Suggestions for AI Improvements in Future Updates

[ben_wh]

For the AI warning, the idea is to have the communication with AI more meaningful and useful in making tactical decision. So having the AI wingman to warn you of immediate danger, even if passively on your request, is along that direction.

Other aspects I'd like to suggest (_if_ DT plans to tweak the AI more in the future) are:

1) More self-preservation instinct among AI planes - on when to break off an attack/bomb run, when to jettison bombs, break formation and head for home when its formation is decimated

2) More variations in behavior among AIs - some are more disciplined and press home the attack no matter what, some break formation easily when attacked.

The following is not a request but reminiscing of earlier flight sim experience ...

If I recall correctly, in Rowan's MiG Alley, not only are there training and behavioral differences among AI pilots in Russian, Chinese and North Korean MiG squadrons, but recent successes or defeats in the dynamic campaign also affected AI behavior. For example, AI squadrons that had been successful in recent missions exhibited more aggressive behavior, while those that suffered attrition sometimes hanged back or disengaged more readily. In some missions you would see some brightly painted MiGs from an expert squadron and you knew you'd be in for a tough fight. In such case the AI behavior was very successful in raising the immersion factor in that you, the human player, suspended your disbelief and almost attributed human quality to your computer-controlled opponents.

Cheers,

[sniperton]

Originally Posted by ben_wh

If I recall correctly, in Rowan's MiG Alley, not only are there training and behavioral differences among AI pilots in Russian, Chinese and North Korean MiG squadrons, but recent successes or defeats in the dynamic campaign also affected AI behavior. For example, AI squadrons that had been successful in recent missions exhibited more aggressive behavior, while those that suffered attrition sometimes hanged back or disengaged more readily. In some missions you would see some brightly painted MiGs from an expert squadron and you knew you'd be in for a tough fight. In such case the AI behavior was very successful in raising the immersion factor in that you, the human player, suspended your disbelief and almost attributed human quality to your computer-controlled opponents.

Yeah, a dynamic AI would be great, but it's only possible in campaign games which the Il-2 engine is not designed for (campaigns are generated as a series of static missions by 3rd party applications like DGEN and DCG). IF the AI were composed of various openly accessible skills (as major_kudo suggested on the pattern of CLoD, and many others opposed with reasonable arguments), THEN it would also be possible to dynamically affect AI behaviour via 3rd party campaign generators. I mean we could create "brave" AI squads without corresponding good shooting skills, and the like. Just brainstorming, don't shoot me.

[major.kudo]

These are the pictures which I drew before.

First, I think this is just a problem.
http://gachopin.no-ip.info/kudo/Fighter_2.jpg
I think the cause of this problem is a thing by too exact shooting.
I want to play more historical air combat.

I thought that it would be solvable by this.
http://gachopin.no-ip.info/kudo/AI_Level.jpg
However, this may change greatly the victory or defeat of a battle for dynamic campaign etc.
I think that the result which the maker of campaign does not mean may be brought about.

Then, I thought that it was a thing that what is necessary is just this.
http://gachopin.no-ip.info/kudo/AI_skill_edit.jpg
It seems that however, it is not so reputable now.
:
:
:
So, I added change.
http://gachopin.no-ip.info/kudo/AI_skill_edit2.jpg
Everyone, what do you think?

-

I point out another one.
http://gachopin.no-ip.info/kudo/Unreal_gunshooting.jpg
At least, I think that impossible to the pilot of rookie and average.

Sorry, my poor English.

[ben_wh]

To sniperton,

I understand the limitation of the IL-2 engine and the MiG Alley reference was not a request but more of a reminiscence of past flight sim experience.

Who knows, may be useful as creative brainstorming when DT is thinking about AI update for 5.00?

[sniperton]

Originally Posted by ben_wh

I understand the limitation of the IL-2 engine and the MiG Alley reference was not a request but more of a reminiscence of past flight sim experience.

It was clear to me, but I liked the idea, and upon some conditions it could be even feasible IMO. Campaign generators do improve the skills of the AI over time, but they do it according to how AI skill can be set in the game -- in a 'monolithic' way (rookie>average>veteran>ace), where one particular skill (say, shooting accuracy) develops hand in hand with others (say, agressiveness). I'm pretty sure that an 'average' Japanese pilot in RL had a different 'skills composition' than his American adversary, even if they both were on the same 'average' level in general. What I suggest is not a full breakdown of all particular skills via sliders (like in CloD), but to allow different 'attitudes' within the same skill level. Just think of the difference in habits between Manfred and Lothar von Richthofen.

[majorfailure]

Originally Posted by major.kudo

These are the pictures which I drew before.

First, I think this is just a problem.
...
I think the cause of this problem is a thing by too exact shooting.
I want to play more historical air combat.

I thought that it would be solvable by this.
...
However, this may change greatly the victory or defeat of a battle for dynamic campaign etc.
I think that the result which the maker of campaign does not mean may be brought about.

Part of the problem may be too good gunnery by the AI, but greater part is IMHO the fight to the death attitude - AI usually doesn't retrat - real life pilots in a faster plane wouldn't wait till all of their wing is wiped by superior opposition.

Originally Posted by major.kudo

Then, I thought that it was a thing that what is necessary is just this.
http://gachopin.no-ip.info/kudo/AI_skill_edit.jpg
It seems that however, it is not so reputable now.
:
:
:
So, I added change.
http://gachopin.no-ip.info/kudo/AI_skill_edit2.jpg
Everyone, what do you think?

Better, use only single gunnery skill maybe (bad marksmen necessarily are bad deflection shooters, and good marksmen probably are good deflection shooters) and add maybe bombing/torpedo ability, add character (agressive/timid) and maybe some leadership skill.
And make much less grades of each talent, three to five (inept/(less than average)/average/(good)/excellent)

Originally Posted by major.kudo

I point out another one.
http://gachopin.no-ip.info/kudo/Unreal_gunshooting.jpg
At least, I think that impossible to the pilot of rookie and average.

Sorry, my poor English.

It may be unrealistic, but as a player I do it a lot, too, you have nearly endless ammo in a 190 so you can try to get the enemy even with low probability snap shots. And you get a feel where the enemy is and where he will be - even if he is temporarily out of sight you can make the shot, and even as a not so great pilot you can IMHO - difference should be ace makes maybe 1 in 5 no-look-shots and rookie gets 1 in 100 or the like

[Notorious M.i.G.]

Originally Posted by majorfailure

It may be unrealistic, but as a player I do it a lot, too, you have nearly endless ammo in a 190 so you can try to get the enemy even with low probability snap shots. And you get a feel where the enemy is and where he will be - even if he is temporarily out of sight you can make the shot, and even as a not so great pilot you can IMHO - difference should be ace makes maybe 1 in 5 no-look-shots and rookie gets 1 in 100 or the like

The difference between AI and player guesswork tends to be evident, though - try rolling into a different angled turn while you're in their blindspot and the AI still seems to visibly track your movement

Personally, since TD made it clear that AI have subset skills a la CloD, I think it would be nice to see a popup window like CloD's FMB that gives the mission builder an option to nudge around their strengths and weaknesses, as per major.kudo's example. Having a good maneuver fight is fun, but sometimes the single .303 to the head from 500m in a sharp turn dampens the excitement a bit. I know these things happen, but I seem to get a disproportionate amount of PK's from the AI as compared to human players (maybe because the player is generally near the "center" of the 3D model, and the AI will always use the central point of the model for targeting as opposed to any firing solution that will connect)

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Notorious M.i.G.

I know these things happen, but I seem to get a disproportionate amount of PK's from the AI as compared to human players (maybe because the player is generally near the "center" of the 3D model, and the AI will always use the central point of the model for targeting as opposed to any firing solution that will connect)

Same here. While it's reasonable for AI to aim at the aircraft's center, less experienced human pilots will give too little deflection, while IMO more experienced human pilots will give a little bit too much lead in an attempt to take out the engine on single-engined planes, since it's a larger target.

A quick fix for AI gunnery accuracy would be for Rookies and Average pilots to not lead their targets sufficiently, Veterans to give their target too much lead, and for Aces to get it "just right" aiming more or less at the target's CG or vulnerable parts of multi-engined planes.

[Jami]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

Same here. While it's reasonable for AI to aim at the aircraft's center, less experienced human pilots will give too little deflection, while IMO more experienced human pilots will give a little bit too much lead in an attempt to take out the engine on single-engined planes, since it's a larger target.

That's just what happens with human pilots in virtual skies. Rookies that I know shoot the enemies always when possible and hope to get some hits - and waste their bullets. More skilled guys try to hit the fuselage and most skilled aim at engines and even bomber pilots when attacking head on. That's how it goes in my sqn with pilots who have 1 to 10 years of experience in virtual combat flying.

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

A quick fix for AI gunnery accuracy would be for Rookies and Average pilots to not lead their targets sufficiently, Veterans to give their target too much lead, and for Aces to get it "just right" aiming more or less at the target's CG or vulnerable parts of multi-engined planes.

If we got this change, my sqn would be veeery happy...

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by major.kudo

I point out another one.
http://gachopin.no-ip.info/kudo/Unreal_gunshooting.jpg
At least, I think that impossible to the pilot of rookie and average.

Even a rookie pilot will make a guess and fire a bunch of rounds to see if they can score a hit in those kinds of situations.

Prior to the AI upgrades the AI could see 360 degrees and would make these shots regardless. With the upgrade the AI could no longer see through their aircraft but that meant adding some routines to change how the AI did aiming. With the upgrade they will now estimate the target angle and make a deflection shot guess not unlike how human pilots behave.

You are probably on to something that the Rookie pilots are perhaps too successful in this area. The effect can be toned down surely. But its not unrealistic for an average to veteran to ace pilot to be able to make this shot.

With the FW190 in particular I got to a point where I was firing blind a lot of the time and destroying my target. I'd follow the target for a while and then once I was into firing position I'd pull the stick back and although I couldn't actually see the target I'd have the whole trajectory worked out in my head and I'd score a killing shot say 7 or 8 times out of 10. No reason the AI at perhaps the veteran level to be able to do that kind of shot semi-reliably. The rookie AI... maybe not as much as it does.