those who say the career is all about action. At one phase of the campaign flying for jg2 I had hardly any enemy action for many missions. 

 

I've started to play on rapid, where next day advances about 4 days at a time to speed things up a bit. For the most part I really enjoy the career as is, with no tech chat, no labels, no virtual instruments. on occassion when outnumbered I can still be taken by surprise and get my ass kicked.

 

I seem to suffer with corrupt careers though. Sometimes they are so bad that they will not even load and crash the client. Biggest thing on my wish list, is for better long term career stability.

[JonRedcorn]

If I see another AI thread before Bodenplatte releases I am gunna go crazy. You guys can't wait a few months till they finish arguably the biggest release this games ever seen? Do you not watch the dev update threads? These guys aren't sitting around twiddling their thumbs. They are making unmatched in quality ww2 airplanes while still working on other aspects. Patience is a virtue. All this with a tiny team of devs.

 

Go play something else for a few months if it pisses you off that badly. Reposting the same thread week in week out isn't going to change anything. You think because the same 8 people are whining they are gunna drop bodenplatte development and start work on this? Just chill and have some faith.

Edited September 21, 2018 by 15th_JonRedcorn

[Lusekofte]

4 minutes ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

You guys can't wait a few months till they finish arguably the biggest release this games ever seen?

 

That is arguably.

 

To me SP is of great importance, it is for those making campaigns too. How long do you think they will bother making them with AI so clearly sabotage their work. Mission makers do not grow on trees , not in any of the simulators. There is not a huge recruitment going on. 

No matter what plane arrive or pack, it take one week tops before people ask for something new. Those people are in for short fun, not long lasting usage of the simulator.

No matter what planes there are in a pack, in MP it is all about the kill. There is no reward for bombing stuff, it always end up in a dogfight carnage. SP is a huge part of it in the long run. 

[Tapi]

28 minutes ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

You guys can't wait a few months till they finish arguably the biggest release this games ever seen?

 

Of course, we can but what makes me crazy is the silence from the devs about the matter?

Because I suspect that we are going to find out after BoBP release that only minor and not very significant AI change was done...

So IMHO, if the devs go out with the clear word about the future of the AI no other threads like this one would emerge since...

Edited September 21, 2018 by Tapi

[C6_lefuneste]

And the problem is that AI improvement is not on roadmap, as I understand. And I wonder what the "I can only turn" algorithm will give with plane like the 262 or other high speed performer plane of the Bodenplatte period. I will not be surprise if IA I16 will mostly win again AI Me262 in dogfight. 

And try to intercept bomber in carrer : you will see your wingmens going right into the 6 of the bombers and beeing shot. Should be the same for those planes. This is why I didnt pre purchase BoB yet, without AI improvement it will not be worth and moreover the me262 may kill most of the MP gameplay.

[unreasonable]

There are some things that can be done to improve the career without having a major AI rewrite: some of them are just tweaking the mission design machine, perhaps making it a bit more flexible. An example from an escort mission I have just finished.

 

1) We sit on the airstrip waiting for the bombers.   Why? Give us an RV point and time in the air.  Similarly on the return: why are He111s landing at a forward airfield just behind the front line? We should escort them to an RV point from which they head off map, or to a western edge field.

 

2) The target is due north of the airfield. A large V of He111s arrives at the airfield: from the north.   So they all have to do a 180 degree turn while we take off: two of them collide while doing this, and the others take most of the 20 minutes flight time to target to reassemble their V.  I am not saying that either the collisions or the long form up are unrealistic at all: it is precisely because you do not want to make bombers do this that you should have them approach towards the direction of the waypoint, not from it: or failing that from the west (for Germans: this is obviously map and side dependent).

 

3) The escorts (6 109 F-2s) take off and luckily this time do not crash into any of the He111s.  Once above the bombers, the leader is (I think) trying to fly at his designated F-2 cruising speed of 450 kph. Since the He111s are flying at 300 kph he cannot keep station doing this so has to weave and race track around.  Naturally the wingmen 109s cannot stay with him doing this, much less stay in their designated formation, so they end up spread all over the sky in a loose column that looks a bit like mayflies over a pond.

 

3) Meanwhile I have taken station to the side and above the He111s, where I can fly at 300 kph (easy enough - about 1900/2000 rpm on automatic). Because I am not wildly weaving about and worrying about collisions I can keep a good look out.

 

So why not give planes a variety of situation specific cruise speeds for the mission maker to use?  If you are escorting Ju88s give the escort AI a target cruise speed equal to the Ju88's, and so on, until they reach the "goodbye" WP. Give the escort AI a horizontal as well as a vertical offset from the bombers, so that they do not collide climbing up through the bomber formation.  And while you are at it, give all fighter bombers a "loaded" cruise speed that they can achieve using rated power so that we do not have to burn limited engine time just keeping up with the AI. 

 

This is all just lists, really, not complex AI programming.    

 

[Semor76]

On 9/20/2018 at 1:25 PM, JG27_Steini said:

I would really like to know whether the team is really aware of this huge problem. I am tired of getting new grafic updates and no word about these concerns. 

 Look at the new Dev. Diary and you will get the answer. Or the Dev. Diary before,or the one before...or before.

 

This is what drives me away from IL-2 GB slowly but steady. Lack of AI improvements,lack of a propper Radion comms menue, lack of communication from dev. side.

 

?

[Herne]

1 hour ago, unreasonable said:

There are some things that can be done to improve the career without having a major AI rewrite: some of them are just tweaking the mission design machine, perhaps making it a bit more flexible. An example from an escort mission I have just finished.

 

1) We sit on the airstrip waiting for the bombers.   Why? Give us an RV point and time in the air.  Similarly on the return: why are He111s landing at a forward airfield just behind the front line? We should escort them to an RV point from which they head off map, or to a western edge field.

 

2) The target is due north of the airfield. A large V of He111s arrives at the airfield: from the north.   So they all have to do a 180 degree turn while we take off: two of them collide while doing this, and the others take most of the 20 minutes flight time to target to reassemble their V.  I am not saying that either the collisions or the long form up are unrealistic at all: it is precisely because you do not want to make bombers do this that you should have them approach towards the direction of the waypoint, not from it: or failing that from the west (for Germans: this is obviously map and side dependent).

 

3) The escorts (6 109 F-2s) take off and luckily this time do not crash into any of the He111s.  Once above the bombers, the leader is (I think) trying to fly at his designated F-2 cruising speed of 450 kph. Since the He111s are flying at 300 kph he cannot keep station doing this so has to weave and race track around.  Naturally the wingmen 109s cannot stay with him doing this, much less stay in their designated formation, so they end up spread all over the sky in a loose column that looks a bit like mayflies over a pond.

 

3) Meanwhile I have taken station to the side and above the He111s, where I can fly at 300 kph (easy enough - about 1900/2000 rpm on automatic). Because I am not wildly weaving about and worrying about collisions I can keep a good look out.

 

So why not give planes a variety of situation specific cruise speeds for the mission maker to use?  If you are escorting Ju88s give the escort AI a target cruise speed equal to the Ju88's, and so on, until they reach the "goodbye" WP. Give the escort AI a horizontal as well as a vertical offset from the bombers, so that they do not collide climbing up through the bomber formation.  And while you are at it, give all fighter bombers a "loaded" cruise speed that they can achieve using rated power so that we do not have to burn limited engine time just keeping up with the AI. 

 

This is all just lists, really, not complex AI programming.    

 

 

Was it not standard practice for fighter escorts to fly faster than the bombers they were escorting weaving to maintain a position above and behind ?

 

I don't know if was or it wasn't, but I do not mind doing it in VR as it is much easier to check the bomber formations six every time I have a 30 degree weave deflection.

Edit: just found this, which suggest escorts did not take a static position alongside the bombers.

 

Edited September 21, 2018 by =FEW=Herne

[RedKestrel]

4 minutes ago, =FEW=Herne said:

 

Was it not standard practice for fighter escorts to fly faster than the bombers they were escorting weaving to maintain a position above and behind ?

 

I don't know if was or it wasn't, but I do not mind doing it in VR as it is much easier to check the bomber formations six every time I have a 30 degree weave deflection.

It doesnt make sense to match speed and position with the bombers. If you're flying at the same speed as the bombers you don't have enough speed to engage any attackers. You're just as slow as the bombers and a sitting duck for when the enemy starts to make their high-speed attack runs and you're trying to accelerate to a decent combat speed. Especially a problem with planes that accelerate or climb poorly. 

I think IRL you had multiple groups of escorts usually, some up high, some on either side of the bomber stream, ranging a bit more widely than they did in-game.