Serious thoughts and feedback for Career & AI

[bush_wizard]

3 hours ago, JG4_Sputnik said:

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

Has anybody a clue? 

30% SP 70%MP?

 

lolwut

 

no, sp exceeds mp in every capacity. thats why its sad it doesnt get more attention

[Blutaar]

4 hours ago, =FEW=Herne said:

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. 

 

Stop flying these "aircover" missions every round. It is the only missiontype where you not get enemy planes in every mission (not true for Escort). That dosent mean there are no enemys in the sky, they just dont come to your area or they come to late when the mission is already over. Most of the time they spawn in the moment you reach the "Target Area" and fly somewhere. If you wait long enough you might get lucky and they come to your location but most often they do their own thing. Which would be no problem when it not happend in every mission of this missiontype. I started to avoid these missions because its boring and plays out the same everytime for me.

 

Another AI behavior i dont like is when an enemy flight spawns and has you as their mission. No matter what you do, they will allways find you. It will no matter if they start 20km from you or on the ground 100s of kilometers away. They will focus on you till they reach you or got distracted by other friendly flights. They make curse corrections when you try to avoid them and will find you because of onboard radar. Happend more then once to me. Now imagine this in an unescorted ground attack mission where already a flight of enemy planes waiting for you above the target area. This is not fun. If i want to dogfight in every mission i use fighter type missions and not groundattack. In groundattack missions i want to groundattack and not dogfight.

 

What is the logic behind the concept that you have to dogfight in ground attack missions almost everytime? I mean sure, an enemy flight here and then is a good variety but in nearly every damn mission even without any escorts for you? I dont get it.

Edited September 21, 2018 by Ishtaru

[unreasonable]

19 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.

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

 

 

 

Possibly - although having just finished Wellum's book his descriptions of escort duty have his unit in a clearly defined position relative to the bombers. He was flying Spitfires, which have a rather slow cruise speed anyway, especially if they are to have the range to get well over France and back.  So I think it may be situation specific.

 

In a way, it is also missing my point, which is about how to improve the overall game experience without completely rewriting the AI code.  When you are formation leader you can fly your escort where ever you want. The problem is the AI's inability to follow the weaving track: they cannot do it with an AI flight leader, and unless you are very careful about how you go about things, they cannot do it with a player flight leader either. Hence you get planes scattered all over the sky and frequent collisions.  Having the escort fly at the speed of the bombers should reduce all of that.  You might be swapping one unrealistic feature for another: but I would argue that this is both preferable and easy to achieve: it is just one number in a WP, not rewriting any AI capabilities.

 

As to Red Kestrels point, I rather disagree.  The energy you have relative to the bombers is height, that can be freely swapped for speed in a matter of seconds.  By not weaving and hence reducing collision risk, you free up time for something far more important - looking around.  Instead of scanning close to your plane for friendlies to avoid collisions, you can systematically search for approaching enemy interceptors, and when you do see them you have a much clearer 3D picture of their approach because you know exactly where the bombers are located. If you see any of course you can open the throttle in plenty of time.   

 

Trying an escort this way I was struck by how much more effective I was in maintaining a good look out.  I will keep trialing this method, including when I am leader, if I can stay alive.  

 

2 minutes ago, Ishtaru said:

Stop flying these "aircover" missions every round. It is the only missiontype where you not get enemy planes in every mission.

 

Escort missions are quite often not intercepted: I would say maybe 40% of the time.  This may be because the other AI fighter flight (usually "Swift" for the Germans) engages them.  Same with ground attack.  I like it that there is a question mark over when or if enemy aircraft will engage and looking out for them is a requirement if you want to live. If I just want a fight there is always QMB. 

 

 

[Herne]

4 minutes ago, Ishtaru said:

 

Stop flying these "aircover" missions every round. It is the only missiontype where you not get enemy planes in every mission. That dosent mean there are no enemys in the sky, they just dont come to your area or they come to late when the mission is already over. Most of the time they spawn in the moment you reach the "Target Area" and fly somewhere. If you wait long enough you might get lucky and they come to your location but most often they do their own thing. Which would be no problem when it not happend in every mission of this missiontype. I started to avoid these missions because its boring and plays out the same everytime for me.

 

Another AI behavior i dont like is when an enemy flight spawns and has you as their mission. No matter what you do, they will allways find you. It will no matter if they start 20km from you or on the ground 100s of kilometers away. They will focus on you till they reach you or got distracted by other friendly flights. They make curse corrections when you try to avoid them and will find you because of onboard radar. Happend more then once to me. Now imagine this in an unescorted ground attack mission where already a flight of enemy planes waiting for you above the target area. This is not fun. If i want to dogfight in every mission i use fighter type missions and not groundattack. In groundattack missions i want to groundattack and not dogfight.

 

What is the logic behind the concept that you have to dogfight in ground attack missions everytime? I mean sure, an enemy flight here and then is a good variety but in every damn mission even without any escorts for you? I dont get it.

 

That's not been my experience at all on the moscow map. Sometimes we attack target I drop my bomb, and then I provide top cover for the rest of my flight expecting enemies, that do not always come. 

Sometimes we get bounced on way to target where we drop our bombs and have to try and save our skins.

 

very occasionally I get bounced at the target. As for target focus, why shouldn't enemies have it ? I know I have it. Only time I let go of my target is when I think I am in danger then I brake off. 

[Bando]

@Tapi : I believe Jason said on multiple occasions they want to change AI, but lack the resources. The AI programmer has a schedule (FM of new planes, BoBP) with no room for additional stuff like AI. At least; that's how I read it at the time. It is what it is. Try PWCG, although it struggles with the same AI flaws. Hopefully the new titles will bring in lots of new people (maybe a load of tankers) and the team will get financially better so they can upgrade the AI. As I understood from Jason, the task of rewriting AI seems to be monumental in terms of programmer time.

 

As a single player I too stopped playing this sim about a year ago. MP does not attract me at all, so I will not go there.
I still support the team whenever I can, I will buy each and every bone they throw at us and hope that the future will prove me right.

Edited September 21, 2018 by Bando
Spells

[Lusekofte]

1 minute ago, Bando said:

I believe Jason said on multiple occasions they want to change AI, but lack the resources. The AI programmer has a schedule FM of new planes, BoBP) with no room for additional stuff like AI.

 

This is what I was afraid of, BOBP is a pay ware, AI is a fix, if resources is in the need we all knows what priorities have to be. It do not help in my concern for this sim.

Personally I rather have this fixed before any new thing come along, at the same time I recognize the point of not doing so for a cooperation standpoint

[Herne]

7 minutes ago, Bando said:

@Tapi : I believe Jason said on multiple occasions they want to change AI, but lack the resources. The AI programmer has a schedule FM of new planes, BoBP) with no room for additional stuff like AI. At least; that's how I read it at the time. It is what it is. Try PWCG, although it struggles with the same AI flaws. Hopefully the new titles will bring in lots of new people (maybe a load of tankers) and the team will get finacially better so they can upgrade the AI. As I understood from Jason, the task of rewriting AI seems to be monumental in terms of programmer time.

 

As a single player I too stopped playing this sim about a year ago. MP does not attract me at all, so I will not go there.
I still support the team whenever I can, I will buy each and every bone they throw at us and hope that the future will prove me right.

 

Bando I know this is a bit off topic, but I can strongly recommend that you should give MP a go. Even if it's just a solo bombing run or ground attack mission. Plan your route, a little off the beaten track, do your business and try to get home. Very rewarding stuff, and its performance can be better than SP too due to not being so heavy on your CPU.

You might like it, you might not, but you should at least give it a try. 

Edited September 21, 2018 by =FEW=Herne

[Blutaar]

3 minutes ago, unreasonable said:

Escort missions are quite often not intercepted: I would say maybe 40% of the time.

 

Yeah i edited my post. Thanks for pointing out. I never fly escort because it is boring after a few times.

 

3 minutes ago, =FEW=Herne said:

That's not been my experience at all on the moscow map.

 

Im glad that your experience is way better then mine. Keep it that way.

 

For me it dosent matter on which map i fly. The missions are allways of the same concept in my version of the game.

 

5 minutes ago, =FEW=Herne said:

Sometimes we get bounced on way to target where we drop our bombs and have to try and save our skins.

 

This is not the exception for me, it is the rule. There is nearly allways a flight of enemy planes circling above the target area. I dont know which game you play but i want it.

 

9 minutes ago, =FEW=Herne said:

As for target focus, why shouldn't enemies have it ? I know I have it. Only time I let go of my target is when I think I am in danger then I brake off. 

 

You misunderstood. What i mean with focus in this context was that sometimes an enemy flight spawns with you as their missiongoal. It dosent matter if they spawn near you or 100km away. They will actively intercept you as if they had an onboard radar just like in modern jets. Where they can track you from 100km distances. 

[Herne]

2 minutes ago, Ishtaru said:

 

Yeah i edited my post. Thanks for pointing out. I never fly escort because it is boring after a few times.

 

 

Im glad that your experience is way better then mine. Keep it that way.

 

For me it dosent matter on which map i fly. The missions are allways of the same concept in my version of the game.

 

 

This is not the exception for me, it is the rule. There is nearly allways a flight of enemy planes circling above the target area. I dont know which game you play but i want it.

 

 

You misunderstood. What i mean with focus in this context was that sometimes an enemy flight spawns with you as their missiongoal. It dosent matter if they spawn near you or 100km away. They will actively intercept you as if they had an onboard radar just like in modern jets. Where they can track you from 100km distances. 

 

My settings are moderate difficulty, scattered enemies with ground starts. I don't know if it's a factor but thought it might be worth mentioning.

[Blutaar]

11 minutes ago, Bando said:

The AI programmer has a schedule (FM of new planes, BoBP) with no room for additional stuff like AI.

 

Since when do they have a dedicated AI guy? Did i miss something?

 

13 minutes ago, Bando said:

I still support the team whenever I can, I will buy each and every bone they throw at us and hope that the future will prove me right.

 

So why should they mess with the AI then? You support them anyway.

[Bando]

3 minutes ago, Ishtaru said:

 

Since when do they have a dedicated AI guy? Did i miss something?

 

 

So why should they mess with the AI then? You support them anyway.

 

It is what I understood from Jason, but I may well be proven wrong. Doesn't really matter, the lack of resources prevents the team from upgrading/reworking the AI. If I do not support the team I made the chance of getting the AI upgraded/reworked that much smaller, hence the support.
But you knew that already......

[RedKestrel]

As for the Devs not communicating about AI improvements....we've been told several things
-small AI tweaks happen when they can (even within the last few updates, these have happened)
-No major AI overhauls are likely in the near term, because they don't have the money, time, or ability to hire an AI person right now. (and before anyone talks about how much money they must be raking in, and how they should spent it on AI rather than new planes, consider that money is not the only issue, and despite what many think, money doesnt solve all problems).
-As soon as AI changes are planned, we will be told.

I say this as someone who plays primarily single player, and would LOVE to see AI improvements: Right now, all the calls for AI improvements are completely moot. We've been told the situation. No amount of cajoling, threats of withholding future purchases, or threads on the topic are going to change the basic economic and physical reality - time and money are not infinite and will not become so in the near future. Do we really expect, at the end of the Dev diary, every time they give us news, for Han or Jason to say "Sorry guys, no AI improvements yet". How would that help address the problem?

I mean, my kid wants a kitten. But she doesn't demand a kitten every time we talk about getting her something else. The kitten would really complete the home experience, especially when she's in the house by herself (single player mode). But that doesn't change the fact that a kitten isn't happening.

 

[Feathered_IV]

2 minutes ago, Ishtaru said:

 

So why should they mess with the AI then? You support them anyway.

 

I pretty much went the other way.  If the product can fit my needs in the future I'll be pleased to buy more, but for now I think its best that I step back from the perpetuating cycle of ten planes and a map.  It was a hard habit to break, as I've been buying Il-2 products sight-unseen since 2002.

[Sandinourcoffee6]

All we want is something concrete to go by,instead we get nothing in regard of future plans for AI work.

as it is now is just a sightseeing sim or for the few expert multiplayers

[Godspeed]

I preordered bodenplatte and G6 they are my newest products.

I do own almost everything in my account and i feel i have more than plenty products to enjoy already.

 

But.. it does not make mutch difference because using all this planes and maps the experience what i get is almost the same.

 

I was very happy when career mode was released and did not really care that it had issues because i believed that they will be fixed in near future.

Now my paid content is sitting and waiting to be used but certainly will not buy more before i see noticeable improvements.

 

Its still fun to fly and i can enjoy at times but its not the experience what i hoped to be.

 

 

 

[bush_wizard]

37 minutes ago, Bando said:

 

It is what I understood from Jason, but I may well be proven wrong. Doesn't really matter, the lack of resources prevents the team from upgrading/reworking the AI. If I do not support the team I made the chance of getting the AI upgraded/reworked that much smaller, hence the support.
But you knew that already......

 

you got it wrong. at one point it was mentioned that the dedicated ai guy left the team because of health issues

 

they dont have a dedicated ai guy and programing a flight model is a different cup of tea than programming sequential logic

[Bando]

9 minutes ago, bush_wizard said:

 

you got it wrong. at one point it was mentioned that the dedicated ai guy left the team because of health issues

 

they dont have a dedicated ai guy and programing a flight model is a different cup of tea than programming sequential logic

 

I stand corrected.

 

I really hope they find some time/money/people to work on the AI.

[Blutaar]

42 minutes ago, Feathered_IV said:

If the product can fit my needs in the future I'll be pleased to buy more, but for now I think its best that I step back from the perpetuating cycle of ten planes and a map.

 

If the devs would promise to overhaul the AI, lets say after BoBp, i would gladly continue to support them. Because they keep their promises and i trust them enough. But as long as they consider the AI not worth the money, i cant enjoy the game. So the future looks dark in the AI department and thats it for me. No matter how good it looks or how believeable the FMs or what else is, without good AI, the SP will never be enjoyable for me.

 

51 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

No amount of cajoling, threats of withholding future purchases, or threads on the topic are going to change the basic economic and physical reality - time and money are not infinite and will not become so in the near future.

 

So without making noise and stop supporting, how should we influence the development then? Without talking about the problem again and again, nothing will change. The devs seem to think that the AI is not important enough to invest money. Instead they invest the money into new content which is understandable. But if 90% of the playerbase are SP, i would consider ignoring AI to be a serious risk. It could cost them more money in the longrun. But of course i am not an expert on buisness and such.

Edited September 21, 2018 by Ishtaru

[Feathered_IV]

1 hour ago, Ishtaru said:

It could cost them more money in the longrun

 

I agree.  All the more so now that there are three titles on the go.  Every player who is no longer actively buying represents three lost sales instead of one.  

[Sandinourcoffee6]

They need to put a hold on all future products,and sort this out,then go back to bonenplatte ,tanks and flying circus

[bush_wizard]

Just now, meplanes1969 said:

They need to put a hold on all future products,and sort this out,then go back to bonenplatte ,tanks and flying circus

 

no they shouldnt put anything on hold. just need to accept the seriousness and urgency of doing something about it

[unreasonable]

Given all of the above is why I have been trying to think of improvements to the career that do not actually involve AI rewriting to any significant degree, but changes to the mission generator: I am not talking about bugs specifically.  We know the developers can do this right now since they are still working on the mission generator for BoBP. These could include:

 

1) A few more mission types: fighter sweep is obvious one.

2) A "Historic" setting for AI level so that all AI flights have a chance of including a mix of AI levels depending on the side and date.

3) Reducing the damage threshold that triggers an AI RTB decision.

4) Allowing a plane requesting permission to land clearance once the plane on the runway is past the tower, rather than as now completely off the runway.

5) Introducing a "loaded" cruise speed: or just ensuring that the default cruise speed is easily attainable at rated power when carrying bombs.

6) Making bombers approach the RV so that they are heading towards their next WP not away from it.  

7) Moving searchlights away from guns so that the map is not littered with dead searchlights killed by their own guns after every mission.

7+1) ??? Why does this stupid forum turn 8 into ? ?

 

I obviously do not know how hard any of these changes are to make, but AFAIK none of them involve AI programming as such.

 

 

 

[Sandinourcoffee6]

What about the flying in defensive circles,can that be fixed?

[bush_wizard]

unreasonable - the problem there is that none of those things fix the ai issues

 

like, those are mission design things. it doesnt change the ai being stupid, doesnt change the flaws in ai logic, doesnt change ai behavior

 

1. this is just another mission type?

2. ai are already mixed level. theyre just dumb as rocks while simultaneously behaving unbelievably (crazy off angle snapshots, spotting thru clouds [dont care if not supposed to happen because it does so save it], hyper aggression, all while never rtb, crashing in to ground, nothing but turning, etc)

3. be great if rtb worked at all. barely ever does. more likely you will be chased across map by a smoking enemy

4. whole landing procedure sucks and needs rework. flying in pattern 20 mins while nobody does anything is dumb

5. fair enough but comes down to ai and how they pilot

6. ok but is only the flight lead gonna drop bombs?? more ai issues that waypoints aint gonna solve

7. what?

[Herne]

2 minutes ago, Feathered_IV said:

 

I agree.  All the more so now that there are three titles on the go.  Every player who is no longer actively buying represents three lost sales instead of one.  

 

Rubbish ! As with any other franchise people will go, others will come. There is a lot of salt in this thread. I consider myself to be one of the "new kids on the block" and from my perspective IL2 may not be perfect, either for single player or MP, but I think it's pretty damn good, and would go so far as to say that currently it's currently the best sim on the market for both SP and MP WWII air combat.

 

For all we know maybe they are looking at AI improvements, but they would be foolish to promise this unless they were sure that they can deliver. 

 

I agree with you in so far as if we are not currently enjoying what's on offer then we should not buy it, but from my point of view, flying in VR in this sim is the most immersive flying experience I've had since I used to fly. I just can't get enough of it.

 

IL2 has improved since launch, It will very likely continue to improve for years to come in spite of, or maybe partly because of our complaints, but thinking the current state of the AI is killing the game, is simply not true.

[bush_wizard]

Just now, =FEW=Herne said:

 

Rubbish ! As with any other franchise people will go, others will come. There is a lot of salt in this thread. I consider myself to be one of the "new kids on the block" and from my perspective IL2 may not be perfect, either for single player or MP, but I think it's pretty damn good, and would go so far as to say that currently it's currently the best sim on the market for both SP and MP WWII air combat.

 

For all we know maybe they are looking at AI improvements, but they would be foolish to promise this unless they were sure that they can deliver. 

 

I agree with you in so far as if we are not currently enjoying what's on offer then we should not buy it, but from my point of view, flying in VR in this sim is the most immersive flying experience I've had since I used to fly. I just can't get enough of it.

 

IL2 has improved since launch, It will very likely continue to improve for years to come in spite of, or maybe partly because of our complaints, but thinking the current state of the AI is killing the game, is simply not true.

 

maybe its not killing the game for you but its evident some of us arent playing because its killing the experience for us

 

good on you for vr and immersion and whatever but the experience is not fun for many of us and until there is a real effort to improve on the gameplay vr and graphics and planes are meaningless. cool flight models are meaningless. new planes are meaningless. ground units, meaningless. maps, meaningless.

 

for all we know, they are not looking at ai improvements. theyve been vocal about the lack of resources, the lack of staffing, etc. a lot of us just arent having fun anymore and wont until some of this stuff gets taken seriously and they do whatever they need to do to get it done

[BraveSirRobin]

The best part of this thread is that there are complaints about too much action and complaints about not enough action.

[Sandinourcoffee6]

Yes it’s the best flight sim off all time with the worst AI off all time

 

 

[bush_wizard]

Just now, meplanes1969 said:

Yes it’s the best flight sim off all time with the worst AI off all time

 

 

best flight sim with the worst gameplay

[unreasonable]

12 minutes ago, bush_wizard said:

unreasonable - the problem there is that none of those things fix the ai issues

 

like, those are mission design things. it doesnt change the ai being stupid, doesnt change the flaws in ai logic, doesnt change ai behavior

 

1. this is just another mission type?

2. ai are already mixed level. theyre just dumb as rocks while simultaneously behaving unbelievably (crazy off angle snapshots, spotting thru clouds [dont care if not supposed to happen because it does so save it], hyper aggression, all while never rtb, crashing in to ground, nothing but turning, etc)

3. be great if rtb worked at all. barely ever does. more likely you will be chased across map by a smoking enemy

4. whole landing procedure sucks and needs rework. flying in pattern 20 mins while nobody does anything is dumb

5. fair enough but comes down to ai and how they pilot

6. ok but is only the flight lead gonna drop bombs?? more ai issues that waypoints aint gonna solve

7. what?

 

The point is that there are things that will improve the SP experience that do not require AI rewrites: which we are not getting any time soon, or possibly any time at all. 

 

1) Yes. Variety is the spice of life.

2) No - only in your own squadron. All other AI only units are of a single level set by the "options". So if you go for Easy, friendly AI flights are all Ace, and enemy AI flights are all Novice.

3) RTB works - in my last ground attack the leader broke off and landed not at our base but at another friendly base on the way home. As number 2 I had to then take over the flight.  But there is a problem with heavily damaged aircraft being too aggressive that I would like to see toned down.

4) The landing procedure would be much shorter if my proposal was introduced: the AI is good at landing and always lands very near the end of the strip: there is no need for the whole runway to be clear. 

5) No it does not. The speed at which the AI heads to the waypoint is determined by the mission generator which looks up a table of aircraft types. 

6) I have never seen any scenario in which the whole flight did not drop - not saying it does not happen. But this is not about that issue: it is about the chaos over the airfield caused by having the bombers turn 180 degrees while the fighters climb up through them.

 

Edited September 21, 2018 by unreasonable

[bush_wizard]

i think the mixed bag of experiences is interesting because not a one of those things happens for me. ever. in fact, ive never seen a scenario in which anything more than the lead dropped. ive barely ever seen an rtb, let alone landing at another airfield. variety being the spice of life is a little moot when the bad ai is gonna kill the entire experience anyway.

 

maybe we are playing a different game because my experience sure doesnt match yours

Edited September 21, 2018 by bush_wizard

[unreasonable]

Perhaps I have a more powerful PC    

 

Seriously, there is plenty of room for improvement, but just saying "Bad AI" is not going to get anywhere.   

[Sandinourcoffee6]

I would rather have just 2 planes too fly with good FM.

the rest off the planes just AI,with lower res textures,it would be the only way we could have the amount off planes in the sky which could make realistic epic missions

[PatrickAWlson]

I am still having fun, and there are so many things that I have yet to do.  While the AI could definitely use improvement it is not a deal breaker for me in its current state.  But everyone's mileage varies.

[Wilhelm_Heidkamp]

22 minutes ago, meplanes1969 said:

Yes it’s the best flight sim off all time with the worst AI off all time

 

 

 

Exactly. Old IL2 sim AI is very much better. 

[bush_wizard]

11 minutes ago, unreasonable said:

Perhaps I have a more powerful PC    

 

Seriously, there is plenty of room for improvement, but just saying "Bad AI" is not going to get anywhere.   

 

i7 6700K at 5GHz, GTX1080, 32GB DDR4 3200MHz, 512GB SSD

 

sorry, but my specs are not an issue nor do I know what that has to do with mission design or crappy ai... lol

 

sorry, gonna have to agree to disagree with you. saying bad ai (because frankly it sucks) is a lot more affective than goose-chase suggestions about mission design. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

3 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

I am still having fun, and there are so many things that I have yet to do.  While the AI could definitely use improvement it is not a deal breaker for me in its current state.  But everyone's mileage varies.

 

the bad ai definitely suspends a lot of enjoyment i could be having with your campaign generator if said ai didn't suck so bad..

 

like all things ymmv ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edited September 21, 2018 by bush_wizard

[Sandinourcoffee6]

Now this is not the end,

it is not even the beginning of the end.

but it is,perhaps,the end of the beginning.

off the AI bot issue

[Herne]

For those that say the AI sucks, why not play MP ? You'll come across all kinds of variety of different skill levels, and there are servers to suit most tastes.

[bush_wizard]

1 minute ago, =FEW=Herne said:

For those that say the AI sucks, why not play MP ? You'll come across all kinds of variety of different skill levels, and there are servers to suit most tastes.

 

because I don't have the time or desire to play mp.

[Herne]

on Berloga with air starts time will not be an issue  

Seriously much of my MP time is spent solo play. I do fly occasionally with others, but mostly I like to fly alone. I get a better sense of freedom in MP, to pick my AC, and my mission, with which load out. 

Actually one big + for me is the ramp starts, I'm one of these sad people that enjoy taxiing to the runway, and seeing other traffic around the field, giving way to damaged birds leaking fluids as they are nursed back to base. 

I miss these things when I play the career