Can't get AI wingmen to attack

finchOU · #1 03-26-2013, 09:28 PM

okay...I don't even know how the way point system works. I end up winging it an flying to where I need to be. Is there a "trip" function with waypoints? IE i fly to a waypoint and it rolls to the next one?

I don't have waypoints on the map....I can only use the Comm menus to figure out Target waypoint. Then I fly there and nothing happens.....so I don't know.

SlipBall · #2 03-26-2013, 10:11 PM

It sounds like to me that your group are just too far away from the AI's orders given in the waypoint...try this, in the realism page over on the right side, un-check the visual aids. Now you can pull up the map to see if you are on course for the mission. When you can, read up on fmb guide and how to set waypoints. You can re-check visual aids when you are more knowledge in how it all works in game

4H_Ccrashh · #3 03-27-2013, 08:38 PM

I've long given up on my wingmen doing anything but follow me around. I'm playing single player campaigns. We were a three ship and were bouced by 4 109's. I managed to get two but my wingmen just follwed me around. They never engaged the other two fighters. After a while the 109's ran low on fuel and left for home.

When we got back to base I could not order my wingmen to RTB. We were on the last waypoint and they continued to follow me. Request landing? nothing,, nothing worked. I ended up landing and my wingmen crashed and died.

I know that the first post on this ai commnds was posted in 2008. Will there ever be a fix for this?

SlipBall · #4 03-27-2013, 09:12 PM

Well it is unfortunate that the AI were changed a bit in the rewrite, but thats what people wanted, change. Now AI aren't what they used be and thats a shame because they were very good when set correctly.

4H_Ccrashh · #5 03-27-2013, 10:17 PM

Well maybe at some point the folks that make these sims will listen to suggestons,

but not let the inmates run the asylum.

What I mean is that maybe we all got a little too enthusiastic about waht we were looking for in the perfect flight sim and buried the developers with a list of thigs that at the time could not be incorperated into a usable sim..

Cliffs of Dover.

In the future I hope the guys that take the time to make this cool stuff will listen,,,,,

but know when to ignore.

Stick with what is do-able and not kill themselves trying to please the techno geeks looking for a rust spot or an oil drip on a cowling so they can sit back and go "Hey honey come check this out!! Isn't that cool!" The wife will stroll over disinterested and say "Thats nice dear" and that will be as far as it goes.

COD is a perfect example. A dream that was awesme in concept, ruined by trying to please everyone.

Years in delay,, hyped talk,, cool pics and videos of stuff like the grass blowing in the wind..

I mean who the heck thought of that puppy?

Its a flight sim. You see the grass for what? 1 minute on startup and take off and 2 minutes for landing taxi and shutdown? What the heck do we need animated grass or trees blowing n the wind for? Except for those two times mentioned, the only time you are close enough to appreciate the grass or the blowing tree leaves is when it is coming thorugh your windscreen as you become a lawn dart.

Flight sims need four things..

1 Terrain that looks ok on the ground,, good but NOT PERFECT. Ground that looks "believable" From the cockpit at speed or at altitude,, forget the "on the field" taxi stuff.

2. Detailed aircraft,, and I don't mean count the rivets detail.. You don't get that close to an enemy plane in a fight. I'm not counting oil stains or bugs splattered on his wind screen in a fight. The only cool thing that needs to be modeled in a fight on an enemy plane is damage and REALLY cool flames as you light them on fire.. (of course fire comes with cool smoke).

3. As realistic a flight model as can be programmed.

4. A sim that can lessen numbers 1 and 2 so you can have large formations and epic fights without turning the average computer into a slide show..

And since I'm venting (well not too much,, I do like COD.)

We don't need all the extra voices on the RT,, I have found a HUGE tip to get COD to not give you multiple stutters in a fight is to TURN off the AI voices. Every time some AI has a bit to offer over the RT its a stutter.. For the first time.. After that that phrase is cached,, but there are so many little snippets of conversation programmed into COD to "Get the FeeL" that it makes the beginning of a fight a nightmare.

Vent off.... (small vent I'm not that angry just have a lot of things runnng through the brain.)

I've heard the guys are working on a new sim based on the engine used in Rise of Flight.

COD was promised to be a heart stopper, after many delays and years late it was a dud,, As far as I can tell we are left with that dud with no hope of it being fixed to be even close to what it was originally promised to be.

Are we to take them at their word that this next one will be any better?

I offered to be a tester of COD.. I heard nothing..

I WAS a beta tester for Rise Of Flight.

I'd like to Beta this new sim.. I'm not looking for extreme perfection, or pretty little gizmos on the ground for eye candy.. I'm looking for a Combat Flight Simulator.. Where no one ,, AI or human has an advantage.

Oh last rant.. (Soorry)

Can we please have a sim where the AI don't always climb as max performance... Unless the world was on fire,, pilots made it a point to not beat up on their engines. Every pilot knew and still knows they would need that engine later when it counted. Climb power settings were designed to be a balance of performance and engine longevity.. And no flight leader ever used power settings that required his mates to burn up engines to keep up.. Leaders like that found themselves in the ADJ office getting assigned to maintenance hops to test repaired aircraft.

Small rant off .. AGAIN,, sorry guys.

I hope this next sim is a ball breaker and a heart stopper.. I know I'll be buying it.

4H_Ccrashh · #6 03-27-2013, 11:52 PM

When you guys build the next sim,, don't build it on a CRAY computer.
It took me 4 years past the release of IL2 to have a computer that could run it took look even marginally like the screenshots posted online..

Just in the last eight months I had a computer that could do a fair job at running Cliffs of Dover.

TIP:

It may look great in a testing lab on a computer that you spent thousands of dollars on to specifically design a flight sim, but to John Q Nobody , we get a product that is unusable or to make usable we have to dial so much back we might as well be playing European Air War. AHHH now that was a fun time!!!

finchOU · #7 03-28-2013, 06:45 AM

Nice rant!! haha

4H,

Do you mean Aces over Europe??

SlipBall · #8 03-28-2013, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4H_Ccrashh

When you guys build the next sim,, don't build it on a CRAY computer.
It took me 4 years past the release of IL2 to have a computer that could run it took look even marginally like the screenshots posted online..

Just in the last eight months I had a computer that could do a fair job at running Cliffs of Dover.

TIP:

It may look great in a testing lab on a computer that you spent thousands of dollars on to specifically design a flight sim, but to John Q Nobody , we get a product that is unusable or to make usable we have to dial so much back we might as well be playing European Air War. AHHH now that was a fun time!!!

Oleg designed the sim for the future and had trouble getting it to perform on the average PC out there today. The box specs should have been more realistic and it should have read beta WIP