Jump to content
EAF_51_FOX

A.I. DEFENSIVE MANOUVERING..ANY LIGHT IN FUTURE?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, =RS=Stix_09 said:

I do play quite a lot offline also, because I make my own missions, often its testing maps made.

The game could do with a far better QMB (quick mission builder) so people that do not want to delve into the full editor (lot of time involved) can design some better scenarios.

 

It is a very simple programming job to improve QMB: all we need is more granularity. For example: when I fly HS-129 I want to be able to adjust the type of tanks that were autogenerated on the map. For that purpose a simple "adjust" button could be added to allow me to choose if I want "light", "medium" or "heavy" tanks. As a result: I don't waste time going against IS-2s which are impervious to HS-129 guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, WheelwrightPL said:

 

It is a very simple programming job to improve QMB: all we need is more granularity. For example: when I fly HS-129 I want to be able to adjust the type of tanks that were autogenerated on the map. For that purpose a simple "adjust" button could be added to allow me to choose if I want "light", "medium" or "heavy" tanks. As a result: I don't waste time going against IS-2s which are impervious to HS-129 guns.

 

Yes, it's so simple...all they have to do is hit the "make game awesome" button on their keyboard and they can move on to the next product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

Yes, it's so simple...all they have to do is hit the "make game awesome" button on their keyboard and they can move on to the next product.

 

I programmered the Staples “Easy” button.  An “Awesome” button would have been a much tougher job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a great sim for sight seeing and a good sim for most everything else. Unfortunately the a.i. is too hard and expensive to address anytime soon so the developers give us 10 versions of the 109 to make up for it. I will keep supporting 777 with my wallet since they are the best WW2 sim option and I want them to succeed.  If they are in business maybe they can put some resources behind fixing the ai in the future. 

 

But in the meantime, the ai is predictable, robotic, unrealistic, boring, tedious, frustrating and just plain sucks. Ah, now I feel a little better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think improving the AI would be a great opportunity for Russian students at university to improve AI skills in general.  The applications from a game like this to real world situations with drones and such seems to somebody who actually knows nothing about it to be a no brainer.  

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

I would think improving the AI would be a great opportunity for Russian students at university to improve AI skills in general.  The applications from a game like this to real world situations with drones and such seems to somebody who actually knows nothing about it to be a no brainer.  

I agree! The field of AI is advancing at gigantic speeds. Just a few weeks ago, an AI developed by DeepMind (part of Google) was just beating some of the world's best StarCraft players, a game considered very difficult to tackle with an AI. The thing that marveled me most, is that DeepMind used a ton of hardware, resources and time, to create a superb AI, first by learning from human matches, and then by playing against different versions of itself! Once the training was done, they compiled it to a stand-alone AI agent that completely runs on a bare-bones GPU!   Maybe 777 Studios could partner with DeepMind or other AI enterprise the way Blizzard did for this amazing research. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the AI fly into the ground a bit less, but I haven't seen any huge strides in behaviour.  In SP I'm still inevitably finding myself chasing a 109 in an endless right hand turn on the deck.  While doing so I'm pulling back the stick and taking hopeful potshots as the aircraft disappears from view under my nose, then easing back for a look and repeating the process over again. All the while my pilot character is shouting that he is engaging a different enemy, 10km away and my wingmen are saying "It's close!" at ten to twenty second intervals.  

 

It is interesting that these are passive-defensive turns that the AI do.  They don't turn as tightly as their aircraft will allow, nor do they seek to get onto the player's tail. They just go into a sort of holding pattern. 

 

Providing I do not say forget it and press Alt-f4 to quit, this will go on indefinitely or until one of two things happen.  Either I run out of ammunition and fly away, or I cause some damage to the enemy aircraft. If it's the latter, he will stay in the same passive-defensive turn until there is about two minutes of fuel or engine life remaining.  At which point he will break off and fly absolutely straight and level to land on or crash into whatever lies ahead. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the 109 “ace” AI. It makes use of its climb ability so in an i16 or Mig3 it is necessary to have patience to bring the fight higher or lower as desired. Also a challenge with central location of Russian weapons. Less seems more when pulling back on the stick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen the 109 AI flying vertical, but never do a left shallow climbing turn which is meant to leave most russian fighter in the dust if you try to follow.

Have any of you seen AI doing this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, II./JG77_motoadve said:

I have seen the 109 AI flying vertical, but never do a left shallow climbing turn which is meant to leave most russian fighter in the dust if you try to follow.

Have any of you seen AI doing this?

I am just saying that 109’s are able to outclimb my i16 or Mig3 so I am forced to be patient and wait for the AI to make a mistake and assess how to evade the ai’s BnZ.

Share this post


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

I am just saying that 109’s are able to outclimb my i16 or Mig3 so I am forced to be patient and wait for the AI to make a mistake and assess how to evade the ai’s BnZ.

I am not referring to your case, just in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, yogy said:

By the way, the current main contradiction for getting better AI in the near future is that the devs are working on tank crew AI…

 But this could be a good thing in the long run! I imagine that a decent ground combat AI is even harder than an airial combat ai. Especially a commander AI and platoon leader AI. I have actually my doubts they'll get that right - that's why haven't bough TC yet. But should these AI's work well at some point they obviously have an AI expert on the team who could also improve flight ai substancially at some point :)

 

7 hours ago, JonRedcorn said:

 the AI here isn't the worst. Just needs to be tuned better and more specifically to each aircrafts strengths and weaknesses.

I believe that flight behaviour is not the only thing lacking in AI to make it a truely immersive experience. I'll now display bad manners in quoting myself from another threat in the polls section:

1st Situational (un)awareness: You cannot sneak up on AI - they know you are there. Always. Most kills in WWII airial combat were achieved in suprise bounces - not in this game...

2nd Maneuvering: They already started improving this (hooray!) but most of the time the AI still dives for the deck and then does an infinite high speed turn in the same direction... From what I read the most common defensive tactic (Until they developed something special for a certain adversary) in most air forces of WWII was a sharp break turn to have the enemy overshoot and start scissoring to press for gun solution... The higher the skill level of the ai the more sophisticated maneuvers should be of course... Also of course this includes a wish for more effective ground attacks.

3rd Decision making: When to attack when to flee? How to flee (climbing, diving, cloud cover) How to attack (maneuvering into a favourable position before you engage); all based on mission, status, type and numbers of own and hostile aircraft, weather, ammo and of course AI skill level (with rookies making the wrong call more often!) - Current AI fights you to the death no matter what (or sometimes ignores you)

4th Pilot Error: Current AI always has perfect control of the aircraft - depending on AI skill there should be pilot errors - from not managing the engine perfectly, maneuvering at perfect angles to stalling in the heat of battle (panic after near misses) or losing control when control surfaces are damaged.

5th Tactics: While of course No. 2 and 3 already include some tactical improvements here I'm talking about formations and SOPs (especially interesting for Bodenplatte as RAF, USAAF and Lw used the finger four [which is something diffrent from the games 4 ship Vic] as standard, fought in pairs and used crossover turns - none of which is possible with current AI) This of course would also neccessitate better communications - including the possibility to either issue diffrent orders to the A/C of your flight (like one pair attack, one pair flying cover) or even recieving tasks from an AI flight leader!

 

I put these in the right order of importance for me personally.

 

So while I do see maneuvering as very important to improve the ai - in my eyes it's just one of several weaknesses in the way of immersion

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

 I believe that flight behaviour is not the only thing lacking in AI to make it a truely immersive experience. I'll now display bad manners in quoting myself from another threat in the polls section:

1st Situational (un)awareness: You cannot sneak up on AI - they know you are there. Always. Most kills in WWII airial combat were achieved in suprise bounces - not in this game...

2nd Maneuvering: They already started improving this (hooray!) but most of the time the AI still dives for the deck and then does an infinite high speed turn in the same direction... From what I read the most common defensive tactic (Until they developed something special for a certain adversary) in most air forces of WWII was a sharp break turn to have the enemy overshoot and start scissoring to press for gun solution... The higher the skill level of the ai the more sophisticated maneuvers should be of course... Also of course this includes a wish for more effective ground attacks.

3rd Decision making: When to attack when to flee? How to flee (climbing, diving, cloud cover) How to attack (maneuvering into a favourable position before you engage); all based on mission, status, type and numbers of own and hostile aircraft, weather, ammo and of course AI skill level (with rookies making the wrong call more often!) - Current AI fights you to the death no matter what (or sometimes ignores you)

4th Pilot Error: Current AI always has perfect control of the aircraft - depending on AI skill there should be pilot errors - from not managing the engine perfectly, maneuvering at perfect angles to stalling in the heat of battle (panic after near misses) or losing control when control surfaces are damaged.

5th Tactics: While of course No. 2 and 3 already include some tactical improvements here I'm talking about formations and SOPs (especially interesting for Bodenplatte as RAF, USAAF and Lw used the finger four [which is something diffrent from the games 4 ship Vic] as standard, fought in pairs and used crossover turns - none of which is possible with current AI) This of course would also neccessitate better communications - including the possibility to either issue diffrent orders to the A/C of your flight (like one pair attack, one pair flying cover) or even recieving tasks from an AI flight leader!

Eisenfaustus, I agree partially:

1) definitely right. Here, a random factor of "how far does AI let you sneak on them before breaking away" would help and should be pretty easy to impelement.. With 30% only reacting when being fired at.

2) If you watch guncam videos, a lot of evasive action is just wobbling left-right and back about 10 meters or so. At least that's what Luftwaffe N00b's often did in front of P-51's 😮 
3) Definitely right. First new rulewould be a "stop attacking before ammo is used up totally, or when damage is >XY%". Next step is "AI cannot see in clouds", then strategical maneuvering into good attack positions

4) Perfect control: Well, I saw lots of AI crashing into the ground and even falling into spins. Probably there exists something in that direction already.

5) Yes, real cooperation between AI is a necessity - and you are right: Here, the tank AI development might be usable also for aerial AI, although I am only partially optimistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting observations posted here and good discussion to improving AI.

 

I have noticed AI improving in little bits over the last few updates.  In campaign no longer do I suffer from squad wipe out when flying missions.  They are also starting to target ground objectives better without lawn darting into the ground as a result.  Some wingmen will break off and head home if damaged as well and this I also see on the enemy flight side too.

 

Maybe AI could be implemented also in the new Graphics Card hardware which have dedicated AI learning and processing units.  Goto be better than wasting it on poor DLSS implementations.

 

For sneaking up on AI, low 6 seems to do the trick on fighters but with bombers - you just eat lead.😊

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, II./JG77_motoadve said:

I have seen the 109 AI flying vertical, but never do a left shallow climbing turn which is meant to leave most russian fighter in the dust if you try to follow.

Have any of you seen AI doing this?

 

Yes, maybe I just suck but I find the AI to be pretty challenging - especially the 109's.

I oftentimes find the 109's going vertical, boom and zoom a lot - also climbing right hand turns.

I am flying the Spit Mk V and generally have my hands full with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, blitze said:

Interesting observations posted here and good discussion to improving AI.

 

I have noticed AI improving in little bits over the last few updates.  In campaign no longer do I suffer from squad wipe out when flying missions.  They are also starting to target ground objectives better without lawn darting into the ground as a result.  Some wingmen will break off and head home if damaged as well and this I also see on the enemy flight side too.

 

Maybe AI could be implemented also in the new Graphics Card hardware which have dedicated AI learning and processing units.  Goto be better than wasting it on poor DLSS implementations.

 

For sneaking up on AI, low 6 seems to do the trick on fighters but with bombers - you just eat lead.😊

I have been wondering why ‘deep learning” AI has not been more prominently mentioned in the forum as to potential impact on future of combat flight sims. Seems like there would be effort by developers to harness its power. Granted the developers might not have access to the most powerful “deep learning” systems but even so I have to think that they are searching for a way to recruit graphics card hardware as a central tool in addressing customer’ concerns re AI. My fantasy is to be able to “train” an AI wingman or opponent and save the “learned” behavior to a file. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, =RS=Stix_09 said:

Even the free version is pretty good.

I was looking at getting tacview. I am wondering if advanced is really needed over standard version. Anyone have any experience with either and can make any recommendations?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, SShrike said:

I was looking at getting tacview. I am wondering if advanced is really needed over standard version. Anyone have any experience with either and can make any recommendations?

I can’t make recommendation but have standard version that’s adequate for my use, skipped trial version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I was too going to skip trial version but was not sure if advanced was really just overkill. 

Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SShrike said:

Yes I was too going to skip trial version but was not sure if advanced was really just overkill. 

Thanks. 

Its free , its not a trial version , try and see

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SShrike said:

Yes I was too going to skip trial version but was not sure if advanced was really just overkill. 

Thanks. 

Sounded to me like overkill at time I made the call.

2 minutes ago, =RS=Stix_09 said:

Its free , its not a trial version , try and see

Yes, thanks for the clarification.

Share this post


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

I have been wondering why ‘deep learning” AI has not been more prominently mentioned in the forum as to potential impact on future of combat flight sims. Seems like there would be effort by developers to harness its power.

 

Deep learning stuff is pretty expensive. In the last place I worked where I had to help implement this kind of tech (for Finance), the vendors we were working with were charging six figures. And the tech doesn't even have that 'wow' factor you'd expect. It just read and decided on context for financial data and reporting. 

 

Billings are probably different in other industries, but this is some really expensive stuff. And it didn't appear like something that could be done in-house unless you had significant latent talent. We tried to build our own implementation for years until we ended up scuttling it and went with external vendors. 

 

And this was at a Fortune 500 company. 

 

It's not as easy as it looks.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, MarderIV said:

 

Deep learning stuff is pretty expensive. In the last place I worked where I had to help implement this kind of tech (for Finance), the vendors we were working with were charging six figures. And the tech doesn't even have that 'wow' factor you'd expect. It just read and decided on context for financial data and reporting. 

 

Billings are probably different in other industries, but this is some really expensive stuff. And it didn't appear like something that could be done in-house unless you had significant latent talent. We tried to build our own implementation for years until we ended up scuttling it and went with external vendors. 

 

And this was at a Fortune 500 company. 

 

It's not as easy as it looks.

 

 

Thanks for comments. Doubtless there is a lot of  money available to apply to such tasks in fields like medical imaging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm testing missions, watching 109's, 190's and Jugs use the the vertical to avoid attacks and gain angle when attacking.

I just watched a 109 end up more or less on the deck (furball started at 3400 meters) do a few circles, then work it's way back up above the cloud layer to 2600 meters or so.

 

'The distant screen shot is of the 109 that a few minutes earlier was down on the deck being chased by a Jug.

The 190 is also being chased and rather than circle to the deck, he's using his vertical.

 

The AI is not perfect and needs work, but it's much better than some of you giving it credit for.

I'm starting to have hope that AI Wildcats will be able to fight Zekes without every fight devolving into a RoF style turning match on the deck.

 

Most of these aircraft are keeping altitude, and working to gain it when possible from what I can tell.

At least the ones I'm testing right now.

 

 

 

Untitled-2.jpg

2019_2_21__18_47_19.jpg

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are those two AI that you are observing fighting one another, or is it one AI vs Player?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AI vs AI

 

 

Might make a difference at this point - not sure.

Share this post


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

The AI is not perfect and needs work, but it's much better than some of you giving it credit for.

 

So much this, it is far better than it was back in 2014 and is very far from immersion breaking. 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For shure there was a little adjustment from 1C in the latest patch for A.I. defensive manouvers (vertical climb for  axis planes) But this A.I. is really far from any aceptable challenging for doghfight for now. Game programming isn't simple I can immagine, but my topic intention was to keep alive the wish to have at least some significant improvement on A.I. defensive manouvers -for all planes- after 4 years of  life of this sim. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy was doing a sustained, inverted negative G climb trying to get away from a pursuing Jug.

A moment late he pulled stick to dick and executed a high G dive/slice-back.

 

2019_2_21__23_4_12.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something in favor of AI in a way seem more realistic the maneuvers they do , at least they looks real.

 

Go to Berloga and you see some stuff that is totally unrealistic.

Never ever seen a gun cam footage of that type of maneuvers.

Impossible for real pilots to pulls those Gs turn after turn after turn and even looking backwards sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like the biggest thing the AI need when being engaged by a human player is one or more breakout strategies that make them try and wriggle out of that eternal turn on the deck.   I find all my engagements end up in a merry go round with 109s turning to the right and 190s turning to the left.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, we play several Coops every week since half a year now, always fighting AI. 

If you set the AI to High or Veteran, they mostly avoid endless turning. They jump you, attack in pairs, dive away, try to pull you to ground level, shoot very accurately. 

 

Sure, it's not comparable to human players, but really what do you expect. 

 

 

Share this post


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

I'm testing missions, watching 109's, 190's and Jugs use the the vertical to avoid attacks and gain angle when attacking.

I just watched a 109 end up more or less on the deck (furball started at 3400 meters) do a few circles, then work it's way back up above the cloud layer to 2600 meters or so.

 

'The distant screen shot is of the 109 that a few minutes earlier was down on the deck being chased by a Jug.

The 190 is also being chased and rather than circle to the deck, he's using his vertical.

 

The AI is not perfect and needs work, but it's much better than some of you giving it credit for.

I'm starting to have hope that AI Wildcats will be able to fight Zekes without every fight devolving into a RoF style turning match on the deck.

 

Most of these aircraft are keeping altitude, and working to gain it when possible from what I can tell.

At least the ones I'm testing right now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes I see this quite often now flying the Spit against 109's and 190's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, is it the Average skill AI then, which is so commonly used but so pitifully underwhelming that it is giving the series such bad press?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the impression that this 'average, veteran, ace' setting merely effected the gunnery accuracy of the a.i. rather than any tactical manoeuvering ability?

 

I'm pretty sure that was how it worked in RoF....... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DD_Arthur said:

I was under the impression that this 'average, veteran, ace' setting merely effected the gunnery accuracy of the a.i. rather than any tactical manoeuvering ability?

 

I'm pretty sure that was how it worked in RoF....... 

I have never bothered with anything other than "ace" ai for 1v1 qmb but in BoX gunnery at that ai level seems reasonable. My recollection is that in RoF "ace" level ai accuracy was ridiculously accurate which made it necessary for me to barrel roll to the deck and then enter the endless turn scenario. In BoX the fight can be dragged up or down as desired. I only fly with full CEM, typically with default weapons loadout and ~ 65% fuel for myself and the ai.

       I don't know why but online battles seem to function at a faster pace than i experience offline. Also damage i receive online seems typically at mission ending severity than offline. This was especially obvious in RoF where every online hit i receved seem to be either engine damage yielding oil spattered windshield or wound with similar effect on vision. Those experiences  pretty much soured me from spending much time onlne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DD_Arthur said:

I was under the impression that this 'average, veteran, ace' setting merely effected the gunnery accuracy of the a.i. rather than any tactical manoeuvering ability?

 

I'm pretty sure that was how it worked in RoF....... 

 

I haven’t checked, but I think you’re correct.

With the tests I was running most of the Luftwaffe aircraft were set to normal or low, and still used the vertical much better than in the past (shooting skill aside)

 

When I say I haven’t “checked”, I mean run exhaustive tests/comparisons with different AI settings etc. 

Share this post


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

 

I haven’t checked, but I think you’re correct.

With the tests I was running most of the Luftwaffe aircraft were set to normal or low, and still used the vertical much better than in the past (shooting skill aside)

 

When I say I haven’t “checked”, I mean run exhaustive tests/comparisons with different AI settings etc. 

 

I have tried different settings and that is what I found also.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Feathered_IV said:

So, is it the Average skill AI then, which is so commonly used but so pitifully underwhelming that it is giving the series such bad press?

I never fiddle with the ai setting, maybe will give it a try and see what happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my experience the AI enters a gentle right turn even on ace setting once you get under 500m or so.  When further out the AI will enter a gentle climb.  I find the AI has little aggression on the offense, nor does it makes any significant evasive manouevres when on the defence to throw off an attacker or to force an overshoot.

 

I appreciate that it so no easy task to create a AI for a flight sim, however those are my observations from single player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×