How’s the A.I now thanks.

[Adger]

Hi all, any improvements in any of the latest patches regarding single player AI? It’s been over 12 months since I uninstalled due to poor (imo) A.I, do enemies still follow you all the way home? What about them taking the fight to the deck and turning in complete circles..thanks in advance to anyone who can reply. Thanks 

[Adger]

36 views no insight.? Any advice lads, BON really appeals but I’m unwilling to spend £49.99- £79.99 if some of the A.I issues are still around..thanks 

[Eisenfaustus]

5 hours ago, Adger said:

I’m unwilling to spend £49.99- £79.99 if some of the A.I issues are still around.

Then you can skip. I personally find AI fun to fight against - a little less fun to fight along. But it definatly still has some issues and propably always will...

[Adger]

4 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

Then you can skip. I personally find AI fun to fight against - a little less fun to fight along. But it definatly still has some issues and propably always will...

 

Thank you @Eisenfaustus, I also asked on Steam sounds like there have been improvements since I last flew I think I’ll reinstall and have a look at the theatres I own, il possibly pick up BON in the future when it goes on a deep sale. Again many thanks it’s appreciated. ?

[depapier]

I've also not played it for a year, but back with BoN now. I think they fight better, that is certainly improved. But the friendly AI tends not to follow or acknowledge your orders if you're the leader. Playing the official career, I've only been able to get my wingmen to attack the enemy once in 6 flights, and then the command to attack was given 300 meters away, so everyone got slaughtered anyway. Otherwise the friendly AI just circles above or follows me without attacking.

[Deicide]

Short answer, No. I have the exact same issues as you stated. It is what I complain about continually since I never touch MP. AI is still a joke. I installed BOX yesterday again to see what was up and AI are still junk and UI is still slow (factually faster, basically almost unnoticeable ). I watched my wingman get blown out of the sky by a 109 and he did nothing but fly straight until he didn't have a wing anymore. Along with 2 109 following me from France all the way back to England, I flew about ten times over my airfield hoping SPAA would do something, but that was foolish of me to think that.

[Adger]

31 minutes ago, depapier said:

I've also not played it for a year, but back with BoN now. I think they fight better, that is certainly improved. But the friendly AI tends not to follow or acknowledge your orders if you're the leader. Playing the official career, I've only been able to get my wingmen to attack the enemy once in 6 flights, and then the command to attack was given 300 meters away, so everyone got slaughtered anyway. Otherwise the friendly AI just circles above or follows me without attacking.

 

 

Yeah I think that’s the general consensus @depapier  Eisenfaustus mentions above about it being “a little less fun to fly along” Such a shame that the A.I is a let down ..Once in 6 flights that’s a pretty poor record for a sim which I believe is probably made up of over 80% single players ..Thanks for your insight mate appreciated.

 

 

22 minutes ago, CrazyJow said:

Short answer, No. I have the exact same issues as you stated. It is what I complain about continually since I never touch MP. AI is still a joke. I installed BOX yesterday again to see what was up and AI are still junk and UI is still slow (factually faster, basically almost unnoticeable ). I watched my wingman get blown out of the sky by a 109 and he did nothing but fly straight until he didn't have a wing anymore. Along with 2 109 following me from France all the way back to England, I flew about ten times over my airfield hoping SPAA would do something, but that was foolish of me to think that.

Thanks @CrazyJow I never touch MP either and there’s probably a lot of others aswell who only fly SP. It’s such a shame that the A.I behaves this way still, I did hear that improvements had been made??. Yeah there’s probably no way that 2 109,s would ever follow you back over Blighty..never mind actually flying over your airfield to get to you, absurd mate. This series has the hallmarks of being quite brilliant..

 

I understand that income is what keeps the series going, I’m not here to blast the devs but please,please team spend some time on the SP side regarding A.I, wingman communications ect. It honestly seems to me that IL2 1946 with BAT does the SP AI better than the BOX series what a damn shame..thanks again mate your comments are appreciated.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

The AI is very good and should give you a real challenge with lots of vertical maneuvers, if they have the necessary altitude. There's little in the way of "squadron" AI though so there's no wingman tactics and a friendly AI may occasionally hit you with a few stray bullets if he goes for the same target as you. But again, the individual AI is pretty good.

 

The automated mission generator could use an update though, as the mission logic doesn't always generate the proper commands for the specific circumstances of the mission. This results in some people complaining about what they call "AI" (like above, with the doing nothing, the following back to England and the AAA not firing), but that has in fact nothing at all to do with AI but is rather Mission Scripting. With proper, human-made missions like you'll find in the many available campaigns, both paid and free (check https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/forum/111-scripted-campaigns/), things like that just don't happen, ever (at least, if the mission author knows what he's doing), and the AI performs splendidly.

[Adger]

@AEthelraedUnraed , thank you for your knowledgeable insight mate, thanks for the link to the hand made missions ..so I’m assuming that the “issue” with mission scripting occurs in Campaign mode and also possibly PWCG? I’m going to do a reinstall and take a few of the craft up. Thanks again mate it’s really appreciated.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

1 minute ago, Adger said:

@AEthelraedUnraed , thank you for your knowledgeable insight mate, thanks for the link to the hand made missions ..so I’m assuming that the “issue” with mission scripting occurs in Campaign mode and also possibly PWCG? I’m going to do a reinstall and take a few of the craft up. Thanks again mate it’s really appreciated.

"Campaign" is the name for the hand-made campaigns I'm talking about above, so I'm going to assume you mean the "Career mode" that consists of auto-generated missions. In that case, then yes, the career mode suffers from bad mission scripting, although that too has improved a lot lately. For instance, in the career, enemies following you all the way back to base shouldn't happen nearly as much as before.

 

I don't play PWCG myself, but from what I've heard it tends to be better regarding mission scripting than the stock career. But PWCG too won't be entirely devoid of errors or strange behaviour either. A human mission writer knows exactly what should occur when and how to adjust the mission for that, as well as having the enormous advantage of being able to test. For a campaign I'm writing, there's a single mission I must have played at least some 15 times by now. That's the tweaking you just cannot do for auto-generated missions.

[Deicide]

2 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

The AI is very good and should give you a real challenge with lots of vertical maneuvers, if they have the necessary altitude. There's little in the way of "squadron" AI though so there's no wingman tactics and a friendly AI may occasionally hit you with a few stray bullets if he goes for the same target as you. But again, the individual AI is pretty good.

 

The automated mission generator could use an update though, as the mission logic doesn't always generate the proper commands for the specific circumstances of the mission. This results in some people complaining about what they call "AI" (like above, with the doing nothing, the following back to England and the AAA not firing), but that has in fact nothing at all to do with AI but is rather Mission Scripting. With proper, human-made missions like you'll find in the many available campaigns, both paid and free (check https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/forum/111-scripted-campaigns/), things like that just don't happen, ever (at least, if the mission author knows what he's doing), and the AI performs splendidly.

you say that but this game comes with career mode, this happens in career mode. You're basically saying either buy a scripted campaign or use on the free ones only. This rarely happens in scripted yes, but it should work in career also. Career mode is one of the major points of the each module coming out. Not the single use scripted campaign that cover 1 squadron across maybe 10 sorties. 

 

40 minutes ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

"Campaign" is the name for the hand-made campaigns I'm talking about above, so I'm going to assume you mean the "Career mode" that consists of auto-generated missions. In that case, then yes, the career mode suffers from bad mission scripting, although that too has improved a lot lately. For instance, in the career, enemies following you all the way back to base shouldn't happen nearly as much as before.

 

I don't play PWCG myself, but from what I've heard it tends to be better regarding mission scripting than the stock career. But PWCG too won't be entirely devoid of errors or strange behaviour either. A human mission writer knows exactly what should occur when and how to adjust the mission for that, as well as having the enormous advantage of being able to test. For a campaign I'm writing, there's a single mission I must have played at least some 15 times by now. That's the tweaking you just cannot do for auto-generated missions.

 

 I literally installed and played yesterday after the release of Normandy and this happened to me. I watched my wingmen fly straight while a 109 tore him apart all the while i'm spamming attack air targets. I climbed to 20,000ft in my P38 and watched 2 109's in 3rd person view fly behind me following me from France all the way til I was shot down by them over my airfield that I flew over no less than 10 times hoping spaa would help. So no, none of this has been fixed after years of begging and pleading. Instead we get guys like you who say "Buy my scripted campaign or download my free scripted campaign you won't run into this issue" that should be the fix for this problem....

[AEthelraedUnraed]

14 minutes ago, CrazyJow said:

you say that but this game comes with career mode, this happens in career mode. You're basically saying either buy a scripted campaign or use on the free ones only. This rarely happens in scripted yes, but it should work in career also. Career mode is one of the major points of the each module coming out. Not the single use scripted campaign that cover 1 squadron across maybe 10 sorties.

The OP is asking about the AI, not about the career mode, or even the AI specifically in career mode. I'm answering his question. If you want to whine about the career mode, go to a different thread.

[Adger]

Yes tbf to @AEthelraedUnraed I did ask about the A.I in general I should have probably included that has a SP flyer only I kind of meant the campaign or has rightly pointed out to me the Career mode. Thank you all for your advice etc, I’ve just got in from work so I’m hopefully going to have a couple of hours later to have a good nosy at the sim.

 

@CrazyJow Yeah the state of the mission you’ve mentioned is what used to frustrate me last time I flew the Box series, I can live with it happening if it is a rare occurrence, I’m not going to lie though if it happens as frequently that it used to then I’d be sadly disappointed, but if Hopefully it has improved somewhat like @AEthelraedUnraed has mentioned then I can live with it..Again cheers to everyone for your comments, appreciated massively.

[depapier]

So, my example is actually the opposite and very much positive. On BoM map I've been scrambled with 5 other pilots to intercept 9 bombers with 6 migs escorting and from the past experiences I totally expected that this is the end of my squadron. Bear in mind I wasn't the lead, so they also didn't climb that high. Surprisingly, only one got shot down, another two had forced landing in friendly territory and they had 6 kills among themselves, some of which were migs. This was a nice surprise!

 

However I've yet to have a similar experience while being a lead. Due to the mentioned issues, friendlies don't act on my command. So, it's a slaughter.

 

Despite what was written above about this being misguided critique, that has to do with AI and mission structure both. The idea that it's all fine and jolly if the mission is well designed is simply ridiculous. The issue with not following commands occurs in both original campaign and PatWilson's magnificent generator. Elsewhere, it has been discussed that the tools by which AI priorities could be set are very limited for any mission maker. Therefore, the comment that it all depends on a good mission design is essentially a comment that as long as the player doesn't stray too far from the rails of the given scenario - its all good. Which is, to say the least limiting.

 

But again, the air fights can be very lively and certainly there is much progress on this side of things. Ground attacks are much better as well, although in my experience currently its a 50/50 chance the whole gaggle attacks one spot and then leaves. But sometimes they do a better job. Either way they don't crash. But they still try to bite flack first on occasion.

 

All of this is frustrating to me because although I've been simming for years, and got used to both grumpy communities of all-knowing middle aged men and the idea that every simulator needs a ton of tinkering to make it work well, Il2 comes incredibly close to perfection. There is sooo much that works extremely well out of the box in the BoX! The feeling of flight and the quality of it all is just something we've never really encountered in other products, where it would all need to be assembled through mods. But the AI drops the ball. And this has been the issue for years.

 

I understand the difficulty of good AI and make no mistake - Il2 made strides in recent years! But for now it remains frustrating that Il2 remains a product with 90% of everything a perfect simulation would have, but this one detail isn't there yet. Tbf one doesn't have much choice where to go from here - WOTR demands a lot of compromises from the player, albeit its AI is pretty good; WOFF is wonderful, but again a compromise on physics; il2 Blitz seems better now, but campaigns require tinkering and I dunno about AI; DCS essentially has no AI to speak of, at least none which can manage a landing; BMS has incredibly good AI, but for now not such a good terrain and anyway, it's not set on Eastern front with a prop, isn't it.. So, I fear that if IL2 ever fixes up its AI woes, we'll approach singularity. I realize, it may be a significant push, but still.

[PA_Willy]

We need AI flights working better. AI pilot, individually, is good.

 

AI flights, order's menu, AI global response in mission... Must be fixed.

 

Nowadays (and before) this is the worse thing in this wondeful sim. 

 

This is, for me, more importante than new maps, planes or vehicles. I would pay for a new AI flight behaviour expansion instead for new content, inmediately.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

10 hours ago, depapier said:

Despite what was written above about this being misguided critique, that has to do with AI and mission structure both. The idea that it's all fine and jolly if the mission is well designed is simply ridiculous. The issue with not following commands occurs in both original campaign and PatWilson's magnificent generator.

You're miscomprehending the scope of the AI. This too isn't an issue with AI but with the commands system (which, indeed, is in need of a major rework). The AI in itself works fine, there's just no way to reliably tell them what to do (or, in more technical terms, radio commands don't usually result in the AI commands that would be expected by the player). If the AI never receives the order to attack enemy aircraft because it gets distorted or stuck in the commands system, the results cannot be blamed on the AI. The deficient commands system leads to an important observation that you touched upon, namely that missions usually perform better if the player is not the flight leader. This goes for both generated and player-made missions, although as I said above player-made missions tend to have better mission scripting overall. If you do play as a flight leader, don't issue any commands because those are usually generated by the mission itself. Watch your radio, and look at what your wingmen are doing.

 

10 hours ago, depapier said:

Elsewhere, it has been discussed that the tools by which AI priorities could be set are very limited for any mission maker. Therefore, the comment that it all depends on a good mission design is essentially a comment that as long as the player doesn't stray too far from the rails of the given scenario - its all good. Which is, to say the least limiting.

I don't know who's been discussing that (or where this is being discussed; I'm one of the major contributors to the "Mission Making and Mission Editor" forum and I haven't seen any such disscussions there), but my experience as a mission maker is that the tools you mention are more than adequate. Of course, there are always things that could be improved and MCUs that could be added, but so far I haven't had a single case where I couldn't get the AI to behave as I wanted* - and that includes some pretty complex behaviour with lots of "ifs" and "elses".

 

*barring physical impossibilities and one or two bugs not directly related to mission scripting.

 

Straying far from the rails of a given scenerio is certainly possible, as long as that particular deviation to the mission plan occurred to the mission maker beforehand, and he has included scripting to both detect this deviation and adjust the mission logic accordingly. For instance, in my Hürtgenwald campaign, I've included the following abnormal situations into the mission scripting for at least some missions:

- The player doesn't see the intended target and keeps following the flight path.

- The player attacks but misses the target.

- The player attacks a different target than intended.

- The player runs out of ammo.

- The player is damaged.

- The player fails to follow the flight path correctly (or even at all).

I know most other experienced mission makers have similar checks in place. Depending on the mission and any "straying from the rails" the mission maker can come up with, many more deviations from the intended result can be accounted for. (Incidentally, this is why many mission makers prefer to make the player a wingman rather than flight leader; you can control pretty accurately what the AI flight leader does so you don't have to take all these possibilities into account.)

 

On the other hand, the player isn't supposed to deviate too far from the given scenario. This is the military. If you're ordered to intercept bombers over England and you end up strafing trains in France, it's a straight court martial. There should be scripting in place to account for the player doing everything he could conceivably do while following the mission orders, but anything beyond that doesn't need to be covered. I do not find that limiting at all.

 

So yeah, @Adger to conclude:

- The AI itself is good.

- Mission scripting in the Career can still be bugged, but also gives great results at times.

- Mission scripting in player-made missions is usually much better (I can really recommend to try a couple!) but depends on how experienced the mission maker is.

- The communications system is, well, bugged, so you shouldn't play as a flight leader, or not issue any commands if you do.

[depapier]

50 minutes ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

You're miscomprehending the scope of the AI. This too isn't an issue with AI but with the commands system (which, indeed, is in need of a major rework). The AI in itself works fine, there's just no way to reliably tell them what to do (or, in more technical terms, radio commands don't usually result in the AI commands that would be expected by the player). If the AI never receives the order to attack enemy aircraft because it gets distorted or stuck in the commands system, the results cannot be blamed on the AI. The deficient commands system leads to an important observation that you touched upon, namely that missions usually perform better if the player is not the flight leader. This goes for both generated and player-made missions, although as I said above player-made missions tend to have better mission scripting overall. If you do play as a flight leader, don't issue any commands because those are usually generated by the mission itself. Watch your radio, and look at what your wingmen are doing.

 

I don't know who's been discussing that (or where this is being discussed; I'm one of the major contributors to the "Mission Making and Mission Editor" forum and I haven't seen any such disscussions there), but my experience as a mission maker is that the tools you mention are more than adequate. Of course, there are always things that could be improved and MCUs that could be added, but so far I haven't had a single case where I couldn't get the AI to behave as I wanted* - and that includes some pretty complex behaviour with lots of "ifs" and "elses".

 

*barring physical impossibilities and one or two bugs not directly related to mission scripting.

 

Straying far from the rails of a given scenerio is certainly possible, as long as that particular deviation to the mission plan occurred to the mission maker beforehand, and he has included scripting to both detect this deviation and adjust the mission logic accordingly. For instance, in my Hürtgenwald campaign, I've included the following abnormal situations into the mission scripting for at least some missions:

- The player doesn't see the intended target and keeps following the flight path.

- The player attacks but misses the target.

- The player attacks a different target than intended.

- The player runs out of ammo.

- The player is damaged.

- The player fails to follow the flight path correctly (or even at all).

I know most other experienced mission makers have similar checks in place. Depending on the mission and any "straying from the rails" the mission maker can come up with, many more deviations from the intended result can be accounted for. (Incidentally, this is why many mission makers prefer to make the player a wingman rather than flight leader; you can control pretty accurately what the AI flight leader does so you don't have to take all these possibilities into account.)

 

On the other hand, the player isn't supposed to deviate too far from the given scenario. This is the military. If you're ordered to intercept bombers over England and you end up strafing trains in France, it's a straight court martial. There should be scripting in place to account for the player doing everything he could conceivably do while following the mission orders, but anything beyond that doesn't need to be covered. I do not find that limiting at all.

 

So yeah, @Adger to conclude:

- The AI itself is good.

- Mission scripting in the Career can still be bugged, but also gives great results at times.

- Mission scripting in player-made missions is usually much better (I can really recommend to try a couple!) but depends on how experienced the mission maker is.

- The communications system is, well, bugged, so you shouldn't play as a flight leader, or not issue any commands if you do.

This is all very interesting information, but it has little to do with what I wrote about. Although, thank you for expanding on what I called "not straying far" from the original intended scenario.

 

The discussion on limited tools for AI direction (not mission making) has been on PWCG part of the forum and in another long AI and commands topic in relevant forums. It boils down to regulating the priority of a waypoint.

 

In any case, I have no critical comments on the behavior of AI in combat currently, as mentioned. But the AI interaction with player, orders, and leading are currently broken. It is best to avoid leading the flight at all.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

1 hour ago, depapier said:

This is all very interesting information, but it has little to do with what I wrote about.

It was in reply to your saying that AI not listening to player-issued commands has to do with both AI and mission scripting, which it doesn't. Radio comms is a separate system and should be treated as such (although it obviously does have links to the AI. Not so much to mission scripting since ideally the AI should follow player orders regardless of the mission scripting).

 

I haven't read those threads so I cannot comment on them, although I have noticed that the priority system is often misunderstood. If properly used, the priority system works quite well IMHO. Priorities can be regulated if desired, and that is something I've frequently done in the past to e.g. force the enemy to stop fighting and head home once certain conditions apply (e.g. heavily outnumbered).

 

I do agree with the final paragraph of your post, however, and have little to add to that.

[depapier]

Well judging by the comments of PWCG's author, proper use of ai scripting is a matter of trial and error, currently and for years now. And of course my comments are mostly pertinent for original campaign, so the quick mission templates designed by developers themselves.

 

Of course, there is always a bigger concern lurking around wrt AI limits within the engine. I've noticed that in the past year or two, formations in original campaigns have become larger. This is wonderful and somewhat reminiscent to what a player can witness in WOFF/WOTR. But I also remember comments from Jason (I think?) in the past wrt for example larger bombers being a problem due to limitations on how many AI can be on the map simultaneously. That is the concerning part, that limitations are inherent to the engine and overhauling that aspect is a big task. But, ugh, hopefully, fingers crossed.

[Adger]

18 hours ago, depapier said:

.

 

I understand the difficulty of good AI and make no mistake - Il2 made strides in recent years! But for now it remains frustrating that Il2 remains a product with 90% of everything a perfect simulation would have, but this one detail isn't there yet. Tbf one doesn't have much choice where to go from here - WOTR demands a lot of compromises from the player, albeit its AI is pretty good; WOFF is wonderful, but again a compromise on physics; il2 Blitz seems better now, but campaigns require tinkering and I dunno about AI; DCS essentially has no AI to speak of, at least none which can manage a landing; BMS has incredibly good AI, but for now not such a good terrain and anyway, it's not set on Eastern front with a prop, isn't it.. So, I fear that if IL2 ever fixes up its AI woes, we'll approach singularity. I realize, it may be a significant push, but still.

 Absolutely agree mate, there’s not one word you’ve wrote that I disagree with, small world I’m actually a big fan of OBD,s sims and their heavily working on a Battle of France addon for WOTR as I write, I own and fly WOFF and the A,I is indeed excellent but yeah the physics are short of what the Box series offers, but credit to essentially a 2 man team for what they continue to achieve with the old CFS3 engine, I also fly BMS and agree again with your comments, own blitz and Tobruk but I’ve not spent enough time recently on them to form a valued opinion. Thanks for posting I’ve enjoyed reading your thoughts pal.

 

6 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

 

 

So yeah, @Adger to conclude:

- The AI itself is good.

- Mission scripting in the Career can still be bugged, but also gives great results at times.

- Mission scripting in player-made missions is usually much better (I can really recommend to try a couple!) but depends on how experienced the mission maker is.

- The communications system is, well, bugged, so you shouldn't play as a flight leader, or not issue any commands if you do.

 Thanks pal, yeah I had about 3 hours last night on BOX, downloaded a few scripted campaigns (I’d have to look at which ones) and some training missions from the link you provided..really enjoyed my time with them took me some time to get used to taxiing, landing etc.

 

Downloaded a couple of mods and added a Reshade preset which I do with most titles I own and it looks and flies beautifully, next step is possibly either a official career or Pats Campaign Gen, yeah I’ll try not to lead a flight and hopefully I’ll be pleasantly surprised. Cheers for your invaluable insight into both the sim and the A.I situation it’s been a pleasant eye opener..Cheers

 

Edit: Actually @AEthelraedUnraed Is was your scripted campaign Battle of the Hürtgenwald that I had the 1st mission with haha. Taxied up but didn’t receive any take off orders so took off anyway, loved the map, the mission and the chatter, and got decimated by the Flak , just re read your notes on the mission and I missed “Mods on not needed” , I had mods on does it matter if I have them on? also I’m assuming everything is compatible with the latest patch? Thanks mate.

Edited September 13, 2022 by Adger

[AEthelraedUnraed]

6 hours ago, Adger said:

Edit: Actually @AEthelraedUnraed Is was your scripted campaign Battle of the Hürtgenwald that I had the 1st mission with haha. Taxied up but didn’t receive any take off orders so took off anyway, loved the map, the mission and the chatter, and got decimated by the Flak , just re read your notes on the mission and I missed “Mods on not needed” , I had mods on does it matter if I have them on? also I’m assuming everything is compatible with the latest patch? Thanks mate.

Glad you liked it! Strange that you didn't get takeoff orders though. It can take a while for all aircraft of your wing to taxi into position, and only once all four aircraft are in position you will receive takeoff clearance. You also need to taxi all the way up to the windsock. If you did both and you still didn't get any takeoff clearance, let me know - they apparently changed the taxi logic a bit in the Normandy update (not in the changenotes but Jaegermeister mentioned something to that effect) so perhaps I need to tweak one or two things for the mission to work correctly. Anyhow, all other missions start on the runway (small spoiler) so don't worry about defective takeoff logic in the other missions

 

One small piece of advice regarding the Flak, they can be murderous if you fly low and slow. Try to stay above friendly lines as much as possible, and otherwise keep your altitude and speed up, and try to zig-zag a bit. Flak was dangerous in real life too - during a three-day period in mid-November (within the timespan of the campaign) the player's unit (366th FG) lost seven pilots!

 

It shouldn't matter if you have Mods On, although if you use any surface or landscape texture mods, there could potentially be a file conflict resulting in ugly landscape features. Reshade should work fine, as should any non-surface/texture mods (e.g. weapon mods, aircraft skins, vehicle skins, effects, ..., all should work fine).

 

I haven't tested it with the latest patch, but I don't think any major problems will turn up (apart from, maybe, the taxiing you mentioned). If you do come across something, please mention it in the Hürtgenwald thread

[Adger]

@AEthelraedUnraed I'm actually just going to refly mission one now, thanks for the advice re the Flak yeah i stay "straight and level" for far too long ?..Nahh the landscape looks fantastic mate, yep i'll let you know if there's any problems..cheers.

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

As a former SP only guy: try multi-player, especially TAW and Combat Box and you won't be disappointed.