Quote:
Originally Posted by sniperton
I'm eager to know how this 'fear of death' or 'fear of self-destruction' could be programmed. Perhaps the closest analogy is the risk-evaluating algorithm of self-driven cars where the safety of the passenger is first priority.
|
That seems like a considerably more complex algorithm than I was thinking of.
A simpler way might be for AI to count up all the enemy planes in sight, compare them to the number of friendly planes in sight, multiply or divide by factors such as favorable/unfavorable position (altitude advantage/ disadvantage, advantageous/ disadvantageous attack position as defined by QMB), relative quality of planes involved, damage to plane and crew, and assigned mission.
If the resulting number is above a certain threshold, AI aircraft will attack. Otherwise, they will avoid contact or disengage.
Repeat this algorithm after every attack.
I think that the AI already does something like this.
Average or better fighters will always take a head-on shot against a level bomber if closing from the front. Otherwise, they make high side attacks or high or level beam or flank attacks, depending on relative position (although if you want to get picky, USN pilots were trained to make high side and high beam attacks, not head-on attacks). Only rookies will attack level bombers from the rear.
The exception is that flying boats/float planes will always be attacked from below - from front, beam, or flank. Attack aircraft (including strike fighters and attack bombers) will be attacked from any quarter other than head-on.
I think that one of the problems that IL2 AI suffers from, which might not be correctable, is that it only defines three classes of aircraft - level bombers, attack, and fighters.
It would have been better if every plane had been given a rating from 1-10 for speed, maneuverability, offensive firepower, defensive firepower, armor, and ruggedness, plus yes/no operators for various types of ordinance, commo, and radar (e.g., torpedoes, bombs, mines, rockets, heavy cannon, radio receiver, radio transmitter, tail warning radar), and modifiers for assigned role (interceptor, air superiority fighter, bomber destroyer, level bomber, level attack bomber, anti-shipping, ground assault, dive bomber, torpedo bomber, ASW, ASR, artillery spotting/FAC, low level PR, high level PR, transport, cargo drop, paratroop/agent drop, agent insertion/extraction)
Ratings like these would allow the potential for more sophisticated and flexible AI.
For example, an interceptor fighter with a serious edge in speed (a rating of 10 vs. 6), but inferior maneuverability (a rating of 3 vs. 5), is always going to try to BnZ.
Or, a plane with a high level of ruggedness and armor, plus high offensive firepower, is more likely to take a head-on shot against an opponent with weak offensive firepower.
You could also use these ratings to abstractly determine the outcome of AI vs. AI fights which take place far out of sight of the player, or missions flown just by AI during a campaign.