Outperformed by AI every single time

[palker4]

The fact that i cannot build a flight sim does not mean that i have no right to complain about a product that i bought with money and that i expected to work properly a YEAR ago when i bought it.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by palker4

The fact that i cannot build a flight sim does not mean that i have no right to complain about a product that i bought with money and that i expected to work properly a YEAR ago when i bought it.

Where you complaing?

Sorry I didn't notice your complaing..

All I noticed was you asking 'how hard can it be' followed by you answering your own question by saying 'sounds simple'.

At which point I just assumed your had a software background in AI development..

But now based on your most resent post, I see that your statment of 'sounds simple' did not stem from someone with a software background and is thus meaningless

[palker4]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

Where you complaing?

Sorry I didn't notice your complaing..

All I noticed was you asking 'how hard can it be' followed by you answering your own question by saying 'sounds simple'.

At which point I just assumed your had a software background in AI development..

But now based on your most resent post, I see that your statment of 'sounds simple' did not stem from someone with a software background and is thus meaningless

That was meant ironically hence a Jeremy Clarkson picture. I guess your just not Top Gear fan then.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by palker4

That was meant ironically hence a Jeremy Clarkson picture. I guess your just not Top Gear fan then.

Emmm never heard of him.. That and I am more of a Top Shot fan!

[addman]

With all due respect to the OP, CoD is a combat flight simulator. To expect everything to be 100% accurate or that every plane is modeled exactly as the real thing is just asking too much. Same goes for AI, I've realized as of late that to model a complex AI with true CEM handling in CoD would simply destroy any PC rig out there, also I don't think MG could pull it off anyway. The CEM in CoD is almost as simplified as in IL-2 1946, only difference is click-able cockpits. This is no critique to CoD, it's just the way things are. As long as they keep tweaking those FM's as close as possible to real life I'm a happy camper. It would be cool seeing the AI overheat and burn their engines though, really cool.

[ParaB]

It's not that the AI in CloD isn't perfect. It's that it blatantly cheats, completely disregarding the aircrafts' flight models, especially the roll rate. The only solution so far is crippling the AI to the point where it doesn't fly ANY rolls at all anymore. Which just sucks.

[tintifaxl]

Originally Posted by addman

With all due respect to the OP, CoD is a combat flight simulator. To expect everything to be 100% accurate or that every plane is modeled exactly as the real thing is just asking too much. Same goes for AI, I've realized as of late that to model a complex AI with true CEM handling in CoD would simply destroy any PC rig out there, also I don't think MG could pull it off anyway. The CEM in CoD is almost as simplified as in IL-2 1946, only difference is click-able cockpits. This is no critique to CoD, it's just the way things are. As long as they keep tweaking those FM's as close as possible to real life I'm a happy camper. It would be cool seeing the AI overheat and burn their engines though, really cool.

Of course you have to cut corners in AI programming, but even the AI in IL2 4.11 overheats their engines and can't see through clouds now. Why shouldn't that be possible in the CloD engine?

[addman]

Originally Posted by tintifaxl

Of course you have to cut corners in AI programming, but even the AI in IL2 4.11 overheats their engines and can't see through clouds now. Why shouldn't that be possible in the CloD engine?

Don't ask me, I'm not a game developer but my guess is that CoD is a far more complex game to alter stuff in than 1946. It's probably not just "cut-n-paste" coding that can be done with CoD. Also there are most likely a whole lot more "parameters" and stuff in play which makes it extra hard to code a "realistic" AI. It probably won't happen in the near future but someday CoD is probably gonna have spectacular AI. As with anything to do with the new IL-2 series I guess patience is the keyword. I'm not flying CoD anymore but it's always interesting to stop by here and see the progress being made, let's see how BoM pans out.

[adonys]

Originally Posted by addman

Don't ask me, I'm not a game developer but my guess is..

then stop babling nonse. IL2CoD's AI is NOT more complicate than the AI of Skyrim. Actually, it's even simpler. And that without even counting the AI manager, and the number of actors from a free world like Skyrim, which are very complex respectively huge, and the ones from IL2CoD.

[rga]

Actually the G-50 is not that hard to catch. I fly the Hurricane very often and G-50 is the only opponent that can makes fun. German aircrafts are just too fast. Problem is: Hurricane has miserable acceleration and takes forever to get to top speed. Lower the RPM to about 2800 and flat dive should be useful. In term of speed, CloD is not as bad as IL-2, where AI just laughs at you and flies away.
Sadly the same cannot be said for AI maneuver. They can do insanely fast roll, and use it for effect. There is nothing which ruins the gameplay more than an AI rolling literally around your gunsight. You just give up all of your hard-built speed to place the pipper over this SOB for just a bit longer than an eyeblink. The new alpha patch makes it worse. My inner conspiracy Keanu Reeves told me that Luthier used old IL-2 code to update his AI.
Enough complaining. Good news is: with the AI scales, you can dumb down AI practically to the level of grandma-driven car: They are slow, unresponsive and useless. Perhaps with enough testing, one will find out the optimal setting. I just do not have enough time.
AI does not need to be realistic. It just has to be believable.