![]() |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
There are historical examples of planes bravely slogging through fighters and flak to certain doom (e.g., Fairey Battles at the Albert Canal or the Sedan Bridge, the kamikazes), but I think they're notably rare. Suicidal morale aside, it's also worth pointing out that all levels AI is still stupid about not using "nap of the earth" flying and other tricks to minimize flak effectiveness. AI should also selectively take out the first vehicle in a convoy, or the locomotive, when making ground attacks against vehicles or trains. If possible, Veteran or Ace AI should also try to line up strafing attacks so that they can shoot down the length of a train or convoy, or across a line of parked aircraft. Quote:
Finger four formations would often have planes in each section weave across each other's paths to check mutual blind spots. Fighters in close escort with bombers didn't need to "check 6" since they could rely on all the eyes in the bomber formation to keep a look out for them. In any case, "check 6" behavior should happen a lot less frequently. Some doctrine said to not fly more than 10 seconds in a straight line in the combat zone, other doctrine suggested no more than 30 seconds. I'd split the difference - Ace maneuvers or otherwise checks 6 about every 10 seconds, Veteran about every 30 seconds, Average about every 30 seconds, but often forgets, and Rookie either doesn't check or doesn't check much beyond every 1 minute. Agreed. AI programming is an art, and DT has mostly got it right. Certainly, it's a joy to fly offline dogfights now. Ace or Veteran AI is quite challenging, and if you can win in a 1:2 or 1:4 fight against an equally matched Ace or Veteran plane, it's a real achievement. |
|
|