Dev blog #359: Daniel and Albert talk about the past, present and future for the IL-2 series

[LukeFF]

Hey guys! Dev blog #359 is now live. It's a long one, so settle in.  https://il2sturmovik.com/news/844/dev-blog-359/

[KpaxBos]

Hi,

A lot to read.

Waiting for new project ?.

Thnak you for this report.

Edited March 22, 2024 by KpaxBos

[JG27_Steini]

12 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

Hey guys! Dev blog #359 is now live. It's a long one, so settle in.  https://il2sturmovik.com/news/844/dev-blog-359/

 

I really do appreciate those honest statements. Especially about the AI. It is several year too late, because hundred's of player reported problems and discussed here over and over again. I understand that it is very frustration for each side now. Those problems wont be solved. Very sad.

[S10JlAbraxis]

Thanks, I appricate the summery of all the key points.  It was not easy to understand the Google translate version!

 

"In our case we emphasize more on the components of the game world, that is, we need the game world to be interesting, battles happen in it, and therefore the requirements for us are much higher in terms of artificial intelligence"

 

This is why I am hooked on IL2.  I want to experience more than switches in a cocpit I want to experience what it was actually like to be a WW2 pilot including the historical context and enviornment that surrounds that.  I want to be fully immersed in it.  IL2 far exceeds other WW2 sims in this respect.  Nice to hear this continues to be the direction.

Edited March 22, 2024 by S10JlAbraxis

[Enigma89]

This was probably the most substantial blog update in any flight sim in a good long while. Thanks!

[sevenless]

Most important for me is what happens to GB until the new game will hit the streets.

 

Quote

In Odessa, there are two episodes — the defense of Odessa in 1941 and its liberation later in the war. For the later episode, we are thinking of Yak-3 and La-7, right now we are in final negotiations with the contractor who will make the models, and I think they will be successful. In the same way, the early episode of Odessa will include I-153, which is now in the works. The most characteristic airplanes are selected, and there will be others.

[...]

Right now we are using about 10 percent of our internal resources to develop new Great Battles content, but thanks to a lot of external cooperation we are developing more, for instance, the Odessa module. We are expecting it in 2025, but we would like it sooner, of course.

 

[Lusekofte]

That I 153 will be a blast 

[III/JG52_Al-Azraq]

So if I understand correctly, the current GB planes will be ported to the new project? It is for me still a bit unclear what does the new project means for the current GB series. Will it replace it? Will it be a new paid product which will receive the ‘old’ planes step by step?

 

Also a bit worried to read that unlocks are being considered. If it is within a pilot career then it can be fine, but please do not make it transfer to the multiplayer.

 

All in all, great update and thanks for your work! Looking forward to se more.

[FuriousMeow]

13 minutes ago, III/JG52_Al-Azraq said:

So if I understand correctly, the current GB planes will be ported to the new project?

 

No

it is a matter of time and cost because their visual models will have to be redone.

 

Maybe but I would bet no.

[Heliopause]

Sorry to read about the burnout. (I think) most of us appreciate the work that goes into it (as much as we can imagine it to be).

[smink1701]

I appreciate the update and all the information! I agree with your sentiment that above all IL2 is a combat flight simulation. A huge part of that is your experience in SP mode. What causes me to jump out of the game after five minutes is the endless turn circles during a dogfight.  

Or when my adversary outperforms everything I do … speed, turns, climbing, etc. by a factor of 10.
When I play Cliffs the game is very dated and has a number of issues, but AI seems much more realistic and therefore enjoyable. 
until you can crack the code and create a single player experience that is more engaging I will be a non-participant in future endeavors. 
 

[PatrickAWlson]

Nice interview, but I want too offer a critique of the AI statements that I hope is taken as constructive.  Albert emphasizes the difficulties of making AI that grasps all  of the elements of physics.  This is something that I cannot even begin to claim to understand at more than a high level.  However, I am going to argue that most of the AI issues do not fall into this category.

 

I believe that the AI has tremendous room for improvement without regard to making it fly the plane more efficiently.  I mean human behavior and decision making.  Making the AI not see quite so well.  Making the AI leave combat when it is damaged or badly outnumbered.  Making the AI break off chases that seem fruitless.  This is also not simple, but it is possible without understanding the physics at a detailed level.  

 

48 minutes ago, smink1701 said:

I appreciate the update and all the information! I agree with your sentiment that above all IL2 is a combat flight simulation. A huge part of that is your experience in SP mode. What causes me to jump out of the game after five minutes is the endless turn circles during a dogfight.  

Or when my adversary outperforms everything I do … speed, turns, climbing, etc. by a factor of 10.
When I play Cliffs the game is very dated and has a number of issues, but AI seems much more realistic and therefore enjoyable. 
until you can crack the code and create a single player experience that is more engaging I will be a non-participant in future endeavors.

 

The AI flies the same FM as you do, so it is possible to match it if you manage your plane well enough.  The AI is a computer, so exactly matching his maneuver is going to be difficult.  Your primary advantage is being smart enough to do something else.  If the AI starts to circle it is going to lose altitude.  Instead of trying to turn tighter, pull up in a more gentle climbing turn and gain altitude.  When the AI runs out of energy, attack again. 

 

One legitimate issue is the AI's seeming all encompassing awareness which makes it very difficult to bounce.  On the bright side, it also gets target fixated (something that was also true of real pilots) so if you stay a bit above the fray you can nail them when they attack your comrades.

[CountZero]

14 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

Nice interview, but I want too offer a critique of the AI statements that I hope is taken as constructive.  Albert emphasizes the difficulties of making AI that grasps all  of the elements of physics.  This is something that I cannot even begin to claim to understand at more than a high level.  However, I am going to argue that most of the AI issues do not fall into this category.

 

I believe that the AI has tremendous room for improvement without regard to making it fly the plane more efficiently.  I mean human behavior and decision making.  Making the AI not see quite so well.  Making the AI leave combat when it is damaged or badly outnumbered.  Making the AI break off chases that seem fruitless.  This is also not simple, but it is possible without understanding the physics at a detailed level.  

 

 

 

The AI flies the same FM as you do, so it is possible to match it if you manage your plane well enough.  The AI is a computer, so exactly matching his maneuver is going to be difficult.  Your primary advantage is being smart enough to do something else.  If the AI starts to circle it is going to lose altitude.  Instead of trying to turn tighter, pull up in a more gentle climbing turn and gain altitude.  When the AI runs out of energy, attack again. 

 

One legitimate issue is the AI's seeming all encompassing awareness which makes it very difficult to bounce.  On the bright side, it also gets target fixated (something that was also true of real pilots) so if you stay a bit above the fray you can nail them when they attack your comrades.

 

great points, i would aslo add player comand should be prioritiesed abow anything els in ai logic of frendly wingmans, flights and so on... if i wont my wingman to abort chaise or drop bombs or atack neer enemy and so on... he should do that instantly.

 

 

1 hour ago, III/JG52_Al-Azraq said:

So if I understand correctly, the current GB planes will be ported to the new project? It is for me still a bit unclear what does the new project means for the current GB series. Will it replace it? Will it be a new paid product which will receive the ‘old’ planes step by step?

 

Also a bit worried to read that unlocks are being considered. If it is within a pilot career then it can be fine, but please do not make it transfer to the multiplayer.

 

All in all, great update and thanks for your work! Looking forward to se more.

they just said unlocks were mistake and not that new project will have unlocks.

 

also i think its clear new project is new game not in any way compatable with this game, and airplanes in this game can be add in new game only if it pays off

 

 

[Youtch]

GREATLY appreciate all the insights of what is going behind the game. A long read but totally worth it.

 

Thanks for the transparency.

[Han]

1 hour ago, Blooddawn1942 said:

Thanks for the deep and honest view behind the scenes. Much appreciated. 

 

There was word of an Odessa module, not just the map. 

So you decided to go for a full release with accompanying planes then or did I read to much into it? 

 

Yup ))

[LukeFF]

46 minutes ago, smink1701 said:

I appreciate the update and all the information! I agree with your sentiment that above all IL2 is a combat flight simulation. A huge part of that is your experience in SP mode. What causes me to jump out of the game after five minutes is the endless turn circles during a dogfight.  

Or when my adversary outperforms everything I do … speed, turns, climbing, etc. by a factor of 10.
When I play Cliffs the game is very dated and has a number of issues, but AI seems much more realistic and therefore enjoyable. 
until you can crack the code and create a single player experience that is more engaging I will be a non-participant in future endeavors. 

 

Endless turn circles have not been a thing for a long time now, so unless this is recent behavior you have seen with the latest build, please do not spread disinformation about the current state of the AI.

[=SqSq=SignorMagnifico]

1 hour ago, III/JG52_Al-Azraq said:

So if I understand correctly, the current GB planes will be ported to the new project? It is for me still a bit unclear what does the new project means for the current GB series. Will it replace it? Will it be a new paid product which will receive the ‘old’ planes step by step?

 

Also a bit worried to read that unlocks are being considered. If it is within a pilot career then it can be fine, but please do not make it transfer to the multiplayer.

 

All in all, great update and thanks for your work! Looking forward to se more.

 

[6FG_Big_Al]

Thank you very much for the quite informative DD!

 

I  guess that clears some of the uncertainties surrounding GB
A part of me hoped the engine would get a refresh instead of a complete makeover but I can understand the reasoning behind it. I'm also happy that we will get odessa as a map pack with some planes to fly. I also hope that there will be some gap fillers for the German side, even if not, I still would be happy.

 

While I like that there will be the opportunity to also see our beloved planes in the new engine I'm a bit sceptical since it will probably take a lot of time to do so (as like with rofs planes & I would guess that won't be an imminent priority). I will keep an eye out for sure for your next product

[Dagwoodyt]

1 hour ago, smink1701 said:

I appreciate the update and all the information! I agree with your sentiment that above all IL2 is a combat flight simulation. A huge part of that is your experience in SP mode. What causes me to jump out of the game after five minutes is the endless turn circles during a dogfight.  

Or when my adversary outperforms everything I do … speed, turns, climbing, etc. by a factor of 10.
When I play Cliffs the game is very dated and has a number of issues, but AI seems much more realistic and therefore enjoyable. 
until you can crack the code and create a single player experience that is more engaging I will be a non-participant in future endeavors. 
 

One day I realized that I stay in the circle fight cause I'm not gaining position on the bandit, but am afraid of what might happen if I left the circle?

[Aapje]

I assume that the porting of planes would be primarily based on them being needed for new modules. For example, for a Korean War module, the P-51 and Yak-9 might be ported over.

 

But if the first couple of modules would be for non-European theaters, then even classics like the BF-109 might not make it over. Although I cannot image that the most famous planes won't arrive at some point. I would just not expect them very soon.

 

But the upside of the Korean and Pacific theatres is that we would get some very nice new planes as well.

Edited March 22, 2024 by Aapje

[Blooddawn1942]

50 minutes ago, Han said:

 

Yup ))

Thanks for the clarification. 

That's exciting news!

[Blooddawn1942]

1 hour ago, =SqSq=SignorMagnifico said:

 

To be honest, I don't mind to buy some upgrade packs like Flying Circus to keep the business going. None is working for free and every one needs to pay his bills. I don't expect to get stuff for free. That's just not my mentality. If there is work involved to get the old content to a new and I suspect way better standard, I'm willing to pay for it. 

Edited March 22, 2024 by Blooddawn1942

[jokash]

Oh wow,finally after long time,i save money for track ir5,a quality flight stick,decent PC and all IL:GB modules and now its abandon ship...new project on the way...forget about seeing GB grow to its fullest potential.(like career has such weird settings, cant select historical ratios of difficulty).Anyways wish you the best ?

[357th_KW]

2 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

I believe that the AI has tremendous room for improvement without regard to making it fly the plane more efficiently.  I mean human behavior and decision making.  Making the AI not see quite so well.  Making the AI leave combat when it is damaged or badly outnumbered.  Making the AI break off chases that seem fruitless.  This is also not simple, but it is possible without understanding the physics at a detailed level.  

 

 

I'd like to point out, that a lot of this is already achievable with the AI we have now.

 

Want the AI to leave when the fight has turned against it?  Give them all an on-damaged or on-killed trigger (depending on how cautious you want them to be) driving them to a medium level RTB waypoint, linked to the whole AI group in question, set to low alt and their highest possible speed - when the fight starts turning against them and one is damaged or killed, they'll all try to dive away for safety as best they can, without totally ignoring any threats.

 

Want them to not always chase people in a hyper-aggressive manner?  Use attack area commands instead of direct attacks, and replace those attack areas every few minutes - maybe a sequence of 3 zones, with 5 minute run times followed by an RTB waypoint.  Now your AI fighters will focus on the areas you want, and only chase for a short distance before giving up and heading back to their main objective.

 

The big improvement would be to get the AI to recognize clouds and have their visibility limited by them. 

[Aapje]

16 minutes ago, jokash said:

Oh wow,finally after long time,i save money for track ir5,a quality flight stick,decent PC and all IL:GB modules and now its abandon ship...new project on the way...forget about seeing GB grow to its fullest potential.(like career has such weird settings, cant select historical ratios of difficulty).Anyways wish you the best ?

 

A bit of a strange take. They are replacing large parts of the engine exactly because they want the game to grow to new heights, instead of its potential being limited.

 

The current engine has been used for over 10 years and will last a little while more. It also won't go away. You can still play the old modules when the next engine will come out. And of course the current engine will have remaining issues, but the new engine won't be perfect either.

 

Meanwhile, MSFS is already abandoning their current engine after 4 years.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

9 minutes ago, 357th_KW said:

 

I'd like to point out, that a lot of this is already achievable with the AI we have now.

 

Want the AI to leave when the fight has turned against it?  Give them all an on-damaged or on-killed trigger (depending on how cautious you want them to be) driving them to a medium level RTB waypoint, linked to the whole AI group in question, set to low alt and their highest possible speed - when the fight starts turning against them and one is damaged or killed, they'll all try to dive away for safety as best they can, without totally ignoring any threats.

 

Want them to not always chase people in a hyper-aggressive manner?  Use attack area commands instead of direct attacks, and replace those attack areas every few minutes - maybe a sequence of 3 zones, with 5 minute run times followed by an RTB waypoint.  Now your AI fighters will focus on the areas you want, and only chase for a short distance before giving up and heading back to their main objective.

 

The big improvement would be to get the AI to recognize clouds and have their visibility limited by them. 

Very true. A lot of what gets interpreted as "bad AI" are in fact mission scripting errors. I guess mission scripting makes it even harder to create a good AI - if a mission writer has the airplanes ignore all opposition and push through towards the target regardless, the players get angry because the AI doesn't drop their bombs and defend themselves. If they'd change the AI so that they'd defend themselves regardless, the mission writer gets angry because the aircraft won't follow orders.

 

 

PS. @Han shocked to hear about what's going on in Moscow right now. Regardless of "other things" that may be going on in Russia and my feelings about that, the killing of innocent civilians whose biggest crime is that they went out to have some fun, is horrible stuff and cannot be excused no matter what the motive of the perpetrators. I hope everyone from the team and their families are well.

[kendo]

Yes, horrible to see what is happening and hope all on team and their families are safe.

 

And much appreciate taking the time to produce this translation of the podcast. Much interesting info.

[LuftManu]

Hello team, 

First, I hope everything is allright. What a horrible day. Please be safe!

 

On the other hand, this is really excellent!!! I need to process everything, many thanks for the translation! 

 

[timothy55]

Thoughts are with you and yours guys .

Thanks for the podcast, did clarify a few things.

[Vishnu]

I need Cole's notes....

 

Just from a glance, it doesn't offer up too much new information.

 

[Lusekofte]

I find ai mates to be the biggest problem. The lack of interaction with them make a dead environment. For me enemy ai can ba as is. 
But I got to hand it to them. When I am sure I won’t be buying anything more they hand out the I 153. And just for getting it I will buy a module of whatever

[US103_Baer]

Appreciate the effort that went into creating this summary. It was an easy read and very useful. 

Thanks to whoever did this. 

[=SqSq=SignorMagnifico]

9 hours ago, Blooddawn1942 said:

To be honest, I don't mind to buy some upgrade packs like Flying Circus to keep the business going. None is working for free and every one needs to pay his bills. I don't expect to get stuff for free. That's just not my mentality. If there is work involved to get the old content to a new and I suspect way better standard, I'm willing to pay for it. 

While I would prefer to have my existing purchases migrated to the new engine (at least in stages) for free of charge, I see the sense in this statement. There is a time and cost factor for upgrading 3D models. If it helps the team to upgrade existing aircraft/terrains/etc. to the new standard, I could be convinced to pay a reasonable upgrade fee for it. 

[ST_Catchov]

I'm relieved to read the excavator and operator were unharmed along with Albert and his car. A potential disaster avoided. ?

[T24_Martin]

Like already mentioned... For me personally it would be absolutely fine to pay for GB modules that I already own, if they would be transferred to the new engine. There is work behind and I am willing to pay a reasonable price to honour this work. 

 

Maybe it could be a win-win. We get our beloved WW2 content and the team gets extra money with (hopefully) less workload then creating something from scratch.

 

The GB series is awesome! So thank you team for creating this and still improving the game! I am also exited for Korea! Looking forward to a bright flight sim future ?

[jollyjack]

13 hours ago, 357th_KW said:

The big improvement would be to get the AI to recognize clouds and have their visibility limited by them. 

 

That's for sure, but IMO impossible at least for current and even high class computers calculating power in regards of constant changing 'no fly 'zones for the Ai.

Unless someone comes up with a clever programming trick maybe. Clouds that trigger a FC command for the Ai?

[BMA_FlyingShark]

I would buy the next game if my old content can be included in there and I wouldn't mind paying extra for that, if there's a significant upgrade graphic wise and also content wise (fuel management, realistic navigation,...).

However, what are they gonna do with the Flying Circus planes then? Although I personally wouldn't mind paying all over for those too, I can see many people being turned off by the idea, especially those players who come from Rise Of Flight and have rebought their planes already once.

 

Have a nice day.

 

Edited March 23, 2024 by FlyingShark

[Panzerlang]

I have no issues paying for the same content we have now to be upgraded to a new engine. No different to buying a new OS once the previous one has seen it's best. But not if it ends up being trickled out bit by bit AND done back to front again. We still don't have the Eindecker, DH2 and etc so we can play WW1 from start to finish and I doubt I'd ever live to see WW2 fully done on the new engine with the current process.

But I'll be onboard for Korea, so long as it's released fully-canned, so to speak.

[Mysticpuma]

16 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

I believe that the AI has tremendous room for improvement without regard to making it fly the plane more efficiently.  I mean human behavior and decision making.  Making the AI not see quite so well.  Making the AI leave combat when it is damaged or badly outnumbered.  Making the AI break off chases that seem fruitless.  This is also not simple, but it is possible without understanding the physics at a detailed level.  

 

 

 

I remember posting this when Buddeye explained the issues of coding AI:

 

"I posted this elsewhere but as it relates to the Developers of Cliffs of Dover (prior to TFS), I thought others may be interested to read what went into the coding of Battle of Britain: Wings of Victory II.

 

Buddeye, who is credited with creating probably the best/most complex, reactive, proactive/defensive AI in a WW2 combat flight sim, was asked about coding the Ai for Cliffs of Dover, here was his reply:

"I am not sure if a commercial game developer would feel comfortable releasing his product (his source code). His source is his future with respect to new products which he plans to use as a baseline for future products. A flight sim developer must sell a string of products base on his engine to make any real money these days (you do not develop a new engine for only one product).  
The COD manager might be willing to assign a programmer to work with a committed team of AI testers who would test, offer suggestions, analysis, and refinements. All parties would need to understand that the project would be long term (multi-year) with updates maybe every 6 months. A new private forum could be used to coordinate the work (the BOBII approach).  
I do not want to bore you guys with BOBII but for those interested in AI (and I understand that some players are only into MP), I will offer a document. I offer the document to show an overview of BOBII AI's the scope and complexity. Please skip it if not interested and am sorry for boring anyone.  
Overview of the BOBII AI Performance and Design  The redesign of the AI Manoeuvre Selection  The redesign of the AI manoeuvre Selection Criteria was driven by the need to become more deterministic and less random in selecting AI manoeuvres. I felt the need to move in this direction to improve the AI offence and defence so the AI selection software had more control. Of course there is a big danger in this strategy. We do not want BOBII to become repeatable. This will become a fine line to follow in the future and I will need both our testers and customers help and feedback. 

 

Here is a summary of the new selection criteria design:

1. Altitude (how much altitude and rate of change) 
2. Speed (how much speed, and rate of change) 
3. Position of A/C to each other (none to tail, tail to tail, nose to beam, tail to beam or left, right, front, back)  To implement the new selection criteria I built a 3 X 6 matrix (a truth table) and many new programs. For each A/C (the unfriendly and the AI or the player), I designed programs to look at Altitude, Speed, and position and to first try and select the best manoeuvre option (aggressive or defence) based on AI skill level.  Altitude and speed can also be thought of as “energy” as altitude can be turned into speed.  
The new design uses the A/C’s current position, but I am thinking about implementing the A/C’s “lead” position (his future position which would be a small delta in the future).  
Anyway, this new design is a long term work BOBII AI strategy (work in progress) that I can work on as I have new ideas for the AI from our testers and customers. It should position the BOBII AI design for future improvements by using more deterministic rather than random selection criteria. 

 

The goal is very simple "to improve the AI performance" and keep BOBII the best off-line AI.  My gut feel based on my experience and testing is that the AI is now stronger at selecting the best/correct manoeuvre, avoiding bad positions (like low altitude), better at avoiding low energy, and in general a bit stronger fighter and defender. Of course, the Player will always “win” with experience/practice but if we give the player a better fight (scrap), I personally consider that real progress.  
BTW, I also gave the Terminator AI a bit of boost in performance and tune-up so you might want to try it out. With the boost in Terminator performance, he was getting “cocky” so I implemented a spin-out feature. The Terminator flies so close to the edge now that he has a tendency to “spin-out”. This is when you can get him.  I also implemented a new AI feature called “Flying Factor (FF)”. This is the knowledge of the AI pilot to fly a given manoeuvre (experience) and how well the AI pilot will actually fly the given manoeuvre (skill).

 

The FF is based on the Skill Level (customer selected in Instant Action Missions and software assigned in the Campaign). The Terminator AI is assigned a Skill Level of Hero2 (the highest in the game) so that is where he gets his boost in performance (edge).  AI Manoeuvre Selection is KEY  First, the BOBII AI has a special case for selection called “Evasive manoeuvre selection”. 
The Evasive manoeuvre is required when an AI is shot at (either a hit or near miss). The AI will select a defensive manoeuvre based on the criteria/data for both Player and enemy AI (speed, altitude, and the position of the targeting AI and the AI being targeted with respect to each other).  The first key decision to be made is to select either an aggressive or defensive manoeuvre. This is a complex decision based on the available information on both the Player and the Enemy AI or the friendly AI and the enemy AI. 

 

The data considered for both Player and enemy is speed, altitude, and the position of the targeting AI and the AI being targeted with respect to each other.  After selecting either an aggressive or defensive, then a random approach is used to select a category (choose good, choose bad, or choose “neither” good nor bad manoeuvre).
Manoeuvres are then divided into three parts Climb, Horizontal, and dive for each of our categories (choose good, choose bad, and choose neither good nor bad manoeuvre).  

 

The individual manoeuvre selection is then based on speed, altitude, and position of both the player and the enemy AI.  In BOBII we have over 80 complex manoeuvres for selection (both the aggressive and defensive manoeuvres) for the fighters (Spit,Hurri,109.110) and over 50 simple manoeuvres for selection for the JU87 and Defiant. The following are BOBII’s complex manoeuvres (each manoeuvre is a significant program for completing the assigned manoeuvre): 

MANOEUVRE_SELECT

MANOEUVRE_LOOKROUND

MANOEUVRE_WELDEDWINGMAN

MANOEUVRE_BAILOUT

MANOEUVRE_TOPCOVER

MANOEUVRE_FORCETOPCOVER

MANOEUVRE_LINEABREAST

MANOEUVRE_PINCER

MANOEUVRE_MULTIWAVE

MANOEUVRE_DIVEANDZOOM

MANOEUVRE_INSIDELOOP

MANOEUVRE_LAGPURSUIT

MANOEUVRE_SPLITMANOEUVRE

MANOEUVRE_HEADON

MANOEUVRE_LINEASTERN

MANOEUVRE_VICATTACK

MANOEUVRE_BARRELROLLATTACK

MANOEUVRE_SCISSORS

MANOEUVRE_MILDSCISSORS

MANOEUVRE_TURNINGFIGHT

MANOEUVRE_SPLITS

MANOEUVRE_ZOOMANDDROP

MANOEUVRE_STRAIGHTANDLEVEL

MANOEUVRE_SPINOUT

MANOEUVRE_DIVEFORHOME

MANOEUVRE_GOHOME

MANOEUVRE_MAKEFORFRIENDLY

MANOEUVRE_MOVEAWAY

MANOEUVRE_QUICKROLL

MANOEUVRE_IMMELMANNTURN

MANOEUVRE_IMMELMANN

MANOEUVRE_STAYWITHPREY

MANOEUVRE_CLIMBFORHOME

MANOEUVRE_STRAIGHTDIVE

MANOEUVRE_OUTSIDELOOP

MANOEUVRE_SHOOTTOFRIGHTEN

MANOEUVRE_SHOOTTOOEARLY

MANOEUVRE_GAINHEIGHT

MANOEUVRE_LAGROLL

MANOEUVRE_EXTENSION

MANOEUVRE_DIVINGROLL

MANOEUVRE_REVERSETURN

MANOEUVRE_SELFASBAIT

MANOEUVRE_JINK

MANOEUVRE_BREAKTURN

MANOEUVRE_LAZYTURN

MANOEUVRE_BREAKLOW

MANOEUVRE_BREAKHIGH

MANOEUVRE_BREAK90

MANOEUVRE_BREAK180

MANOEUVRE_HIGBARRELROLL

MANOEUVRE_PANICTURN

MANOEUVRE_TURNANDRUN

MANOEUVRE_LOWALT

MANOEUVRE_ZOOM

MANOEUVRE_INTERCEPTHIGH

MANOEUVRE_INTERCEPTLOW

MANOEUVRE_GAINSPEED

MANOEUVRE_HEADONATTACK

MANOEUVRE_LUFBERRY

MANOEUVRE_STEEPDIVE

MANOEUVRE_UPANDUNDER

MANOEUVRE_STALLTURN

MANOEUVRE_SLASHINGATTACK

MANOEUVRE_CLIMBTURN

MANOEUVRE_ROLL360

MANOEUVRE_STRAFFE

MANOEUVRE_TRANSITION

MANOEUVRE_PEELOFF

MANOEUVRE_SNAPSHOT

MANOEUVRE_STAYONTAIL

MANOEUVRE_FLYTHROUGHCLOUD

MANOEUVRE_REGROUP

MANOEUVRE_DISENGAGED

MANOEUVRE_SPINRECOVERY

MANOEUVRE_COLLIDE

MANOEUVRE_LAST

MANOEUVRE_ALIGNMENT

MANOEUVRE_DROPANDZOOM

MANOEUVRE_COLLISIONAVOIDANCE

MANOEUVRE_TURNTOHDGANDPITCH

MANOEUVRE_SCREWYOUGUYSIMGOINGHOME  

The AI Performance Criteria/Dependencies  Skill Level  The AI performance is dependent on AI Skill Level (which is customer selected in Instant Action and SW assigned in the campaign). BOBII AI do make mistakes (spin, crash, dumb manoeuvres, bad judgment, shoot late , shoot bad, etc) which is after all very human.  The skill level of the AI is key in making decisions on about everything with respect to AI performance like (1) how well the AI fly, shoot, shoot fast, slow, accuracy, or not shoot, (2) how well the AI fly, what manoeuvres are selected, and how well the AI will fly the chosen manoeuvre.  

Random Numbers (Luck of the draw)  The BOBII AI A/C is also dependent on luck (specifically on random numbers). Random number decisions are coded throughout the AI code. BOBII’s random approach keeps BOBII from doing the same thing each time. Even something as simple as the direction to start a manoeuvre (left or right), I will use a random number to decide (why hard code something when you can use a random number).   For example, most BOBII vertical manoeuvres use a random number to assign a length of time to for a specific vertical manoeuvre (Like Zoom). 
The AI pilot will sometimes cut off early, or late, or somewhere in the middle. If early the manoeuvre may carry too much speed and if late the AI may slow down so much that control is lost (very human).  

The bottom line is that the customer will always see a somewhat different manoeuvre (very good, good, not so good, and loss of control) both because of the random implementation and the different physic’s parameters (speed, roll, heading, pitch, and overall energy) going into each manoeuvre.  The very real downside of random numbers is it is very hard to test (not repeatable) and the processing power used.  Conditions  The conditions for each manoeuvre are always different (energy, speed, altitude, skill, damage, and enemy position). 
This also changes how the manoeuvre is performed. A damaged AI will not fly as well as an undamaged AI."

 

Edited March 23, 2024 by Mysticpuma

[ACG_Saintt]

Thank you for providing all the background and detail. It is enlightening. Keep up the good work and hang in there.