Korea AI

[Stonehouse]

Possibly still too early yet but, if possible, could we get a briefing room episode devoted to improvements in AI please? 

 

Specifically in my mind it would be good to know about improvements to AI such as they use real life formations, 1950s wingman tactics (eg fluid four, welded pair, moving from patrol position into fighting position on contact), flak avoidance, 1950s ground attack tactics (eg aircraft attacking from different directions using timing over the target to best survive ground fire) etc. etc. , different attack profiles on different aerial targets (eg bombers v's fighters), changes to how skill levels are applied (eg something different to the hard coded ranges for the AI to open fire)

 

As part of this some details of improvements to human led AI formations and how orders to your AI flight will improve. eg being able to order the formation to close up or spread out or using elements of the formation to execute different attacks (simple eg low element high element to increase chances the enemy only spots one element and to force enemy choices on the merge). 

 

I'm not sure of the North Korean doctrines but presume them to be somewhat similar if less experienced in execution but in an ideal world it would be nice as practical processing limits allow to see the UN aircraft AI approach behaviour along the lines of that described in Blesse's document on 1950s ACM and tactical formations and North Korean aircraft act according to their doctrines.

 

 

[BlitzPig_EL]

As to AI, I would at least want the ability to set their gunnery skill level separately from their flying skill level.  This alone would make for more realistic engagements. 

Edited July 28 by BlitzPig_EL
Clarity

[Avimimus]

An ability to disengage is very important.

 

The Mig-15 favouring climbing disengagements (vs. diving in the F-86)... would seem to require being able to assign types of aircraft (or different flights of aircraft) different sets preferred (or possible) manoeuvres. Ideally this would be done in the mission editor.

[[CPT]Crunch]

Hope there's a rules of engagement logic on the border built in, Mig's making use of it to disengage when a disadvantage develops, and allies getting penalized for flagrantly violating the rules by crossing over too deep and long.

[=MERCS=JenkemJunkie]

I hope we get the option to put some fight into them, it'd get pretty boring if they run away all the time, or are baby seals.

[Dauntless]

6 minutes ago, =MERCS=JenkemJunkie said:

"baby seals." 

 

[Avimimus]

On 7/28/2025 at 10:51 AM, =MERCS=JenkemJunkie said:

I hope we get the option to put some fight into them, it'd get pretty boring if they run away all the time, or are baby seals.

 

It'd be good to have realism options for the campaign...

 

1) Having AI that would realistically disengage most of the time (using proper hit and fade tactics)

1) Having a campaign that would have realistic flight densities (e.g. Mig's and other fighters are usually not encountered over much of the map)

 

vs.

 

2) Having AI that prefers to be more aggressive

2) Having a campaign where more Mig-15Bis are released to train up Chinese squadrons, thousands of Il-10 are released, along with the remaining Tu-2 as night bombers etc.

 

I'd rather have one option that'd satisfy each audience - rather than picking a middle-road that satisfies no one...

[=MERCS=JenkemJunkie]

Yeah different options is ideal, those 2 tastes aren't compatible.

[Enceladus828]

I don’t know if anyone else has encountered this (I sent over the Track files for this), whenever you bomb an airbase and then fly back to home base, if all of your wingmen have been taken down and you are like 5 or so miles away, all the enemy fighters swarm in on you as if they have very precise onboard radar or real-time tracking. I had a case flying a Razorback P-47 on the AQMB on the BoN map (damaged by Flak) where that happened and then while 200 feet above the channel a pair of Bf-109s at 8,000 feet dropped their bombs and came after me. As if all the airborne aircraft or abandoning your planned ground attack to relentlessly go after a lone fighter miles away or thousands of feet below mattered more than protecting the base from a potential Wave 2 attack or your intended mission.

 

I know that there are a number of AI things that will never be in GBs but I hope that what I discussed won’t be the case in Korea especially with piston fighters and possibly back ported in someway to GBs.

 

Thank you