Why we need AI in online wars.

[Cybermat47]

It amazes me how many people think that MP servers are filled with nothing but aces.  The truth is that there always seems to be someone that sucks even worse than you flying on a server at any given time.

For me there isn't

[sturmkraehe]

People want depth, they want intelligent missions ...

 

I hesitate to take away from you THIS illusion. A few do. Many? I doubt. When I actively played IL2 1947 online the most popular servers were spit vs 109, zeke vs wildcat and War Clouds, both with a huge emphasize on dogfight. 90% of the players went there for air quake. Some smaller servers had more mission based approach but they were more on the fringe.

 

 

... and they want a chance to shoot shit down without having to dedicate weeks and months to become skillfull enough before they can handle the resident gang-bangers. Fail to give it to them and this game will be dead online before six months after release. And that's an extremely charitable prediction.

 

There you're right. Imho a lot of buyers of flight sim don't want to go through the learning phase. They want immediate success and immediate reward (you say it yourself and this is a bit in contradiction to what you claim earlier about what other people want ("depth", and stuff like that).

 

I really don't understand that AI stuff. If I want to shoot AI down I go offline or fly a coop. Avoiding to fly against humans in multiplayer drives the whole sense of multiplayer ad absurdum.

Edited May 5, 2014 by sturmkraehe

[BraveSirRobin]

Where are all the players, lapping up that non-AI goodness? Eh?

 

 

I assume they're playing against the AI offline.  That pretty much is the reason people fly offline.  They prefer to play against AI.  People go online to fly against humans.  The idea that more AI will attract more people who want to play against humans online might be one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard.

For me there isn't

 

Do you know how to start the aircraft?  If so, you are probably better than the 1-2 players I see asking how to start the aircraft.  It happens almost every night.

Edited May 5, 2014 by BraveSirRobin

[Panzerlang]

I hesitate to take away from you THIS illusion

 

 

 

There you're right. Imho a lot of buyers of flight sim don't want to go through the learning phase. They want immediate success and immediate reward (you say it yourself and this is a bit in contradiction to what you claim earlier other people to want ("depth", and stuff like that).

 

I really don't understand that AI stuff. If I want to shoot AI down I go offline or fly a coop. Avoiding to fly against humans in multiplayer drives the whole sense of multiplayer ad absurdum.

 

I can only tell you that when I ran my DiD online war for over a year we had around 200 active pilots who got the entire concept of AI planes to represent the ace-fodder. And not knowing if a target was a rookie (AI) or a vet/ace (human) was added spice.

 

Nobody, nobody, is going to reproduce the career of one of the great aces if every opponent is a human. It's not going to happen. Ever. Just as it would never have happened in real life. Approx 95% of the victims of aces were rookie to average pilots, and that is an entirely factual statement so far as commonwealth pilots were concerned and reasonable to broadly extrapolate the same statistic for every other WW2 airforce.

 

For those who could care less about DiD and personas and emulating the careers of the greats, this is a non-issue. But for those who do care it's important. The numbers of each? I think I've already covered that in my references to the numbers of people flying the air-quake servers in CloD and RoF...next to none.

[1./KG4_Blackwolf]

It amazes me how many people think that MP servers are filled with nothing but aces.  The truth is that there always seems to be someone that sucks even worse than you flying on a server at any given time.

Here, Here Krusty! I think I suck the worst until I shoot someone down!

And as far as the bomber pilots go..I can chime in here. The AI in ROF are great and all but they are there IMO because most log on to dogfight and shoot a plane down. There are a few groups that do just bombers or Jabo's,but not many. I think what Siggi is trying to say (if I read it right) is the AI's would give a guy of any skill another target IF no one else was flying bombers ,fighters or whatever. Not everyone who logs on line is looking for an instant furball. In ROF we like to run the missions to kill the targets and roll the map. Sometimes other squads work with us to do that. Closing the main base and posting "All your bases are belonging to us" has become fun for us.

 

In BOS we have tried running bomber/jabo missions on line and with the small map its just not worth it, for 25 minute mission time we can just furball it up and wait for the big map.

EDIT "the AI's would give a guy of any skill another target IF no one else was flying bombers ,fighters or whatever. " meaning you don't know who you're up against.

Sorry Rama but I had too

Edited May 5, 2014 by Blackwolf

[Felix58]

I'm certainly no Flight Sim veteran, but I always thought having AI on the ATAG server was a good thing.  For numbies like myself it gave me a chance to have a shot at something!  Two, if you could not find the bad guys, it was fun loitering behind a bomber formation, then stalking a hunter of the bombers.   Personally, I like the "mud-movers".  So if i was able to lead, even a three ship formation (two being AI), I think that would be fun and perhaps give a "bomber" player a chance to survive.

 

Some of the posters have talked about "robot pilots".  Unlike players, many real pilots were obliged/disciplined to hold formation and the like for defensive fire reasons etc (talking mud-movers here).  So having aircraft hold formation is not as "robot" as some would assume.

 

Do not understand why some punters would be against AI involvement on a server.  I think it adds to the richness of the game. 

[BraveSirRobin]

Do not understand why some punters would be against AI involvement on a server.  I think it adds to the richness of the game. 

 

That's easy.  If I want to fight against AI I will fly in SP.  I fly MP specifically to compete against humans.  Fighting against AI does not add to the richness of the game, it does the opposite.

[Bearcat]

Does anyone believe there would have been any aces if the vast majority of pilots had been veterans or aces in their skill before they met in combat? But this is how it is online. And it reduces nearly every fight to one of the machine instead of the pilot. Skill being approximately equal it's the guy with the Spitfire who'll beat the guy with the 109 every single time. There is no human flaw to find and no way to beat the machine. AI levels the playing field and allows historically realistic outcomes to develop. Most aces got their kills against rookies and average pilots, even when those pilots were flying the superior machine, because those pilots didn't know how, or were too scared, to fly them to their limits.

 

There is no such thing as an online war where there are only humans vs humans; they are, by functional definition, nothing but dog-fight servers.

 

I understand what you are saying.. and I agree .. but I still thin it is too early to know what we will wind up with in BoS.. and we can only speculate from RoF ..

 

Yeah, fly bombers.  Lots of people fly bombers in RoF.  Lots of people escort bombers in RoF.  It's not exactly realistic in WW1 terms (there should be mostly recon), but it's perfect for WW2 eastern front combat.

 

As for why I despise AI, it's because I'm pretty sure there were no robot drones flying during WW2.  I want realism, and robot drones are not realistic.  There are plenty of crappy human pilots on which to pad your stats.  Not everyone can practice every day.

 

I disagree with you there... not about the drones and such.. but I think there is a place for AI .. decent AI in any sim. A part of the joy in IL2 is .. if you have a 16 slot coop .. and only 9 guys.. you can still run it.. If you have only one side .. you can fly totally against AI ... or if you have two sides  with live and AI pilots on both .. you can structure a mission with more variety.. more detail .. and far far more immersion than having to depend solely on live pilots..

 

There is easily room for both, some servers are going to focus more on PvP only missions and some will focus on missions with AI, there is no right or wrong way to do it, it all comes down to what you personally like.

 

  For me, I prefer missions that are structured around realistic mission goals and pacing, this is possible to do with all human players but it is easier to do with AI, more to the point, I prefer co-op missions anyway.

 

  It comes down to personal taste, I am not really sure what the OP's first post was really for other than to tell us what they personally like, not everyone is going to share that preference and nor should they feel the need to.

 

I agree.. 1001% with this.. I think what Siggi is saying is ....

 

But therein lays the problem...the DN engine can't handle AI. Aka the RoF experience and the resultant morbidity of its online presence.

 

If, as others have suggested, it's because the AI uses highly complex physics, I'd recommend to the devs they provide a simpler physics for online AI, so that servers can be adequately populated with it. That or see BoS go the exact same way as RoF so far as online combat is concerned.

 

He may be right .. he may be wrong.. but I prefer to wait and see what the final product is before I form any concrete opinions .. I like what I see so far.

 

Is not coop human vs AI, not human vs human AND AI?

 

That is the best of both worlds for me.. The problem with human only flights i s that if you don't have enough humans.. you are not going to get the same result.. I fly coops as single missions sometimes.. To me that was and still is a part of the beauty of IL2 .. and the 4.12.2 AI is fantastic! Sometimes I cannot tell the difference..

 

 

If I want to fight against AI I will fly in SP.  I fly MP specifically to compete against humans.  Fighting against AI does not add to the richness of the game, it does the opposite.

 

Yes .. but you are not the only one buying this sim.. and I among many many others think that any flight sim is greatly enhanced by a robust and challenging AI. AL becomes problematic when it goes from target drone to crack shot ace with no in between points.. IMO the AI in IL2 '46 4.12.2 should be the benchmark that any flight sim developer uses .. but what the heck.. I think IL2 should be the benchmark for any sim as well .. so I guess I am biased.

 

1.  You have no way of knowing if the person you meet is competent or not if there is no AI in the mission. 

2.  There were no robots flying aircraft during WW2.

Summary:  Adding AI does NOT make missions more realistic or less predictable.

 

1 is true... as for 2 and the summary... no there weren't ...

 

Of course it does.. especially if you have something like triggers.. achieve objective B and result C will not happen.. fail objective B and result C will happen ... but even without triggers.. adding AI can add another dimension that live pilots cannot.. You are assuming that you will always have enough live pilots for a given task.. Your theory only works in a pure dogfight  or limited scenario on any random night.. Sure for something like SEOW it will work fine.. and even some of the better DF/OLW servers but everyone cannot devote that amount of time.. The reason why IL2 is STILL being purchased to this very day after 13 years is that it does so many things well enough.. and it would behoove the development team to take those things into consideration as they move forward with this sim. I don't think it is a limit of the DN engine .. I think that the DN engine probably has a lot more robustness to it than we know.. otherwise the devs would not have chosen it. I don't think that RoF is the end all and be all measurement of what it can do.

 

AI has a place online.. Some of the posts in here remind of folks who say that the option for an open pit view should not exist in a "real" sim .. The notion that it should cater primarily to online flying against live pilots and leave AI out of it .. or not develop it .. is actually limiting the potential.. More and broader options are always better as long as those options include as realistic a simming experience as possible.

[BraveSirRobin]

Of course it does.. 

 

 

No, it doesn't.  And it's unlikely that it will in our lifetimes.  There is just no way that current hardware can support the processing power needed to simulate human behavior.  You can simulate a formation of bombers, but once the shit hits the fan the humans in those bombers start to do things that current AI just can't replicate.

[JG27_Chivas]

Siggi your absolutely right.  AI is a must to create more realistic or just interesting online wars.  I also agree that the average ability of todays online pilot should be better than the average real WW2 pilot, considering the hours of practice we've enjoyed over our real life counterparts.   That said all online pilots are certainly not aces.  There are always a percentage of the humans that have far better eyesight, and situational awareness than most others will ever have. 

 

Sometimes just not knowing if your attacking a group of AI aircraft, or human pilots can be very interesting..

 

The use of AI in online wars is critical for more realistic combat.  This one example will eliminate the problem of not having enough bomber pilots.  A human bomber pilot should be given the option to select any number of AI bombers within reason and server controlled to accompany him on his mission, or divert to another target on his command.   He should be able to fly in any position in the formation so other human pilots would find it very difficult to target the human component in the formation.  The ability for all AI aircraft to drop bombs on the human pilots command. etc etc

 

I've always imagined an historic or otherwise twenty-four seven online or offline AI war, where any human pilot entering the server or offline campaign, can take over any AI slot, or just take off by himself, or with buddies and wreck havoc in the fog of war.  

Edited May 6, 2014 by JG27_Chivas

[Bearcat]

No, it doesn't.  And it's unlikely that it will in our lifetimes.  There is just no way that current hardware can support the processing power needed to simulate human behavior.  You can simulate a formation of bombers, but once the shit hits the fan the humans in those bombers start to do things that current AI just can't replicate.

 

Whatever... You have your view and I have mine.. but if flight sim developers had to depend solely on people who think like you over the past 15 years .. there probably wouldn't be any flight sims today.

 

In WWII bomber pilots once under attack generally stayed the course to complete the mission ... the AI in IL2 does this .. quite well.. and if you take a 64 plane coop and mix up the flights with Rookie, Average, Veteran and a few ACE AI in there .. along with live pilots also of varying skill sets, with limited icons (although I guess a guy like you would want no icons.. )  I guarantee you, you will not know who is who and would be thoroughly entertained.. If the AI in BoS can eventually get to the point that the AI is now in IL2 it will be a good thing.. no a great thing..

[BraveSirRobin]

Whatever... You have your view and I have mine.. but if flight sim developers had to depend solely on people who think like you over the past 15 years .. there probably wouldn't be any flight sims today.

 

 

LOL  And if more actual humans had my view we'd have servers full of people and no need for AI at all.  AI does not simulate real humans.  Not now, and probably not ever. 

[FlatSpinMan]

I tend to agree with the OP.

Being a crap player with little time to practise, I do find it annoyingly hard on closed pit servers against really experienced players. Adding in some AI to create larger flights (online always seems to be single planes, making spotting even harder), or to carry out roles that humans are unwilling to do, sounds great. Sure there are humans willing to fly bombers and transports, but it requires a critical mass of like minded players before it becomes practical, otherwise your lifespan can be measured in seconds when everyone else is in fighters. Incentivising players to carry out such missions would be great, especially if it was part of the actual game's scoring system.

 

 

Now, can we all please post more civilly?

[216th_Peterla]

I know I'm right. I've participated in enough events and wars over the past decade and a half to know that AI is only filler in case of low numbers. A full battle/scenario/war of people is far better than a bunch of AI milling about except in individual small units of mindless tasks that involve... you know, there are zero AI units in online only games with perpetual 24x7 wars going on with humans flying those terrible supply flights to repair airfields or drop troops to capture fields.

 

Give the human controlled plane a point with a reward, and surprisingly humans will do it. There's even a study on it with computer games that gauge investment vs reward, and if all someone has to do is fly a little C-47 over a hill to drop troops and gain far more perk points than they ever could amass as a fighter then surprise, surprise - they'll go right on ahead and do it.

 

We don't need AI, just need the rewards for doing the AI's job in a fun environment that makes it worthwhile.

+1

[Panzerlang]

LOL  And if more actual humans had my view we'd have servers full of people and no need for AI at all.  AI does not simulate real humans.  Not now, and probably not ever. 

 

When they did have your view we did indeed have servers full of people. Dogfight servers, with the bases a few miles apart and 10% fuel loads etc etc etc.

 

Every successful IL2 online war had AI. Fact. Now ask yourself why that was and still is.

 

It cannot detract from an experience, so long as the AI can be implemented without having to sacrifice too many humans. The detail on that? On a 200km x 200km map, do we need 100 humans? Or would 50 do, with 50 AI? But we already know human objects require far fewer resources than AI, so to have 50 AI we'd lose how many humans out of 100? Ten? Twenty?

 

And excellent points have been made above, concerning human bomber drivers taking AI along for cover and increased defensive fire. I've tried a couple of times on the CloD servers to generate fighters alongside of me when flying solo (it doesn't work unfortunately).

 

I wonder how racing driving would be if all the also-rans were excluded? In flight combat sims the also-rans mostly exclude themselves. But the AI makes a good replacement for them. The AI actually encourages them to return, because now they too can have a chance of getting kills and enjoying the sim.

 

Aces and vets vs aces and vets isn't a sim, it's a dogfight arena. A competitive sport. Not a sim.

Edited May 6, 2014 by II/JG3Siggi

[Wind]

Have to say I vehemently agree with Siggi as well. Just give us that option to have AI. People that want to airquake can do that, and

peeps who want to use AI to fill up stuff, can do that as well. What is the hard part to in that??

 

There is a lot of use for AI, be it sending occasional high alt recon planes, transporters, bomber formations and whatnot.

You can easily fill up the map and make it more lively.

Hard to imagine people would queue up for "do the 25.000 feet recon run over airfield X, It´ll take only 4 hours" or

"deliver 4tons of nuts to airfield X 400km away, and bring back 5 tons of bolts"...

 

It would bring a interesting aspect to the game to have more stuff flying around, well, at least to have the OPTION to that.

[AbortedMan]

I'm saying it's deserted because once a critical mass of experienced pilots have taken over and dominate a server the vast majority of newbies will take only a few good kickings before they give it up. And the vets themselves, those who aren't fanatically dedicated furballers, they get bored of the same old routine week in, week out, and move on too. And with less newbies sticking it out than vets who get bored and leave...you get the picture.

 

Or...somebody else care to explain why CloD and RoF are pretty much dead? The ATAG occasionally sees around a hundred players on at the same time. Does RoF see even that? So, what's up with that? Why aren't there hundreds, if not thousands, of players on at peak times? Like the good old days of IL2? Please, somebody enlighten me if I've got it so wrong. Where are all the players, lapping up that non-AI goodness? Eh?

 

People are sick to their back teeth of shallow air-quake dogfight servers, with the 10% fuel-loads and win-at-any-cost headless-chicken desperately-fragile ego mayhem. People want depth, they want intelligent missions and they want a chance to shoot shit down without having to dedicate weeks and months to become skillfull enough before they can handle the resident gang-bangers. Fail to give it to them and this game will be dead online before six months after release. And that's an extremely charitable prediction.

I can only tell you that when I ran my DiD online war for over a year we had around 200 active pilots who got the entire concept of AI planes to represent the ace-fodder. And not knowing if a target was a rookie (AI) or a vet/ace (human) was added spice.

 

Nobody, nobody, is going to reproduce the career of one of the great aces if every opponent is a human. It's not going to happen. Ever. Just as it would never have happened in real life. Approx 95% of the victims of aces were rookie to average pilots, and that is an entirely factual statement so far as commonwealth pilots were concerned and reasonable to broadly extrapolate the same statistic for every other WW2 airforce.

 

For those who could care less about DiD and personas and emulating the careers of the greats, this is a non-issue. But for those who do care it's important. The numbers of each? I think I've already covered that in my references to the numbers of people flying the air-quake servers in CloD and RoF...next to none.

By this logic, any game ever made would/should be desolate, but they're not...there's always someone better than the next guy in ANY game. To most that doesn't deter, but challenge and motivate to BE that next guy. A lot can be taken and learned from getting your ass beat in a game (or in real life, heh).

 

I think you're taking the defeatist approach to a situation that isn't half as bad as you think it is. If I new I had a %50 chance to encounter an AI in any of today's flight sims while playing online I'd be extremely disappointed and only have a fraction of the enjoyment online play brings, even when playing on a server that has a total of 6 people.

 

You state that CloD and RoF are desolate and no one plays them, but I think you're not viewing numbers in the correct perspective. Battlefield 4 requires thousands of players and an extreme case of AAA title popularity to be considered fun, meanwhile I can play BoS, RoF, DCS, CloD or 1946 with less than ten players and marathon play for hours. It seems your comparing apples to oranges in regards to viable player numbers...these games are definitely not dead online. You should look into some virtual online campaigns to get your fix of teamwork oriented role playing realism, because that's where it is. Maybe your time zone/sleep schedule is out of sync with prime time?

Edited May 6, 2014 by AbortedMan

[=FB=LOFT]

I`am personally a huge fan of the idea to use AI in multiplayer. I think this is big and great way to create interesting and "live" world of the game. Or just create game even for 2 players. 

 

But we face some challenges on this way. First one is our approach to calculating AI. From ROF bases our AI is heavy. I mean this is not just 3D object with some trajectory, but complex system which controls plane as a pilot with hundreds of elements every second, and also top level of "thinking" about dangerous targets, friendly planes' movements, target fixation, and route management.

 

This is why now we can`t use too many AIs now. And the way to improve this situation is hard and long. And no promises at all about how, then, who and others can be given now. But the idea is very attractive and may be some day it can be done.

[FlatSpinMan]

Thanks for reading and commenting, Loft.

[Feathered_IV]

I agree that AI is a must too. Their inclusion adds some real meat to the otherwise shallow gameplay and horrible mission design that is only made to funnel dwindling player numbers into an airquake scenario.

 

That being said, Meow's comment: "Give the human controlled plane a point with a reward, and surprisingly humans will do it. There's even a study on it with computer games that gauge investment vs reward, and if all someone has to do is fly a little C-47 over a hill to drop troops and gain far more perk points than they ever could amass as a fighter then surprise, surprise - they'll go right on ahead and do it."

 

It just burns my guts out that flight sim developers cannot grasp this simple concept. I would never go back to RoF MP and its pew pew points system. As someone who prefers bomber and especially recon sorties, I can fly for hours achieve every mission goal and roll the map single handed every time. All I get for my pains is a record of time flown. Nothing else. If my actions unlock things like better aircraft for others, all I get is "Tx 4 teh D7f mf, lol" in the chat bar.

 

If that is the sum of 777's ambitions for BoS, then forget it. I'm out.

[SYN_Vander]

I don't understand the heated discussions about this topic. It has been clear for some time that some people like to fly MP missions with AI and some hate AI. Some people like complex mission scenarios and some people love dogfight/duel servers.

Now here is the good news: There is no need to chose either this or that. We can have multiple servers, each specializing in a specific game mode. Everyone can be happy at the same time!

 

Myself, I prefer missions with AI if they are used for bombers and reconnaissance aircraft. At least AI will follow orders!  

 

Also agree that bomber/reconnaissance/cargo missions should get you points/rewards in a mission!

Edited May 6, 2014 by SYN_Vander

[csThor]

The anti-AI attitude shown by some posters in this thread has been the most important reason for me to turn my back on online flying. For me this is an unsustainable supremacist attitude that hurts historical realism and promotes the gross over-abundance of fighters and fighter-bombers that online is reduced to. Pretty much any online "war" I've seen so far is tailored towards fighter engagements (individual exceptions prove the rule but don't change it) and reduces the historically important bombers, Stukas and ground-attack aircraft to petty targets which few players will ever fly. Trying to dress up that fact is simple self-delusion and soe of the recent CloD "Squad Wars" have shown this very well: 40 fighters vs 40 fighters and maybe 10 bombers. That has nothing to do with historical realism.

 

So, anyone refusing to use AI in online wars to fill aircraft players wouldn't fly, should never ever use the term "historical" for that war ... because it wouldn't be historical, it would be a shallow Shoot-em-Up in the air. Which, unfortunately, is the most accurate description for what online flying generally is today.

[Aracno]

I will eat my 3 days old socks if I will ever see on average MP server 18 human controlled stukas flying in "2 waves of 9 each'' formation.As they usually did on eastern front and as was many times mentioned in memoires of Sasha Pokryshkin.This is what Siggi means,I would say.

 

Other +point for AI in MP are special historical missions.In old sturm there were plenty of special coop missions flown by squads against AI to simulate historical events.Like this one,which is dear to me as it is part of history of my country.

 

26.6.1944 8 fighters of ''Pohotovostna letka'' (Emergency Flight) took-off to face american bomber formations of 15th USAAF near capital Bratislava though this time it was not their target (week earlier they bombed oil rafinery Apollo in Bratislava) Result of attack was 1 B-24 shot down by rtk. G. Lang and one damaged B-17 (rtk. R. Bozik).Numerous fighter escort of P-51s and P-38s acted immediately and in following minutes almost whole Emergency Flight was decimated.It lost 3 pilots (Puskar, Lang, Jambor),another one heavily wounded (Zelenak). 6 aircrafts were destroyed in aerial combat and during crash landings. As result there were only few Bf 109 Gs left for planned uprising against Germans.

 

You will never ever recreate such historical missions without AI.

Squad flying against AI is/was big part of online life in old sturm.Because it was bunch of guys who knew each other,were history enthusiasts and wanted to have fun within squad,to fly like squad in campaign....

if they decided to have a break,they went to average dogfight server and had fun killing each other in furbal.

 

+1000

[No601_Swallow]

I will eat my 3 days old socks if I will ever see on average MP server 18 human controlled stukas flying in "2 waves of 9 each'' formation.As they usually did on eastern front and as was many times mentioned in memoires of Sasha Pokryshkin.This is what Siggi means,I would say.

 

Other +point for AI in MP are special historical missions.In old sturm there were plenty of special coop missions flown by squads against AI to simulate historical events.Like this one,which is dear to me as it is part of history of my country.

 

26.6.1944 8 fighters of ''Pohotovostna letka'' (Emergency Flight) took-off to face american bomber formations of 15th USAAF near capital Bratislava though this time it was not their target (week earlier they bombed oil rafinery Apollo in Bratislava) Result of attack was 1 B-24 shot down by rtk. G. Lang and one damaged B-17 (rtk. R. Bozik).Numerous fighter escort of P-51s and P-38s acted immediately and in following minutes almost whole Emergency Flight was decimated.It lost 3 pilots (Puskar, Lang, Jambor),another one heavily wounded (Zelenak). 6 aircrafts were destroyed in aerial combat and during crash landings. As result there were only few Bf 109 Gs left for planned uprising against Germans.

 

You will never ever recreate such historical missions without AI.

Squad flying against AI is/was big part of online life in old sturm.Because it was bunch of guys who knew each other,were history enthusiasts and wanted to have fun within squad,to fly like squad in campaign....

if they decided to have a break,they went to average dogfight server and had fun killing each other in furbal.

 

Exactly. This is what my squadron did for many many years in IL2 '46, and have been really struggling with in CloD to replicate. It's one of the reasons we have fingers crossed for BoS. Most of our missions are designed by the mission builder to portray some action in a historical campaign, so having AI opponents, who do what they're supposed to do, is a must.. Obviously, the mission builder knows what (hopefully, if he's done a good job...) will happen, but for the rest of us it's an adventure. It's great fun.

 

Why Luthier and the boys turned their back on a simple pick your slots and when everyone's ready the host clicks "start battle" mechanism is for me the biggest mystery in the whole sorry CloD saga. Given ATAG's focus on DF, even the TF modding seems oriented towards maximising the DF experience. It's frustrating that people often don't seem able to comprehend that there should be lots of different ways of playing a flight sim. Edit: And, I may add, mission building is also "playing a flight sim" and shouldn't be a forgotten part of the experience (hint, hint, devs).

 

So yes, robust AI in BoS is a must, as is a good MP/Coop GUI. As I think Bearcat said, the more choice the better.

Edited May 6, 2014 by No601_Swallow

[Panzerlang]

 

I`am personally a huge fan of the idea to use AI in multiplayer. I think this is big and great way to create interesting and "live" world of the game. Or just create game even for 2 players. 

 

But we face some challenges on this way. First one is our approach to calculating AI. From ROF bases our AI is heavy. I mean this is not just 3D object with some trajectory, but complex system which controls plane as a pilot with hundreds of elements every second, and also top level of "thinking" about dangerous targets, friendly planes' movements, target fixation, and route management.

 

This is why now we can`t use too many AIs now. And the way to improve this situation is hard and long. And no promises at all about how, then, who and others can be given now. But the idea is very attractive and may be some day it can be done.

 

 

Thanks for your thoughts Loft.

 

The fighter AI in CloD does actually present a difficult target, dumb as it is, and hundreds of bombers are possible without crashing the CPU (I tested around 200 back when the game was still un-optimized and it ran ok).

 

Is there any possibility to provide a far simpler AI specifically for online use? Bombers don't need to maneouver much and even if fighters were likewise it wouldn't be unrealistic (I note the many examples of RL guncam footage where the target barely maneouvered while being shot to pieces).

[=FB=LOFT]

Thanks for your thoughts Loft.

 

The fighter AI in CloD does actually present a difficult target, dumb as it is, and hundreds of bombers are possible without crashing the CPU (I tested around 200 back when the game was still un-optimized and it ran ok).

 

Is there any possibility to provide a far simpler AI specifically for online use? Bombers don't need to maneouver much and even if fighters were likewise it wouldn't be unrealistic (I note the many examples of RL guncam footage where the target barely maneouvered while being shot to pieces).

 

We are not Clod. You can play it if you like. Create new AI system demand time or resources. In time Clod was created (yesrs), we also prefer way to create more simple AI. Game style.

[Panzerlang]

Well, my system handles 8 vs 8 in SP perfectly well, that's 15 AI fighters and I suspect my rig could handle more. The question is, how many humans could be handled on top of that? I used to hit the limit in IL2 of approx 20 AI planes with 20 vs 20 humans in my missions and that was back around 2002. The AI flew pretty decently too. There was also a fair bit of AI on the ground too, handling tanks etc (far simpler AI calculations though).

 

I reckon 20 AI planes would still make the nut on the Stalingrad map. It's enough to give players the uncertainty of who/what they're attacking and not have every flight a totally predictable fight for their virtual life vs a human (ice cream tastes good but too much makes one feel sick kind of thing).

 

I'll be interested to test the limit of AI numbers on my rig once that becomes possible (FMB).

[=FB=LOFT]

Basically we try to have the same result we have in ROF. Now we have bugs and not optimised elements, and i cant right now expect true prediction. Like good server sys  can handle 20+ AI + 32 players.

[Blakhart]

Every successful IL2 online war had AI. Fact.

 

 

Negative...

 

http://il2.aviasibir.ru/mow/?lang=en

 

http://adw.the-war.org/ ( very popular few years ago )

 

and few others like Frontove Nebo, Nullwar,

 

AI in online wars are for those who cant get "regular" kill...

 

In past AI were only an empty stats in online wars for "wannabie-I can only B&Z-experten" and "stick to the d1$ " Spit-La minded fans...

 

 

For example lets check very popular CloD ATAG server...

http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/stats.php

AI planes are counted as a "regular" kills so in fact mission by mission  mighty AI hunters are camping behind own front lines to get "precious" ( hahaha ) AI airkill.

So as a result we have very popular server with massive number of players and very poor action in game.

Scenario there is simple some action over red bases, vulching, sometimes nice dogfights over target area and bunch of "AI - hunters" taking off only to get easy kill on bomber.

The same boring scheme day by day, mission by mission...

 

I flew 1 or 2 months but finally quit due to boring scheme, poor skill level on server and pointless flying for stats achieved on AI bombers...

 

Sorry... If I want to kill an AI I`m just launching off-line single player...

 

plus

 

8vs8 or any other limited mission is just too easy...

You know what planes you can expect in mission, you know the correct number of enemy.

Easy, easy, easy, predictable...

[II./JG27_Rich]

Bomber Nights were great sometimes on Spits VS 109s but why can't we have both AI and bomber pilots? The more the better.

[Aracno]

 

AI in online wars are for those who cant get "regular" kill...

 

 

 

Nice way to moderate a thread .....

Someone should moderate the moderator 

Edited May 6, 2014 by Aracno

[Blakhart]

Personal attacks are welcome on PM Aracno if you have problem with my  personal opinion which is just honest and based on strong arguments.

 

Cheers!

 

:D

[Aracno]

AI in online wars are for those who cant get "regular" kill...

 

 

Personal attacks are welcome on PM Aracno if you have problem with my  personal opinion which is just honest and based on strong arguments.

 

Cheers!

 

:D

 

I think that was a personal attack to all of us that expressed their preference about having AI in this thread.

So next time send a MP to all of us.

Cheers!

:D

 

PS Also my opinion is "just honest and based on strong arguments."

Edited May 6, 2014 by Aracno

[Panzerlang]

Negative...

 

http://il2.aviasibir.ru/mow/?lang=en

 

http://adw.the-war.org/ ( very popular few years ago )

 

and few others like Frontove Nebo, Nullwar,

 

AI in online wars are for those who cant get "regular" kill...

 

In past AI were only an empty stats in online wars for "wannabie-I can only B&Z-experten" and "stick to the d1$ " Spit-La minded fans...

 

 

For example lets check very popular CloD ATAG server...

http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/stats.php

AI planes are counted as a "regular" kills so in fact mission by mission  mighty AI hunters are camping behind own front lines to get "precious" ( hahaha ) AI airkill.

So as a result we have very popular server with massive number of players and very poor action in game.

Scenario there is simple some action over red bases, vulching, sometimes nice dogfights over target area and bunch of "AI - hunters" taking off only to get easy kill on bomber.

The same boring scheme day by day, mission by mission...

 

I flew 1 or 2 months but finally quit due to boring scheme, poor skill level on server and pointless flying for stats achieved on AI bombers...

 

Sorry... If I want to kill an AI I`m just launching off-line single player...

 

plus

 

8vs8 or any other limited mission is just too easy...

You know what planes you can expect in mission, you know the correct number of enemy.

Easy, easy, easy, predictable...

 

You entirely miss the point that in the real war most of the aces' kills were against 'AI' (rookie or average skill pilots). Were they "wannabes" too?

 

Most of my 44 kills on the ATAG server were humans. I escort bombers over England too and 90% of the time meet zero opposition, mainly because few to zero red humans are on the server and there is no RAF AI fighter force (but there is a German one, plus German bombers come in multiple waves of up to 20 planes each, vs the RAF's seemingly two sorties only of five bombers each...server set up for RAF "wannabes" much?).

 

It sounds like you want and enjoy airquake dogfight. I use the server, as best I can, to fly as realistically as possible. Which isn't easy, given that 95% of the humans I meet are veteran or ace skill level. The fights I have 95% of the time should be only 5% of the time, per reality. But that's why I instituted the 20-sided die-roll rule for my gruppe.

[Feathered_IV]

 

[=LD=Hethwill]

AI planes has a definite place on specially designed missions and events, like One Life events. As long as the design is good the AI will try to do their mission and even RTB, etc. So more fun.

 

On the open MP classic face off I cannot see the point of AI but nothing against it. A target is a target.

[Panzerlang]

AI planes has a definite place on specially designed missions and events, like One Life events. As long as the design is good the AI will try to do their mission and even RTB, etc. So more fun.

 

On the open MP classic face off I cannot see the point of AI but nothing against it. A target is a target.

 

On dogfight servers I agree. But AI also has a place on 'sandbox' servers, such as the two ATAG ones. Though its lack of AI on one of them (totally removed) that has turned it into an air-quake server.

[=LD=Hethwill]

I agree with your vision.

Given I enjoy more of a "story driven" events campaign and I cannot see some "war days" being designed and played without resorting to use of AI. Yes DF servers could use the AI as well, especially the least popular ones on x2 mode ( see RoF for population and demand ).

 

But I reserve myself to a FMB on release. Given it will be similar to RoF event designers will have a fair chance to do beautiful weekly events with lots of fun.

[Guest deleted@1562]

I like the concept of AI flights in MP servers.

[Bearcat]

LOL  And if more actual humans had my view we'd have servers full of people and no need for AI at all.  AI does not simulate real humans.  Not now, and probably not ever. 

 

Yes but that is part of the rub isn't it?

 

Everyone cannot or does not want to get online at the same time and fly the same way...

 

What works for you does not work for everyone... and neither does what works for me.. Within the context of this discussion, in order for this sim to be successful in the long run the AI issue will have to be addressed properly.  If it is not then the longevity of this sim is not a given. There are not enough online pilots alone to sustain this and I am surprised that the issue is even an issue ..

 

I know I'm right. I've participated in enough events and wars over the past decade and a half to know that AI is only filler in case of low numbers. A full battle/scenario/war of people is far better than a bunch of AI milling about except in individual small units of mindless tasks that involve... you know, there are zero AI units in online only games with perpetual 24x7 wars going on with humans flying those terrible supply flights to repair airfields or drop troops to capture fields.

 

Give the human controlled plane a point with a reward, and surprisingly humans will do it. There's even a study on it with computer games that gauge investment vs reward, and if all someone has to do is fly a little C-47 over a hill to drop troops and gain far more perk points than they ever could amass as a fighter then surprise, surprise - they'll go right on ahead and do it.

 

We don't need AI, just need the rewards for doing the AI's job in a fun environment that makes it worthwhile.

 

This sim needs to appeal to a wide range of simmers.. not just the online guys.

 

By this logic, any game ever made would/should be desolate, but they're not...there's always someone better than the next guy in ANY game. To most that doesn't deter, but challenge and motivate to BE that next guy. A lot can be taken and learned from getting your ass beat in a game (or in real life, heh).

 

I think you're taking the defeatist approach to a situation that isn't half as bad as you think it is. If I new I had a %50 chance to encounter an AI in any of today's flight sims while playing online I'd be extremely disappointed and only have a fraction of the enjoyment online play brings, even when playing on a server that has a total of 6 people.

 

You state that CloD and RoF are desolate and no one plays them, but I think you're not viewing numbers in the correct perspective. Battlefield 4 requires thousands of players and an extreme case of AAA title popularity to be considered fun, meanwhile I can play BoS, RoF, DCS, CloD or 1946 with less than ten players and marathon play for hours. It seems your comparing apples to oranges in regards to viable player numbers...these games are definitely not dead online. You should look into some virtual online campaigns to get your fix of teamwork oriented role playing realism, because that's where it is. Maybe your time zone/sleep schedule is out of sync with prime time?

 

Don't forget IL2... HL is not what it once was ... but you can have a blast with 6-12 people online still in IL2.. and be challenged and still enjoy yourself.

 

I don't understand the heated discussions about this topic. It has been clear for some time that some people like to fly MP missions with AI and some hate AI. Some people like complex mission scenarios and some people love dogfight/duel servers.

Now here is the good news: There is no need to chose either this or that. We can have multiple servers, each specializing in a specific game mode. Everyone can be happy at the same time!

 

Myself, I prefer missions with AI if they are used for bombers and reconnaissance aircraft. At least AI will follow orders!  

 

Also agree that bomber/reconnaissance/cargo missions should get you points/rewards in a mission!

 

 I fail to understand why the rhetoric against the AI is so intense.. I never could understand this elitist BS that some simmers have that seems to suggest that their way of doing it is the best way.. the only "real" way.. and we don't need that other stuff like open cockpits and icons and AI and that other "arcade" nonsense.. I have said it once in this thread and I have been saying it all along since I first found out about this project ... If this sim is going to be successful and long living it will have to appeal to a wide range of simmers.. WT is good at what it does.. but I wonder how many current WT fliers will be flying it 5 years from now.. There are guys that have been flying IL2 for 13 years .. straight.. and it is STILL enjoyable to this day.. This is because it has OPTIONS. A wide range of them.. Hopefully in the end the AI in BoS, while not what some of us are used to will be adequate enough.. This discussion has gotten the way it has because it was taken in a different direction from the OPs intent.. It was never intended to become a slugfest I think and only started to get antsy when certain posters began to cast derision on the OP's premise.. which of course is not really necessary.. You can state an opinion without being condescending and combative.. or you should be able to as adults.