What's Left for the VVS

[BraveSirRobin]

1 minute ago, Redwo1f said:

...okay, maybe we re-frame it to your personal perspective then if you feel that way...let me try this: There is different levels of suckage - some suck more than others but some suck far less! LOL - maybe that makes sense to you then?

 

Not really.  Even the least sucky still suck pretty bad.  Once you've flown with human wingmen for a while it really not possible to overlook the suck.

[JonRedcorn]

Just now, Redwo1f said:

...okay, maybe we re-frame it to your personal perspective then if you feel that way...let me try this: There is different levels of suckage - some suck more than others but some suck far less! LOL - maybe that makes sense to you then?

He watched a video on the ROF forum dude! He knows whats up.

 

He also knows about all the human element coded into those games, like fear, rank, exhaustion, courage, how many pilots are still alive in his squad, if his flight lead is around still, how much fuel he has left, if his guns are empty and all the other crazy stuff that makes those games AI awesome, you can absolutely bounce rookie pilots in that game, good luck bouncing an ace though. The games depth in AI coding is what separates it from other games. The guys clueless.

[Redwo1f]

Well BSR, I like playing my way (SP), you like playing your way (MP). You can't seem to understand why I would want to play SP, when you feel MP is so much better to you. That really is the bottom line - end of story. 

 

Play your way and enjoy, and I will play my way 

[BraveSirRobin]

8 minutes ago, Redwo1f said:

Well BSR, I like playing my way (SP), you like playing your way (MP). You can't seem to understand why I would want to play SP, when you feel MP is so much better to you. That really is the bottom line - end of story. 

 

 

I actually didn't say anything like that.  I totally understand why people like to play SP.  The problem is that the AI is probably never going to not suck.  There is always going to be some point where you say "ok, that's definitely not human".  Or "I know exactly what he's going to do", then the AI will do it.

Edited August 1, 2019 by BraveSirRobin

[MiloMorai]

I know but would be interesting to fly, the retractable wing IS-2.

[Redwo1f]

26 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

I actually didn't say anything like that.  I totally understand why people like to play SP.  The problem is that the AI is probably never going to not suck.  There is always going to be some point where you say "ok, that's definitely not human".  Or "I know exactly what he's going to do", then the AI will do it.

Well I am too happy-go-lucky right now to get drawn into an entangled debate - suffice to say, I was commenting on a general underlying theme that again can be argued is appearing in parts of your statement above - whether you realize it or not. ...anyhooo

AI being good or bad is subjective. From your statements it appears that AI will always be bad to you no matter what - unless a human is controlling.

I don't share that belief. And from my subjective perspective - AI has varied from game to game, sim to sim. In my subjective opinion - some sims have had or do have far better AI than others, and some sims have very poor AI, and some are in the middle, etc. etc. - that is my opinion, my experience. What I can say that is not subjective, but is indeed 100% objective is that I have had far greater enjoyment regarding AI behavior in some games versus others.

Whether you subjectively feel things will always be sucky for you or not because they are not human control is your prerogative - I don't share these feelings. You be you, I will be me.

 

And I am happy that you are enjoying the game they way you like to play. No ill will with anything I have written intended.

Edited August 1, 2019 by Redwo1f

[BraveSirRobin]

6 minutes ago, Redwo1f said:

From your statements it appears that AI will always be bad to you no matter what - unless a human is controlling.

 

Not really.  The entire point of AI is to simulate human behavior.  It has nothing to do with a human controlling anything.  It's about simulating human behavior.

 

And the problem is that, no matter how you look at it, combat sim AI does that very poorly.  There is a good reason for that.  AI programming is extremely difficult.  It's even more difficult is a situation as complex as air combat.

[AndyJWest]

The term 'AI' as used in the context of video gaming has very little to do with the concept of 'AI' as it is generally understood in computer science (e.g. using machine learning, neural networks and the like which have never seen significant use in video gaming). The latter is inherently difficult, certainly, though there have been a lot of advances in recent years. The former is hard too, but it is a different sort of problem, and generalisations about how hard real AI programming is don't really tell us much. I'm quite sure that with sufficient resources, IL-2 GB 'AI' could be improved, and I got the impression that Jason is of the same opinion. The issue seems to be at least partly down to finding a skilled 'game AI' programmer also familiar with the complexities of air combat. And that isn't a technical problem, but a human one.

[Feathered_IV]

If the AI eventually evolved to “suck” as much as the AI seen in the present versions of 1946 I’d be a very happy customer.  

[Cybermat47]

3 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

Yeah, that's not really what this conversation is about.   The problem that we were lamenting is that even the best AI is still pretty crappy.

 

I can’t say I agree with that. There have been times that the AI has given me some real challenges. I even got sent home with what was left of my tail between my legs by an ace in RoF PWCG once. And there have been times I’ve seen human players in MP doing immersion-breakingly stupid things, so that’s not unique to the AI.

 

Of course, it could just be that I’m a bad pilot 

Edited August 1, 2019 by [Pb]Cybermat47

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, Feathered_IV said:

If the AI eventually evolved to “suck” as much as the AI seen in the present versions of 1946 I’d be a very happy customer.  

 

1946 AI would drag and bag - I remember that clearly. It was very good for it’s time.

 

In CoOps it actually made sense to take 3 or 4 AI with you. You could send them in first to attack another player flight and pick your moment.

 

BoS AI is getting better, has been for a little bit now. Long way to go as they said though. I’m looking forward to watching the progress.

[Voidhunger]

Problem with box ai is that its bad in everything. Following orders, protecting, attacking, bombing, strafing etc, not just in maneuvering in dogfight. If they manage to improve basic sp ai stuff it will be wonderfull. Right now i dont care if the the enemy ai is flying upside down  but if my schwarm endlessly circling above enemy cars and do nothing or endlessly chasing enemy il2 in circle with 4 yaks behind it drives me crazy.

[Brano]

Don't want to ruin this AI party, but guys, it's already 2 pages off-topic.

[Voidhunger]

When the Me262 was released i tried to attack enemy bombers with rockets with my schwarm. They probably dont know how to use them and ofcourse they "attacked" enemy fighters. Then i tried to scramble from the airfield with 4x P47 above the airfield wanted to see if I can survive. Pfff not a single straffing attack on me, i tookoff without trouble  and returned with hail of bullets. They were still cicrcling above the airfield.

[Benti]

My wishlist for reds looks like this:

 

1. Lavochkin La 7/9

2. Polikarpov I-153

3. Yakovlev Yak-9

4. Sukhoi Su-2

5. Ilyushin Il-4

 

Bonus, but must have O:) :Hawker Hurricane (Collector)

 

cheers!

[CIA_Yankee_]

8 hours ago, [Pb]Cybermat47 said:

 

I can’t say I agree with that. There have been times that the AI has given me some real challenges. I even got sent home with what was left of my tail between my legs by an ace in RoF PWCG once. And there have been times I’ve seen human players in MP doing immersion-breakingly stupid things, so that’s not unique to the AI.

 

Aye, that's possible.

 

I have to say that I agree that:

 

A) AI will always be worse than flying against humans in MP, there's an element of skill and unpredictability that is very hard for AI to replicate... and I've yet to see an AI that actually fights in the vertical truly effectively, and manages its energy effectively. And also AI tends to be less realistic, which is a major issue in single player campaign where immersion is a major factor (why else fly long missions from start to finish, in long campaigns?). For example, AI that cannot be bounced, or that chases you all the way to your airfield, or that does not retreat (the latter, especially, is a pet peeve of mine).

 

B) This CAN be mitigated greatly by good AI development, pretty much along the lines of what Pat mentioned earlier. The issue is to simulate awareness and some basic realistic behavior, to make the AI less suicidal and more believable. And work can be done to make the AI more effective in dogfights (for example, using the vertical more, conserve energy, not default to turning all the time). It is a lot of work, however.

 

C) There IS human behavior in MP that is pretty immersion-breaking, yes. Mostly this revolves around exploiting weak points in the flight modeling that the AI doesn't know about. Things like the weird instant stalls/spins many 190 pilots like to do (which is both probably physiologically very traumatic, and incredibly risky at low alt. I can't believe pilots in RL would resort to that... if that behavior is even possible in RL). And, of course, pilots in MP can be very suicidal too, such as attack pilots making repeated suicide runs in a target to take it out (since thye know they will probably be able to drop their bombs before getting shot down, and then just respawn to do another run). Fortunately in the latter case, many servers have some mechanics that discourage that (even WOL will wipe your score if you die, for example), and there's still massive value in succeeding in the unpredictable and intense MP environment.

 

I for one hope that B comes about eventually, as I do enjoy some single player when its immersive enough.

[BraveSirRobin]

10 hours ago, Feathered_IV said:

If the AI eventually evolved to “suck” as much as the AI seen in the present versions of 1946 I’d be a very happy customer.  

 

The original IL2 has been around since 2001, and for most of it’s history the AI cheated and was still terrible.  I hear that it’s better now.  That only took about 15 years of development.  Using that timeline you should expect the same AI proficiency in this game in about 10 years.

[RedKestrel]

7 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

The original IL2 has been around since 2001, and for most of it’s history the AI cheated and was still terrible.  I hear that it’s better now.  That only took about 15 years of development.  Using that timeline you should expect the same AI proficiency in this game in about 10 years.

The AI is much better now, after the mod team took it over and eventually did a massive overhaul the AI (I think it was patch 4.12? Can't remember). But the AI still very much cheats and its still very much a formula to how they react. The formula is complex but the more you fly against it the more you see it, and it can be exploited (as all AI can be). 

For example, in a quick mission at high altitud e, 4vs4 P-47 vs 109 G. The four 109s break off into pairs. One flight straight ahead and engages the flight, the other turns left and then starts curving in. If you get behind them and are far enough away they wing over and do a diving right hand-turn. If you get really close they do a rolling scissors - they will eventually drag you to the deck and it becomes a turn fight.

Better than what we have in il2 GB, especially because the pairs actually coordinate pretty well, but the 'cheats' are very frustrating because you can't really use the strengths of the planes against each other in a realistic way.

For example, one evasive maneuver for 109s in 46 is to dive from 25000 feet to about 5000 feet, then do an insane pull up and rocket skyward. Planes that should have good high-speed elevator authority can't follow it. The player's plane can't follow it because the AI's flight model is simplified and allows things like that because control forces and stick forces do not appear to be modeled.

People are still really salty about the simplified FM for the AI especially after the updates made them more skilled, and if Il2 GB went that route we'd see the same complaints here. 

[MiloMorai]

If the Ai reach Borg level you will all die.

[CIA_Yankee_]

5 hours ago, RedKestrel said:

For example, one evasive maneuver for 109s in 46 is to dive from 25000 feet to about 5000 feet, then do an insane pull up and rocket skyward. Planes that should have good high-speed elevator authority can't follow it. The player's plane can't follow it because the AI's flight model is simplified and allows things like that because control forces and stick forces do not appear to be modeled.

 

To be fair, that major elevator authority is one of those things you see in MP today that breaks immersion a bit: you can map the 109s elevator trim to an axis and play with it far, far beyond what it was ever possible in RL, providing the 109s an excessive amount of maneuverability (and of course, allied planes also have magic flaps at times). Trying to outturn a 109 E on berloga is a joke, for example, that thing can tokyo-drift.

[sevenless]

1 hour ago, MiloMorai said:

If the Ai reach Borg level you will all die.

 

Sounds swedish.

[Feathered_IV]

7 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

The original IL2 has been around since 2001, and for most of it’s history the AI cheated and was still terrible.  I hear that it’s better now.  That only took about 15 years of development.  Using that timeline you should expect the same AI proficiency in this game in about 10 years.

 

That's what I was thinking too.  Making such a complex and core feature out of the loose change left over from selling ten planes and a map is going to take a very long time indeed.  

[BraveSirRobin]

1 hour ago, Feathered_IV said:

 

That's what I was thinking too.  Making such a complex and core feature out of the loose change left over from selling ten planes and a map is going to take a very long time indeed.  

 

I’m just basing that number on the original IL2 sales model.  Maybe it will go faster here.

[Redwo1f]

5 hours ago, Feathered_IV said:

 

That's what I was thinking too.  Making such a complex and core feature out of the loose change left over from selling ten planes and a map is going to take a very long time indeed.  

...so go vote in this poll and make sure you choose the right choice - I did ?

...seriously though, I bet this at least gets a look by the developers.

[BraveSirRobin]

19 minutes ago, Redwo1f said:

...seriously though, I bet this at least gets a look by the developers.

 

Seriously though, it probably won't.  I suspect their development priorities are driven mostly by actual data and not forum wish lists.

[=RS=Stix_09]

Forum wish lists are good in that they give development ideas which they decide if there is sales value in. Player data as @BraveSirRobin points out is where dev direction goes in the main as its hard facts.
 

I only care they they stay in business and keep working on the game and improving it , which in general I believe is the case. But bottom line they have to be making $ or development stops.

[Redwo1f]

37 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

Seriously though, it probably won't.  I suspect their development priorities are driven mostly by actual data and not forum wish lists.

...ummmm come on - did I actually say it would drive their development priorities?  Please read again what I wrote. I am not stupid..geesh. Of course they are driven by what they think will impact their sales.

[Sublime]

19 hours ago, 71st_AH_Yankee_ said:

 

Aye, that's possible.

 

I have to say that I agree that:

 

A) AI will always be worse than flying against humans in MP, there's an element of skill and unpredictability that is very hard for AI to replicate... and I've yet to see an AI that actually fights in the vertical truly effectively, and manages its energy effectively. And also AI tends to be less realistic, which is a major issue in single player campaign where immersion is a major factor (why else fly long missions from start to finish, in long campaigns?). For example, AI that cannot be bounced, or that chases you all the way to your airfield, or that does not retreat (the latter, especially, is a pet peeve of mine).

 

B) This CAN be mitigated greatly by good AI development, pretty much along the lines of what Pat mentioned earlier. The issue is to simulate awareness and some basic realistic behavior, to make the AI less suicidal and more believable. And work can be done to make the AI more effective in dogfights (for example, using the vertical more, conserve energy, not default to turning all the time). It is a lot of work, however.

 

C) There IS human behavior in MP that is pretty immersion-breaking, yes. Mostly this revolves around exploiting weak points in the flight modeling that the AI doesn't know about. Things like the weird instant stalls/spins many 190 pilots like to do (which is both probably physiologically very traumatic, and incredibly risky at low alt. I can't believe pilots in RL would resort to that... if that behavior is even possible in RL). And, of course, pilots in MP can be very suicidal too, such as attack pilots making repeated suicide runs in a target to take it out (since thye know they will probably be able to drop their bombs before getting shot down, and then just respawn to do another run). Fortunately in the latter case, many servers have some mechanics that discourage that (even WOL will wipe your score if you die, for example), and there's still massive value in succeeding in the unpredictable and intense MP environment.

 

I for one hope that B comes about eventually, as I do enjoy some single player when its immersive enough.

People keep track of their WoL score? I dont think I ever evem have kept a score in months LOL

The few kills I get always are *peshka cripples me* *your buddy killls me* *i kill you out of spite while my plane is disintegrating around me* *bored and decide to strafe. Lawn dart* *cockpit explodes and plane loses surfaces and some weak ass plane blows past me laughing* annnd... If I get a kill and land dont worry! Because Ill probably ground loop on take off and need to respawn because I ripped an airlieron off.

On 7/31/2019 at 10:35 PM, JonRedcorn said:

Hey! I'm earth have we met?

 

 

This must be how women feel when random dudes come up like "do I know u frm somewhere?"

:facepalm:   yes earth.  We've met.  I see you about 30 times a day when I show up unannounced in a flaming piece of metal...

Edited August 2, 2019 by Sublime

[Alexmarine]

20 hours ago, 71st_AH_Yankee_ said:

Things like the weird instant stalls/spins many 190 pilots like to do (which is both probably physiologically very traumatic, and incredibly risky at low alt. I can't believe pilots in RL would resort to that... if that behavior is even possible in RL).

 

While it was suggested to do not do that at low altitude, the 190s could be forced in an almost instant stall/spin very easily and was a common manouver to shake off a pursuer 

 

BTW... Wasn't this a VVS thread? ?

Edited August 2, 2019 by Alexmarine28

[MiloMorai]

13 minutes ago, Sublime said:

Things like the weird instant stalls/spins many 190 pilots like to do (which is both probably physiologically very traumatic, and incredibly risky at low alt. I can't believe pilots in RL would resort to that... if that behavior is even possible in RL)

 

It was a known escape maneuver but only with sufficient altitude and a proficient pilot. The 190 would flick/stall/spin from a banked turn. Didn't matter if a right or left bank, would always be to port, iirc.

 

I see Alexmarine just beat me in reply.

 

Sorry Sublime, shouldn't quote quotes.

Edited August 2, 2019 by MiloMorai

[Sublime]

8 minutes ago, MiloMorai said:

 

It was a known escape maneuver but only with sufficient altitude and a proficient pilot. The 190 would flick/stall/spin from a banked turn. Didn't matter if a right or left bank, would always be to port, iirc.

Thats crazy how that post somehow is now linkef to me. I got a notification for your response

On 7/31/2019 at 12:29 AM, LukeFF said:

 

First off, I've never been employed by 1CGS or 777 Studios - all my work has been as a contractor.

 

Secondly, what exactly was wrong with the info I posted? 

 

 

There was a post made a while ago by a dev that explicitly stated the percentage of buyers who play MP is very low.

I gotta back up L FF on this. I remember the exact same post from around April or May. He stated that 90/95% (!) Of il2 players were SP only! We.re just REALLY VOCAL

 

 

Dont be sorry @MiloMorai i was just confused I thought the BB bugged. Your response was pretty spot on I thought 

Edited August 2, 2019 by Sublime

[PatrickAWlson]

1 hour ago, Alexmarine28 said:

 

While it was suggested to do not do that at low altitude, the 190s could be forced in an almost instant stall/spin very easily and was a common manouver to shake off a pursuer 

 

BTW... Wasn't this a VVS thread? ?

 

That went by the boards a few days ago.  We have a nice plane list on the first four pages  

[CIA_Yankee_]

2 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

That went by the boards a few days ago.  We have a nice plane list on the first four pages  

 

Ok then: Yak-3! I want to fly The Attackers Season 2, okay?

[Brano]

?

[BlitzPig_EL]

Yes please.

[Heliopause]

Gu-VRD