Is there a general concensus on FC2 Flight Models / Combat AI?

[BazzaLB]

Flying Circus 2 is "On Sale" on steam atm. (cough.. still AUD76 even at 35% off)

 

Whilst I have FC1 (I had all the planes in ROF too), I am not sure whether to pull the pin. Is there a general concensus (if general consensus is possible in any Sim forum  ) regarding the state of the FM and AI in FC2 at this present time? Any comments / opinions welcome.

Edited June 30, 2023 by BazzaLB

[=IRFC=kotori87]

The Damage Model has significantly improved from just a few years ago. It's a slow process, but they do improve. The Flight Model is... well. I'd rate it as very playable, but not very historically accurate. Some FMs are more accurate than others. Other threads have explored this much more than me. But if you fight the FM you've got against the FM the other guy has, then you'll do just fine. If you're going to ragequit over the Albatros not stalling/spinning like the historical D.Va did, then this is not the sim for you.

As for the AI, well... it can fly some of the planes decently. But it's really a WWII AI and it struggles to handle the WWI planes. On the bright side, the multiplayer community is incredible.

[Zooropa_Fly]

The AI isn't great, and MP options are limited.

[Trooper117]

The problem with FC is that any patch or update that focuses on the WWII element, can affect or disrupt aspects and behaviour of the FC aeroplanes... (this has been noticed and reported before).

Ideally, FC should have been a separate entity entirely, but it is what it is...

 

[Patricks]

FC AI is not good, even on the highest setting. WWII AI on the other hand can be quite good, not really sure why this is..

[czech693]

This probably doesn't have anything to do with the difference in AI actions between WW1 and WW2, but in luascripts/ai the individual aircraft .txt files for WW1 aircraft don't have a MaxPitchRate for the Normal ai setting, just for the Novice, High, and Ace settings.  All of the WW1 aircraft I looked at had this same issue.  All of the WW2 aircraft tht I looked had a MaxPitchRate for the Normal ai setting, as well as the other three.

 

In my current WW1 campaign in PWCGFC some of the other side did seem to do better at pitch up and down maneuvers, while others would still do the pitch up and stall from the old AI.

 

Just went and looked at my old 2018 IL-2 version on my old computer.  The only FC aircraft at that time were the Dr.I and the Spad XIII.  They both have MaxPitchRate=180 for all ai categories.  The current version has various rates for each ai category, from 120 to 180 (with Normal missing).  I changed mine and will see what, if anything, changes in the next dogfight.

Edited June 30, 2023 by czech693

[Avimimus]

It is very difficult to accurately identify flight models for aircraft that are over 100 years old... especially if a perfect flying replica doesn't exist. I will say that they do feel really good... better than any other sim I've tried.

 

The damage model is improved significantly compared to Rise of Flight though (even if it lacks the detailed modelling to produce really realistic wing failures - something that would require rebuilding every aircraft to model individual joiners and wires, in addition to spars).

 

Honestly, engine development has been focussed around WWII and there are some features in WWII aircraft that were never ported into WWI aircraft (as well as room for some AI issues periodically, although they seem to be resolved fairly quickly). The AI is better than Rise of Flight (i.e. it only sometimes gets stuck in a gentle turn). The other benefits are access to the various maps and the new clouds.

 

So - I'd say, look at the aircraft list and decide if you want those aircraft... and based on that, decide whether or not to wait for the sale amount to increase. I'm a significant fan of the Sopwith Triplane, and the Fokker D.VIII is fun, while the DFW C.V is relaxing to fly (once you get comfortable with not seeing forward). Overall, I prefer Vol.II to Vol.I

 

That said, the planeset for Vol.III should be even more interesting in my opinion.

[BBAS_Tiki_Joe]

Sorry to say the FC AI is terrible, they feel like target drones with no ability to get behind you whatsoever. As bad as I would love to enjoy SP FC content the fighter AI completely ruins it for me. Shooting down the Red Baron's recorded number of planes in less than 10 Missions on the hardest settings is boring. You can have some good campaigns as an attack/bomber pilot though. The AI in the WW2 portion of Great Battles is much much better. I wish they would recognize this and put some effort into FC AI. I'd even be down for the Devs to allow FC AI to cheat to be more competitive. In my view, it feels like they just float around nonsensically and take pop shots every now and again.

 

FC MP has a great community and I'd highly recommend joining up with the community, it is a much better experience.

Edited June 30, 2023 by BBAS_Tiki_Joe

[US103_Baer]

On 6/30/2023 at 9:29 AM, BazzaLB said:

Flying Circus 2 is "On Sale" on steam atm. (cough.. still AUD76 even at 35% off)

 

Whilst I have FC1 (I had all the planes in ROF too), I am not sure whether to pull the pin. Is there a general concensus (if general consensus is possible in any Sim forum  ) regarding the state of the FM and AI in FC2 at this present time? Any comments / opinions welcome.

The FM and AI issues pointed out above affect some planes worse than others, and if you have RoF there'll be no surprises. FC1 and FC2 are roughly the same in this regard so there's no reason not to get FC2 based on FM and AI, if you already have FC1.

 

The Sim can be very enjoyable in multiplayer even as it is. It just needs enough people online.

 

If you want to explore relative WW1 Aircraft Performance, there is new research and aeronautical software modeling published in a recent book by @Holtzauge. Its essential reading on the subject and could provide a credible basis for FM adjustments. 

 

Edited July 1, 2023 by US103_Baer

[Trooper117]

13 hours ago, BBAS_Tiki_Joe said:

Sorry to say the FC AI is terrible

 

I have to agree...

[Russkly]

5 hours ago, Trooper117 said:

 

I have to agree...

 

Regrettably, so must I.

 

I am no super-pilot, but, even with the 'Fighter AI' set to +4 (i.e. max.) in PWCG FC, I am rarely threatened and can down 5-6 a/c per mission without even using up my ammo.

 

It's usually boredom that makes me end the mission rather than enemy action.

 

The new career mode is even worse IMHO.

 

The Albatros DVa, which is my current career ride is incredibly forgiving and it seems almost impossible to stall or rip its wings off in a dive. Even Camels and Tripes can't seem to out-turn me, and SE5s and Spads don't use energy tactics.

 

I usually end up going back to WW2 for a decent offline challenge. Online is more challenging for sure, but it's just not always possible to fly when you want, so it's not for me.

 

It's a real shame, because FC in VR is a wonderful experience.

[CB77Don246]

Sorry to have to say FC is not for me now and the WW1 planes look great what a shame no more new purchases for me  may as well stick with R.O.F and all the money I have spent on ROF and FC.

[LufberyJAA]

I'm getting better, but I still find the AI challenging. I'm enjoying the dogfights, the new career mode is pretty good so far, and the flight models seem okay.

 

I posted this in another thread, but figured it's relevant here:

 

Quote

I'm pretty easy-going. I played the hell out of the original Red Baron, then Red Baron II, and then upgraded it to RB3D. I was a member of a flight sim message board on Delphi, then joined The Areodrome forum where we discussed the sims endlessly and generated wish lists for what we would like in an improved version. 

 

We debated flight models, propeller torque, p-factors, and wishes for accurate cockpits, and fuel tank placement, and so forth.

 

Things got better when a few people released some really good WWI planes for the MS Combat Flights Simulator 2. It was neat dogfighting Camels and Dr.1s in planes that were more accurate than RB3D. It was strange to do it over Wake Island, however. ?

 

Anyway, kids, and my computers being older and not able to play the latest games, plus what seemed like a lull in flight sim development for a while conspired to get me out of this hobby for a long time. 

 

About 3 years ago, I bought Flying Circus I and the bulk of my wish list from 20 years ago is filled! I pre-ordered FC Ii, and will order 3 & 4. I know that this isn't a perfect sim, but it is nearly so. Yes, I would love to see the Nieuport 28 tweaked a bit, yes the AI is sometimes goofy, but this is an amazing game!

 

I'd say that the AI is better than it was several months ago, when all it did was loop. I'm looking forward to FC3 when it comes out.

 

 

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

Agree with those saying AI is improved.  FM's a mixed bag. Some planes pretty good, others not so much.  Multiplayer is a blast, and can be difficult to stay alive at times..  Haven't spent enough time in career mode to comment.  In Quick mission, if you're outnumbered, against the more effective aircraft, it can be a challenge.

[WitchyWoman]

Unfortunately I notice the AI in FC has the early problems that ROF had before the recent ROF AI mods. The default FC AI is just downright pathetic. They are not aggressive and just turn  back and fourth when you chase them making them easy targets. They do not roll or chase you at all like the WWII side of IL-2 GB. The sad thing is since ROF got an AI upgade in the form of a mod not long ago, it greatly surpasses FC in this depatment. This company really needs to get on the ball and overhaul the AI combat mechanics in FC. There are more or at the very least, an even number of single player campaign affectionados that fly this way. I'm just not into mP myself and its not a good excuse to explain the lack of AI that I have heard sometimes in these types of discussions.  This mechanic is crucial in any simulation. So I don't know why IL-2 GB has better AI mechanics and FC does not seeing as how both modules are in the same game. Can't they use the same AI methods?

 

Eye candy is no trade for AI in my book. Gameplay comes first.

 

Another thing that bugs me about FC is damage. In ROF I could shred enemy planes and they fell apart in midair and or caught fire, though in FC it seems I just notice bullet holes scattered throughout the wings. Just last night I bagged 8 German planes in an F2B and none of those planes came apart, they just had holes in them and eventually started to go down. Not even a fire. Again I don't know why this feature was also not carried over.

 

Its a huge disappointment in this state and I often find myself playing more ROF (I have all the content to ROF) than this.

Edited July 3, 2023 by WitchyWoman

[Todt_Von_Oben]

I've heard it said the AI don't fly any better in Ace mode; just shoot better.  Your mileage may vary.

 

I agree the bots need work but they are getting better, seems to me. 

 

If you want more competition, increase the odds.  Fly solo against eight aces in QM and they will often get on your tail or shoot you from long distances.

 

As for the other points made in this thread: FC was created to bring us into the Sturmovik engine and VR.  If you're still flying 2D, you should stay with ROF.

Edited July 5, 2023 by Todt_Von_Oben

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

 "If you're still flying 2D, you should stay with ROF"

 

Have to disagree with that Todt.  

Edited July 5, 2023 by RNAS10_Mitchell

[Zooropa_Fly]

Yeah Mitch, but he's been sitting in his DVII fuselage, with the goggles on, flying in the Twilight Zone for too long again.

Momentary loss of touch with reality 

 

S!

[Todt_Von_Oben]

Nope.  I meant every word of it.  

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

Mmmkay...

[WitchyWoman]

5 hours ago, Todt_Von_Oben said:

Nope.  I meant every word of it.  

I have an Oculus Rift S dude and that said. The game is not exclusively VR and Id bet money more people use it without VR than those with. Some people do not want to sling on a damn heavy headset or mess up their hair every time they fly so Flying without VR is just fine. Also I think a headtrack has advatages over a headset as you can still see your hotas and yu don't have to worry about the pressure against your head or sweat. VR really will not be ideal until the tech is in place to make the headset as light as a pair of sun glasses. Because of this my VR collects dust on occasion because I just want to boot up and fly and not have any setup or head strain. FB and Suckerberg can also take the forced woke meta account and shove it.

 

As far as virtual sticks like Vtol though? They completely suck. I love vtol but a virtual stick takes away so much precision and dexterity.  I laugh when people on Steam suggest a virtual stick is more realistic. I remind them that real pilots use physical sticks but thats off topic. Rofl.

 

I really hope someone can port over that ROF AI mod upgade to FC eventually as it really gave the older game a new birth and with FC lacking so many important aircraft and the early war, you have a long time to wait to fly the whole war.

Edited July 6, 2023 by WitchyWoman

[RossMarBow]

1 hour ago, WitchyWoman said:

I have an Oculus Rift S dude and that said. The game is not exclusively VR and Id bet money more people use it without VR than those with. Some people do not want to sling on a damn heavy headset or mess up their hair every time they fly so Flying without VR is just fine. Also I think a headtrack has advatages over a headset as you can still see your hotas and yu don't have to worry about the pressure against your head or sweat. VR really will not be ideal until the tech is in place to make the headset as light as a pair of sun glasses. Because of this my VR collects dust on occasion because I just want to boot up and fly and not have any setup or head strain. FB and Suckerberg can also take the forced woke meta account and shove it.

 

As far as virtual sticks like Vtol though? They completely suck. I love vtol but a virtual stick takes away so much precision and dexterity.  I laugh when people on Steam suggest a virtual stick is more realistic. I remind them that real pilots use physical sticks but thats off topic. Rofl.

 

I really hope someone can port over that ROF AI mod upgade to FC eventually as it really gave the older game a new birth and with FC lacking so many important aircraft and the early war, you have a long time to wait to fly the whole war.

 

Very true I know lots of people that ditched the headtracking hotas and pedals 
And went back to a single stick and mouse and keyboard
So much more relaxing just being able to get the stick out and start flying 

[WitchyWoman]

What I meant was I prefer to see my pedals and hotas but with VR you have to rely on muscle memory which is impossible when you have a high end rig with lots of toggles and stuff(I use a saitex X56 and have an x52 pro for backup) Track IR 5 and an oculus rift S so I have experience with most everything currently being used.

[Trooper117]

21 hours ago, Todt_Von_Oben said:

If you're still flying 2D, you should stay with ROF.

That's probably the most juvenile statement I've ever seen on this forum...

[JG4_Moltke1871]

On 7/3/2023 at 6:45 AM, WitchyWoman said:

Unfortunately I notice the AI in FC has the early problems that ROF had before the recent ROF AI mods. The default FC AI is just downright pathetic. They are not aggressive and just turn  back and fourth when you chase them making them easy targets. They do not roll or chase you at all like the WWII side of IL-2 GB. The sad thing is since ROF got an AI upgade in the form of a mod not long ago, it greatly surpasses FC in this depatment. This company really needs to get on the ball and overhaul the AI combat mechanics in FC. There are more or at the very least, an even number of single player campaign affectionados that fly this way. I'm just not into mP myself and its not a good excuse to explain the lack of AI that I have heard sometimes in these types of discussions.  This mechanic is crucial in any simulation. So I don't know why IL-2 GB has better AI mechanics and FC does not seeing as how both modules are in the same game. Can't they use the same AI methods?

 

Eye candy is no trade for AI in my book. Gameplay comes first.

 

Another thing that bugs me about FC is damage. In ROF I could shred enemy planes and they fell apart in midair and or caught fire, though in FC it seems I just notice bullet holes scattered throughout the wings. Just last night I bagged 8 German planes in an F2B and none of those planes came apart, they just had holes in them and eventually started to go down. Not even a fire. Again I don't know why this feature was also not carried over.

 

Its a huge disappointment in this state and I often find myself playing more ROF (I have all the content to ROF) than this.

I can’t confirm the „fire problem“, maybe it’s up to the plane/engine? I set a lot of Spad‘s on fire, in my last flight I fly with Spad’s and I set Dr. I and Halberstadts on fire, I was equipped with the amazing balloon guns. Anyway I set a lot of planes on fire, my target is always the engine and pilot seat area. So I can't say much about tattering wings. All I know is that they break under stress if the damage is too great. 
Yes the AI is incredibly bad but I recommend @Stonehouse‘s AAA and AI gunnery mod. The AI do not fly better as a result, but hit better, which reduces the probability of survival. I play iron man mode only, Yes, I would have an unusually high number of kills but so far I not bring a single character through even a single time period (for example April 1918 to end of war). I would like to take this opportunity to introduce you to Nicolas Keller, he went to war in April 1918, had 109 confirmed kills and was rewarded with all possible German awards the simulation provides. He died one month before the Great War ends and the fact he got the golden wound batch tells us that the reaper was hunting him for a long time ??

Together with the AAA mod what makes every flight on the enemy territory an adventure the game gets much more spicy!!

[BMA_Hellbender]

On 6/30/2023 at 3:29 AM, BazzaLB said:

Flying Circus 2 is "On Sale" on steam atm. (cough.. still AUD76 even at 35% off)

 

Whilst I have FC1 (I had all the planes in ROF too), I am not sure whether to pull the pin. Is there a general concensus (if general consensus is possible in any Sim forum  ) regarding the state of the FM and AI in FC2 at this present time? Any comments / opinions welcome.

 

Get it while it's on sale.

 

There is no real consensus regarding both the FMs and AI, however as @=IRFC=kotori87 says: most of them are very playable, though some are more accurate than others. Don't dive with the Pfalz D.XII (there's a flutter issue with the rudder), understand that the 150hp SPAD VII is an early 1917 machine (the 180hp is rather good) and stay away from the Nieuport 28 unless you have a deathwish (it's been broken since its release in 2009). As for the AI: who cares? This is primarily a multiplayer sim. I suppose they make good target practice, and it's fun to fill the skies with them.

 

On 7/5/2023 at 2:42 PM, Todt_Von_Oben said:

As for the other points made in this thread: FC was created to bring us into the Sturmovik engine and VR.  If you're still flying 2D, you should stay with ROF.

 

FC is benefitting greatly from the x64 Sturmovik engine. For one the infamous "out of bones" errors are a thing of the past, since the engine can allocate more than 4GB of memory. I was briefly flying in VR myself, but have since gone back to 2D (with TrackIR). VR is great, but it makes me incredibly sick after about 30 to 40 minutes. I also find the luminosity of the screens too much for my eyes. Many people don't do well with something strapped to their face.

 

For the record, I went through both a Samsung Odyssey+ and an Oculus Rift S. Haven't tried the HP Reverb G2.

 

I still love VR, I just recently bought a PSVR2 for Gran Turismo 7, but I keep my play sessions 30 minutes or less. Kind of hard to do if you're flying a multiplayer sortie that can take up to an hour.

[Russkly]

1 hour ago, =IRFC=Hellbender said:

This is primarily a multiplayer sim.

 

Interesting assertion, Hellbender.

 

What leads you to that conclusion?

 

I'd love to see some stats on how people play Il2 in terms of SP vs MP or a combination of both (and if both, what % SP and what % MP).

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, =IRFC=Hellbender said:

stay away from the Nieuport 28 unless you have a deathwish (it's been broken since its release in 2009)

 

1 hour ago, =IRFC=Hellbender said:

for the AI: who cares? This is primarily a multiplayer sim.

 

Let's please stay away from statements that are only going to lead to endless arguments and/or are not backed up by any actual numbers. ? It's Friday morning here, so I'd like to keep it a nice, calm day. 

[Russkly]

On reflection, having played a lot of QMs recently in order to play around with the Pico 4 settings, etc. I'd like to revise my opinion of the AI a little: set to Ace, the AI flies defensively pretty well, and, if you don't watch your 6, they will latch on from behind and put holes in you.

 

Still not as threatening as in GB but better than I had experienced a few months ago before I switched almost exclusively to PWCG.

 

 

[Avimimus]

43 minutes ago, Russkly said:

 

Interesting assertion, Hellbender.

 

What leads you to that conclusion?

 

I'd love to see some stats on how people play Il2 in terms of SP vs MP or a combination of both (and if both, what % SP and what % MP).

 

I only fly offline - and I suspect that is true for the vast majority of players... it usually is the case. I recall some numbers being given years ago (but I might be remember Il-2 1946 era for that)... but I'd be willing to bet:

- Most players are not on the forums

- Most players are not flying online

- Most players do not have VR

[Trooper117]

29 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 It's Friday morning here, so I'd like to keep it a nice, calm day. 

 

What?... on here!  

[Avimimus]

Just now, Russkly said:

On reflection, having played a lot of QMs recently in order to play around with the Pico 4 settings, etc. I'd like to revise my opinion of the AI a little: set to Ace, the AI flies defensively pretty well, and, if you don't watch your 6, they will latch on from behind and put holes in you.

 

Still not as threatening as in GB but better than I had experienced a few months ago before I switched almost exclusively to PWCG.

 

The AI could probably be deadlier - I remember one Rise of Flight patch where I just got slaughtered... in seconds... even when in an out of control spin. I wonder if the AI files are still open to modding... that could be fun.

 

However, I'm not sure if it'd be realistic. I flew my first campaign mission in a DFW C.V and ended up getting two kills while trying to defend myself in a massed air engagement... and I remember thinking "This might not be that implausible given the training available" - in spite of the fact that I'm likely not very good.

 

What was the average amount of experience of a pilot when they were killed? If I recall correctly, the famous figures is 17.5 hours at the front... that isn't much compared to what we can accumulate on a sim with unlimited lives.

[Russkly]

8 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

 

The AI could probably be deadlier - I remember one Rise of Flight patch where I just got slaughtered... in seconds... even when in an out of control spin. I wonder if the AI files are still open to modding... that could be fun.

 

However, I'm not sure if it'd be realistic. I flew my first campaign mission in a DFW C.V and ended up getting two kills while trying to defend myself in a massed air engagement... and I remember thinking "This might not be that implausible given the training available" - in spite of the fact that I'm likely not very good.

 

What was the average amount of experience of a pilot when they were killed? If I recall correctly, the famous figures is 17.5 hours at the front... that isn't much compared to what we can accumulate on a sim with unlimited lives.

 

It's a fair point - we have the ability to generate a level of 'combat' experience that very, very few pilots in either war would ever have been able to accrue.

 

Having said that, I would posit that on average they they had a lot more youth on their side ?.

 

Anyway, the AI in FC is passable and provides enough fun - overall I love the game and spend many happy hours playing it. I can't ask for much more than that.

[BMA_Hellbender]

3 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Let's please stay away from statements that are only going to lead to endless arguments and/or are not backed up by any actual numbers. ? It's Friday morning here, so I'd like to keep it a nice, calm day. 

 

If you want to save yourself a headache during the rest of the weekend, I recommend you move the whole thread to the FM / AI Discussion subforum, where interested parties will also find all the data they could ever wish for to back up that statement.

 

 

For the rest my recommendation still stands to buy FC2, especially now that it's on sale. But as always: buyer beware.

[Avimimus]

1 hour ago, Russkly said:

It's a fair point - we have the ability to generate a level of 'combat' experience that very, very few pilots in either war would ever have been able to accrue.

 

Having said that, I would posit that on average they they had a lot more youth on their side ?.

 

Anyway, the AI in FC is passable and provides enough fun - overall I love the game and spend many happy hours playing it. I can't ask for much more than that.

 

Yes, that is where I'm at personally - I love the flight models, I love the aircraft models, the combat can be enjoyable (but it will never be perfect)... but it is still a marvel of research and detailed recreation of history and flight. So, glass half full (or for me 3/4 full really).

 

[LukeFF]

32 minutes ago, =IRFC=Hellbender said:

If you want to save yourself a headache during the rest of the weekend, I recommend you move the whole thread to the FM / AI Discussion subforum, where interested parties will also find all the data they could ever wish for to back up that statement.

 

Done - I thought about moving this topic when I first saw it, but I figured it'd be alright to leave it here for a while since traffic in this part of the forum is relatively slow as it is. ?

[BMA_Hellbender]

14 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

Yes, that is where I'm at personally - I love the flight models, I love the aircraft models, the combat can be enjoyable (but it will never be perfect)... but it is still a marvel of research and detailed recreation of history and flight. So, glass half full (or for me 3/4 full really).

 

I tend to agree with the glass half full statement, though I'd word it that I love the 3D models, love the combat (especially in multiplayer) and the FMs are for the most part enjoyable, but will never be perfect. With regards to the research, it's a great first effort and very much a product of its time, which is to say the late 2000s. A lot more research has happened since then. This is also reflected with the Sopwith Snipe and Siemens-Schuckert D.IV collector planes, which don't really match the rest of the planeset in terms of performance. The margin of error is especially visible at high altitude.

 

Again, before you call me a naysayer: it's a great visual remaster of RoF that also works beautifully on modern systems. I don't think I've had a crash (to desktop) in the last three years.

 

As for the AI, I rescind my previous statement: it's very much serviceable in its current form and good target practice.

[WitchyWoman]

I just had a career mission in an SE-5. After escorting bombers I went looking for targets, I ran into a flight of 5 Albatros on my own and if this was some other sim Id be on edge. Ok so the AI is good at weaving and dodging fire but why for the love of whoever you believe in are they not aggressive? Not one of them shot at me or even tried to really get on my tail and shoot, they just play games in turns and its like the AI practically begs you to get on their tails and shoot at them.  Shot two down and then I flew home bored in disgust of their lacking abilities to fight back. Whats crazy is as I broke contact the survivors continued to weave around in circles as if I was still in that area a mile or so away from them. It feels like once AI in this game detects enemy planes from the player or players side, they enter into this evading weave machanic that just loops over and over.

 

Arggggg its so frustrating. And yes I fly on hard mode. If I had the skills Id somehow port over that recent ROF mod that made the AI light years deadlier than before.

 

I guess I am just spoiled by Il-2 GB AI( which is far different and deadlier from FC for some reason) and some other WW1 and WW2 sims which get this aspect as perfect as anyone could want. The developers should really focus on refining this as a priority.

 

I know I'm critical often but they are valid concerns that if addressed could really take us into the next chapter of top level combat flight sims. Until then, I will keep hovering back to older titles for hat itch.

Edited July 14, 2023 by WitchyWoman

[Patricks]

58 minutes ago, WitchyWoman said:

I just had a career mission in an SE-5. After escorting bombers I went looking for targets, I ran into a flight of 5 Albatros on my own and if this was some other sim Id be on edge. Ok so the AI is good at weaving and dodging fire but why for the love of whoever you believe in are they not aggressive? Not one of them shot at me or even tried to really get on my tail and shoot, they just play games in turns and its like the AI practically begs you to get on their tails and shoot at them.  Shot two down and then I flew home bored in disgust of their lacking abilities to fight back. Whats crazy is as I broke contact the survivors continued to weave around in circles as if I was still in that area a mile or so away from them. It feels like once AI in this game detects enemy planes from the player or players side, they enter into this evading weave machanic that just loops over and over.

 

Arggggg its so frustrating. And yes I fly on hard mode. If I had the skills Id somehow port over that recent ROF mod that made the AI light years deadlier than before.

 

I guess I am just spoiled by Il-2 GB AI( which is far different and deadlier from FC for some reason) and some other WW1 and WW2 sims which get this aspect as perfect as anyone could want. The developers should really focus on refining this as a priority.

 

I know I'm critical often but they are valid concerns that if addressed could really take us into the next chapter of top level combat flight sims. Until then, I will keep hovering back to older titles for hat itch.

 

Agree 100%, its a matter that obviously CAN be rectified and rather than keep coming out with FC versions this should be the #1 priority. I am currently flying a career in IL-2 1946 (Cassie 3.4 Ultrapak,$2.49 on GoG or Steam right now, all-in) and the AI is VERY good, even employing wingman tactics. RoF is much better also, this is not right...

[US103_Baer]

The AI in FC Career mode seem to be particularly useless compared to QMB and MP AI.  At least my quick experiments have born that out.

If you fly Quick mission 3 vs 8 above 3000m the ace AI will try attack you.  D7fs will climb in circles to get above and Dr1s will try to circle with you. Tail chasing them in any Entente aircraft except a Camel is a bad idea.

They all split S and zoom if you get on their tail too.

Is still not great of course, and i don't know why there'd be a difference,  but if Career AI could be leveled up to same as QMB then it'd make for a quick improvement.

Edited July 15, 2023 by US103_Baer