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

[Russkly]

I've just flown a couple of PWCG missions with Fighter AI set to +4 (i.e. the max.) in Advanced Config - my section of 2 Albs encountered 4 Camels, and we got minced.

 

Enemy AI soon despatched my wingman and then shredded me - nothing I could do to get away. If I turned on one, the others would be on my tail.

 

Not sure if something has changed, or whether I just met 4 very good pilots, but I was sorely tested.

 

So, it can be good, but I would agree that, on average, in Career Mode, even set to Hard, the AI is less interesting.

[WitchyWoman]

I am afraid that I am going to have to hold off on buying FC 2 or even 3 until they overhaul AI they even adeguate standards. At this point people do not need new modules. We need the core mechanics fixed with both this module . Thats far more important and should of been there when FC1 came out. 

 

Its just not fun flying against AI in this state and I am a Single player campaign/career player only.

 

Back to IL-2 1946 BAT mod in WW1 mode  (Dawn of flight) WOFF, and ROF until then for me.

Edited July 15, 2023 by WitchyWoman

[LukeFF]

3 hours ago, WitchyWoman said:

At this point people do not need new modules. We need the core mechanics fixed with both this module . Thats far more important and should of been there when FC1 came out. 

 

Sorry, but that's never how it has worked in flight simulation development. You need to sell players new content to fund work on the AI, which is continually being worked on - in fact, there are AI improvements planned for the forthcoming update.

[Patricks]

8 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Sorry, but that's never how it has worked in flight simulation development. You need to sell players new content to fund work on the AI, which is continually being worked on - in fact, there are AI improvements planned for the forthcoming update.

 

Looing forward to seeing what they come up with!

[Dusty926]

  

On 7/13/2023 at 10:37 PM, 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.

I can attest to this: 
FC AI in its current state almost always goes into an evading weaving pattern - They no longer really take advantage of their plane's strengths like the WW2 AI tries to. Instead, the WW1 AI just constantly evades. Not even particularly strongly, as I can outturn AI Camels and DR.Is with ease in just about anything. 


What's more strange than that is what you touched on: They evade universally. 
It's comedically common for me to send the engine to full, crank out some distance, look behind me, and see 3 or 4 fighters just bobbing left and right. They are on my 6, but they must think I'm on theirs, because the moment they get lined up for a good shot, they start weaving evasive. The only times I've been hit have either been by gunners or in high deflection shots, which I guess override the evasive tendencies and allow the AI to actually keep their nose straight for a few moments. 

I'm eagerly awaiting FC Vol.3, as it has a lot of ROF planes I really adore, but I desperately do want the FC AI to be sorted out - Even on Ace it's a flat turkey shoot, and it makes it really uninteresting to do careers or stuff like that.

Edited July 16, 2023 by Dusty926

[WitchyWoman]

On 7/15/2023 at 7:17 PM, LukeFF said:

 

Sorry, but that's never how it has worked in flight simulation development. You need to sell players new content to fund work on the AI, which is continually being worked on - in fact, there are AI improvements planned for the forthcoming update.

That's a very weak argument. Ive been playing flight sims since 1993 and I have worked for a major sim developer and continue to in the field of Milsims. Just about every legendary combat flight sim shipped with decent AI.

 

This module damn near is void of a challenge because of this. Selling us new planes to fund the most important mechanic that should of been there on release  lacks logic. This module basically recycled the early ROF AI that was worthless and its as if the developers thought we would not catch it or what? Now you are saying we have to pay for AI work by way of  new aircraft modules after having bought the sim as well as many other modules.

 

On can only hope that the updates do rectify the issues within these pages so we can enjoy the sim.

Edited July 20, 2023 by WitchyWoman

[Guest deleted@219798]

Poor AI and it is really poor effects not just the enemy but your own flight. Last career mission we were escorting Halberstadts flying Albatros and Dr1. SE5's came after the Halberstadts my flight could have dived to attack. 2 turned away to fly behind me, 4th wingman Albatros. Only 2 actually went after the SE's at first. Eventually a fight started, surprised to see a Dr1 start looping in front of me for no good reason. As usual I had to shoot down most of the enemy and for once a Dr1 got one. Often if you complain about AI you get a response of "Why don't you fly MP online if you don't like the AI?". This is fairly common Flying Circus FB page. I didn't get FC or RoF to fly online.

Edited July 20, 2023 by kestrel444x500

[Guest deleted@219798]

On 7/16/2023 at 12:17 PM, LukeFF said:

 

Sorry, but that's never how it has worked in flight simulation development. You need to sell players new content to fund work on the AI, which is continually being worked on - in fact, there are AI improvements planned for the forthcoming update.

That's like a car manufacturer saying we can't fix the defects in your current model car until you buy the latest model. Seems this is one place where the customers and their opinions count for little.

[LukeFF]

10 hours ago, WitchyWoman said:

That's a very weak argument. Ive been playing flight sims since 1993 and I have worked for a major sim developer and continue to in the field of Milsims. Just about every legendary combat flight sim shipped with decent AI.

 

This module damn near is void of a challenge because of this. Selling us new planes to fund the most important mechanic that should of been there on release  lacks logic. This module basically recycled the early ROF AI that was worthless and its as if the developers thought we would not catch it or what? Now you are saying we have to pay for AI work by way of  new aircraft modules after having bought the sim as well as many other modules.

 

On can only hope that the updates do rectify the issues within these pages so we can enjoy the sim.

 

Yes, well, the coding behind "legendary combat flight sims" has increased exponentially since 1993. Think about it for a moment: why do you think games back then essentially shipped "as-is" and maybe got one or two patches after that? It's not because programmers were somehow smarter than they are today. It's because making that 109 for Aces over Europe required a damn lot less complexity than it does for IL2, War Thunder, or DCS, or MSFS today.

 

A few other things that I think you are ignoring: 

• Good programmers are in short supply. It's been mentioned both here and on Discord by the developers themselves that it's hard to find people with the right skill set to come and work with the team. So, yes, that is part of why AI developments are slower than we would all like, which leads to my next point, which is...
• ...even more than " just good programmers", trying to land and keep guys who know how to code AI is even harder. Most of those that are good at coding AI are working for larger corporations. People are going to go where the largest pot of money is at.

So yes, until the situation dramatically changes, improvements in AI are going to continue at a slow and steady pace, as 1CGS has the time and resources for such work. They aren't ignorant of people's complaints for better AI, believe me. But, they can't work on those changes if they don't have a steady income stream coming in from creating and selling new things.

 

2 hours ago, kestrel444x500 said:

That's like a car manufacturer saying we can't fix the defects in your current model car until you buy the latest model. Seems this is one place where the customers and their opinions count for little.

 

Ah, the old car argument that just won't go away. ? One is a necessary device for daily living and the other is used for entertainment. 

[Avimimus]

I'm not sure these old flight sims really had that good AI...? didn't SWOTL and CFS have a trick where you could just lose the AI by going vertical (if I recall - Il-2 was considered better in that regard). I did really like how the Red Baron I Aces all flew differently - however, I suspect that might have been due to changes to their flight models (rather than to the AI). I know Battle of Britain II: Wings of Victory is famous for its diverse AI behaviours, but I've never tried it.

 

I think this might be a case of nostalgia and rose-tinted glasses - rather than sims from the 1990s having objectively better AI than modern simulations have. That said, I would agree that AI is the area which most needs upgrading in this sim (and in all other flight sims for that matter).

 

The sime could really do with having a more modular AI structure (e.g. WWI aircraft using different AI tactics compared to WWII aircraft) and more human like AI (e.g. having AI field of view and scanning be more realistic - particularly for Tank Crew - where the AI is just too quick to observe opponents).

[BladeMeister]

23 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Yes, well, the coding behind "legendary combat flight sims" has increased exponentially since 1993. Think about it for a moment: why do you think games back then essentially shipped "as-is" and maybe got one or two patches after that? It's not because programmers were somehow smarter than they are today. It's because making that 109 for Aces over Europe required a damn lot less complexity than it does for IL2, War Thunder, or DCS, or MSFS today.

 

A few other things that I think you are ignoring: 

• Good programmers are in short supply. It's been mentioned both here and on Discord by the developers themselves that it's hard to find people with the right skill set to come and work with the team. So, yes, that is part of why AI developments are slower than we would all like, which leads to my next point, which is...
• ...even more than " just good programmers", trying to land and keep guys who know how to code AI is even harder. Most of those that are good at coding AI are working for larger corporations. People are going to go where the largest pot of money is at.

So yes, until the situation dramatically changes, improvements in AI are going to continue at a slow and steady pace, as 1CGS has the time and resources for such work. They aren't ignorant of people's complaints for better AI, believe me. But, they can't work on those changes if they don't have a steady income stream coming in from creating and selling new things.

 

 

Ah, the old car argument that just won't go away. ? One is a necessary device for daily living and the other is used for entertainment. 

Hey my 93 Accord has 600k, original eng & trans, 93 Nissan Hard body 300k original eng and my 06 TL has 117k all original and each are driven a couple of days a week. The Accord is my favorite and yea,.... I don't really know how this relates to the OP, but yea the old cars never go away,.... YEA!!!

 

S!Blade<><

[Avimimus]

So I've been flying a lot of Rise of Flight recently (in anticipation of the Flying Circus Vol.III) and I can say that the AI in the older sim is much worse. I'm rather frustrated as my opponents keep crashing into the ground before I can shoot them down.

[Guest deleted@219798]

If you think FC AI is somewhat acceptable. Try a few quick missions and set your plane on auto pilot. The results of this, 2 Albatros on Ace setting flying against 2 Spad 7, novice. Albatros flew poorly alternatetly diving then stalling, crashed into ground, second mission, collided with another plane. Same scenario with Pfalz DIII, little attempt to turn after Spads, very poor flying and shooting. Fokker Dr1 v Spad 7, Fokker didn't turn and get on the tail of Spads despite many obvious opportunities. A lot of the shooting was pot shots often off target. Eventually after 17 minutes both Spads went down, not what I'd call ace flying or shooting. Dr1 turning and general flying was pathetic. It isn't a great response to say "We haven't got the money to fix this, give us more money!"

[Patricks]

Well, after a few 1v1 test flights with the new planes of FCIII, the NP11 (twin Lewis) vs DII, DII vs NP11, on Ace opponent, the AI is still relatively useless other than practice to stay on them. I don't believe either of my opponents ever put a shot on me, though I think I did see the NP11's guns firing (at what?) when I was attacking from 45 degrees behind... The NP11 AI did some wild kick turns, i'll give him that!

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, Patricks said:

Well, after a few 1v1 test flights with the new planes of FCIII, the NP11 (twin Lewis) vs DII, DII vs NP11, on Ace opponent, the AI is still relatively useless other than practice to stay on them. I don't believe either of my opponents ever put a shot on me, though I think I did see the NP11's guns firing (at what?) when I was attacking from 45 degrees behind... The NP11 AI did some wild kick turns, i'll give him that!

 

A few reports about AI issues with FC planes have been passed to the developers and they are now investigating what might be the cause.

[Dusty926]

4 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

A few reports about AI issues with FC planes have been passed to the developers and they are now investigating what might be the cause.

Thank you! Here's hoping there's something they can do about it that isn't too far out of their hands. I understand AI programming is hard and it's difficult to keep those sorta guys.

That being said, I can't stress enough how important it is to me; I've sold two friends on IL-2 recently with many WW2 modules, but the FC AI as it stands is bad enough that, despite their expressed interest, I have to steer them clear of it. I was pretty happy to buy FC Vol. 1 and 2 myself (2 on Steam, it's why it doesn't appear on my tags) but I can't bring myself to chase cash for Vol. 3 until the AI at least shows a little improvement.

I'm not ignorant of the challenges with AI so I'm not expecting it all to be resolved the immediate next patch, but I do wanna stress that at least showing a step or two towards it will actively help. It's no big money maker, AI pretty much never is, but I have two friends and myself whose purchases hinge expressly on whether or not the FC AI appears to be improving. As soon as patch notes start having FC-specific AI changes, they'll hook me. And I'll rope some people along with me.

 

I don't mean this as some sort of, "I'm holding money over your head so do what I want" thing, moreso just a small anecdote to stress how much the AI experience affects my buds and I.

 

Thank you for your active responses during these recent reports, here's hoping for what they may find.

[Patricks]

Single player Campaigns\Career\Missions are the heart of this (and most) sims, immersion is a big thing, and the crazy thing is the FB WWII AI is really quite good (been a while, but i've been shot down more than once!). My only complaint with them is they are TOO good and can see me in 0 visibility (clouds, when I approach from low 6:00).. but I can live with that, I just fly in clear weather.. 

[Guest deleted@219798]

Well I bit and bought FC volume 3. Flying Circus has a lot a potential, let's hope that will be realised. Sadly there isn't much in the way of competition, only Flanders Fields and that has a lot of flaws. I don't think any other developers are lining up to make WW1 flight sims. Flying Circus is really the only good quality WW1 sim around. Hoping for better SP play in the future.

[Justicier]

Overall, the WW2 AI in IL2GB is... passable. The WW1 AI is incredibly poor... mostly with regard to believable evasive maneuvers to prevent being killed, but also with certain aircraft's strengths/weaknesses being ignored (Looking at the SPAD). And don't get me started on the gunner AI when the player is flying the plane...

 

[giftgruen]

 

On 7/15/2023 at 7:17 PM, LukeFF said:

Sorry, but that's never how it has worked in flight simulation development. You need to sell players new content to fund work on the AI, which is continually being worked on - in fact, there are AI improvements planned for the forthcoming update.

 

Which is continually worked on ... ?

LOL. Sorry.

 

It did NOT improve from July until now. 

 

I like FC.  However I fly more in WW2 now, because the WW1 parts as a single player became quite boring.

 

Wrong flight models 

Completely stupid AI.

Endless repeated missions.

 

If you want to make money with a software product - the products basics need to be okay. They are not.

 

I was impressed by the VR fun in the beginning. In the meanwhile I am simply disappointed.

Probably I will nevertheless buy FC3 and FC4 because I dont care much of this rather small amount of money.

 

Others will not if they try to have fun with FC2 for more than just some weeks.

And - to be honest: They are right.

[WitchyWoman]

I can think of 3 sims right now that cause stress any time I am engaged because enemy AI is damn good and deadly if they are on your tail (very hard to shake). FC is lacking that kind of skill 100% because they only evade and are not aggressive. I am glad my complaints have been backed up by other players that have experienced it. Right now I can tell nothing has been done to the AI mechanics because it behaves exactly the same as when FC 1 was released.

 

We are not asking for a lot, we spent the money on base games and lots of modules. We simply want it to at least be adequate and a challenge on par with Flaunders Fields (which is excellent in regards to AI) or even WW2 IL-2 FB which clearly uses completely different AI mechanics. Right now we cannot even enjoy it and it prevents me from buying module II and upcoming III. Fix it and I will buy more FC content right away and quit complaining about it.

Edited December 1, 2023 by WitchyWoman