AI vs AI Kill ratio

[sniperton]

Originally Posted by majorfailure

But still - I don't see why giving the AI an ability to disengage would weaken them and then they need strengthening in another department?

I’m with you, but there’s a dilemma. Aerial battles are now more decisive (and more arcade-like) than in RL were, there are more kills for the winner and higher losses for the underdog. This is fine for dogfights and coops, as we all want immediate action, and since we don’t risk our lives, we prefer a bloody massacre to an enemy who ‘cowardly’ disengages as soon as the odds are against him.

Teaching the AI to disengage and to evade combat would involve longer sessions with less action and more advantage-seeking intermissions. I’m personally for it, but it’s a matter of gaming preferences. Perhaps better shooting at non-evading targets would compensate for the more evasive AI and re-establish the sort of balance as we have now.

On the other hand, it’s unpredictable how all this would affect single-player campaigns where mostly the AI is fighting the AI. My point is that what might be desirable against human opponents could easily lead to stalemates in AI-AI encounters and would possibly break many single-player missions and campaigns designed and playtested with the non-evasive AI we have at present.

[majorfailure]

Originally Posted by sniperton

I’m with you, but there’s a dilemma. Aerial battles are now more decisive (and more arcade-like) than in RL were, there are more kills for the winner and higher losses for the underdog. This is fine for dogfights and coops, as we all want immediate action, and since we don’t risk our lives, we prefer a bloody massacre to an enemy who ‘cowardly’ disengages as soon as the odds are against him.

Teaching the AI to disengage and to evade combat would involve longer sessions with less action and more advantage-seeking intermissions. I’m personally for it, but it’s a matter of gaming preferences. Perhaps better shooting at non-evading targets would compensate for the more evasive AI and re-establish the sort of balance as we have now.

On the other hand, it’s unpredictable how all this would affect single-player campaigns where mostly the AI is fighting the AI. My point is that what might be desirable against human opponents could easily lead to stalemates in AI-AI encounters and would possibly break many single-player missions and campaigns designed and playtested with the non-evasive AI we have at present.

Solution: Make it a difficulty switch to have evasive AI. And no I wouldn't mind if battles would not end in slaughter on a regular basis. Getting home with only a few kills then would be more rewarding. And imagine what a feat it would be to get home with 10+ kills in one sortie, which now in certain planes is rather the usual case.

[sniperton]

Originally Posted by majorfailure

Solution: Make it a difficulty switch to have evasive AI.

Good idea, if it can be done that way. Seems there's an agreement in

1. a skill-based delay in the re-acquisitioning of targets (which weakens the AI);
2. better AI shooting at non-evading targets (which strengthens the AI);
3. an evasive AI which makes it more difficult to overrun AI squads (optional).

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by majorfailure

Solution: Make it a difficulty switch to have evasive AI.

I've been asking for something like this for years. Mission/Campaign builders should be able to set the level of AI aggressiveness in both FMB and QMB, for both offline online missions.

There are times when you want the AI to be insanely aggressive - like in a QMB fighter sweep mission or online dogfight server. But, there are also times when you want the AI to be cautious, such as during many historical campaigns.

[Marabekm]

It seems the AI perform a little more realistic if you don't set a target.
Example: I want a group of zeroes to intercept a flight of SBDs. If I set the zeroes waypoint to the sbds, and set the SBDs as the target, the zeroes will stop at nothing, and follow the SBDs to the end of the world, unroll they are all shot down or the zeroes are all shot down.

Now if I just set the waypoints close together, but do not assign the SBDs as the target, the zeroes will still attack the SBDs while close, but will not follow and hunt the remainder down once the SBDs are away from that particular waypoint.

[sniperton]

Interesting observations. Could you perhaps figure out how close the Zeros have to be to the SBDs to attack them without any scripted order to do so? Probably this is the range where combat AI is activated in any case, irrespective of the mission script. Learning this threshold would open up new perspectives for mission and campaign design.

[dimlee]

I can confirm the observation of Marabekm.

Regarding the distance between attacking a/c and targets - I'm afraid it "depends" and each mission requires some fine tuning and testing. This is at least my impression after creating some missions in CUP/now BAT. (It was based on 4.12, don't know if 4.13 is different in that respect).
Another lesson I learned - randomness does exist. When play the same mission several times and then watch tracks I see that AI behaviour can be strikingly different which leads to various outcome. At least in well balanced scenarios where neither side has decisive advantage at the start.

[Marabekm]

Originally Posted by sniperton

Interesting observations. Could you perhaps figure out how close the Zeros have to be to the SBDs to attack them without any scripted order to do so? Probably this is the range where combat AI is activated in any case, irrespective of the mission script. Learning this threshold would open up new perspectives for mission and campaign design.

I'm unsure at how close they have to be. Usually I just overlap the waypoints and try and make sure the red and blue get to the same point at the same time.
On the down side, I have not been able to make this work with the escort fighters. They drop their tanks like they want to engage, but never do and just continue flying like normal, while the friendly bombers get killed right below.

[dimlee]

Originally Posted by Marabekm

I'm unsure at how close they have to be. Usually I just overlap the waypoints and try and make sure the red and blue get to the same point at the same time.
On the down side, I have not been able to make this work with the escort fighters. They drop their tanks like they want to engage, but never do and just continue flying like normal, while the friendly bombers get killed right below.

Probably they will engage if timings and/or positions are slightly changed.