ED, Please, Please Fix the AI

[Novan]

ED, I love the planes that have been added over the years, terrain and features like the super carrier, have spent a lot of money on modules, but at some point my battles with getting the AI to work as programmed will result in me shelving the game. Building a mission should not be dependent on me having to script my way around the AI not doing what the editor settings say it should be doing.

 

I purchased the game because I love flight sims, but after making a large invest to get back into the game I seem to get more satisfaction out of building missions than going through the learning curve of getting proficient at flying.

 

 

 

2 weeks ago I set about building a large scale battle on the Persian Gulf map. After spending over well over 60 hours on it, I’m still less than 1/4 of the way in getting mostly just the red side set up.

 

While a handful of those hours were spent re-learning LUA how it is used in DCS and switching to VS Code as my editor, the bulk of it has been spent trying to get the AI to complete a mission with no opposition without killing themselves. Much of my time has been wasted repeatedly re-running the missions to identify errant AI behavior. Even with time acceleration it is an extremely time-consuming process.

 

Here is a list of the issues I’ve encountered:

 

 

1. Helicopters taking damage from cargo when picking up cargo
   
2. Helicopters hovering over cargo, quick drop in altitude, suddenly popping up twice as high as they dropped and then landing next to the cargo with rotors spinning until they run out of fuel
   
3. Cargo continuing to move after it has been dropped. I had one piece of cargo travel about 10 miles offshore before it finally stopped moving
   
4. Helicopters stuck over the drop zone, not dropping the cargo and eventually crashing when they run out of fuel
   
5. Mi-8 helicopters landing mass at Havadarya crashed into each other at the end runway when one brakes to make the turn off the runway effectively shutting down the base
   
6. None of the docks along the Iranian coast (have not checked the other coats yet, but I imagine it is the same) having water deep enough to allow a ship to pull into a slip even though the static ships already docked are considerably bigger, i.e. Rajaei Port
   
7. Helicopters did not reliably pick up troops. One or two would board, the rest would remain outside and the helicopter just sat there until it ran out of fuel
   
8. Flight of 4 B-52’s taking off from Al Dhafra AB consistently resulted in plane number 4 crashing into the back of plane number 3 as they were about to turn towards the runway
   
9. B-52’s set to either Pinpoint Strike or Ground Attack with cruise missiles flew at an altitude of 3000 feet until after the strike way points were completed regardless of what the altitude settings were. After the strike they would then follow the altitudes specified on the way points. If I started the mission with the B-52’s in the air at the desired altitude, things worked as expected
   
10. F14’s starting out in a hangar opened their wings while still in the hangar and blew up as they tried to exit
    
11. F14’s landing at a base with hangars had their wings torn off when going to park in a hangar
    
12. Planes still attempted to dock with refuel planes that had no more fuel. I'm assuming the refueling plane had no more fuel as it did not deploy the drogue even though it had with the previous set of planes. The result was the planes would settle in directly over the refuel plane in the same formation as if refueling with the probe deployed until they ran out of fuel and crashed into the refuel plane. This happened with the KC-130, KC-135 and IL-78
    
13. No fuel management. For example, I had F14’s with external tanks flying 450 miles which is well within the combat radius of the planes, but the wingmen almost always crashed due to no fuel. The leads would crash if I had them engage a target. There should be a hard stop with the AI (when set to RTB on bingo fuel) when the fuel state reaches the minimum required to get back to base. Between this issue, the hangars and refueling, Havadarya become the only base I could use reliably for the F-14’s in quantity
    
14. Planes heading towards parking after having just landed crashing into a plane already parked in the spot while it was going through start up
    
15. Vehicles not following the designated path. I had 4 M113 (was just testing) set to follow a road on Tunb and it teleported about a mile offshore on the other side of the island
    

 

Many the issues I’ve written about have been expressed in some variation by other users, but I wanted to add my voice to the list of people raising concerns about the dysfunction in the AI because it is a game breaker that will end in rage quitting.

[ScopeDope]

Whole heatedly agree with this. Everytime I want to do something more than just plop a single AI in a mission to shoot at, I end up wanting to uninstall.

 

I've just spent a few hours trying to get an AI F-16 to drop a couple bombs on a runway. I found one solution but it's less than ideal. There really needs to be a whole lot of hours spend on refining the ME and making it into something useful and approachable, since the game has literally no content without it.

[stormrider]

IMO today, one of the greatest of problems in DCS is the AI. It means that you cant simply create a mission and enjoy it. You need to test it over and over just to make sure that the flawed AI does what it was supposed to do, completely breaking the enjoyment and immersion that would come for playing a mission for the first time.

[HiJack]

100% agree! Only missions with static units work. Sad.

[Bunny Clark]

I have quit working on my campaign multiple times now out of frustration with trying to get the AI to perform even simple tasks.

[stormrider]

Even DCS Manual is wrong about its own AI. :music_whistling:

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=283713

[Habu_69]

I think Nick Grey acknowledged in a recent interview that AI improvement is critical ED's dynamic campaign development. As to timeframe.........???

[stormrider]

I think Nick Grey acknowledged in a recent interview that AI improvement is critical ED's dynamic campaign development. As to timeframe.........???

 

 

They seem to do this from time to time. Then eventually after a few years everybody forgets about it.

[cnoblenyc1]

Hi All, I just joined the DCS community - was P3D for a long time. I've already experienced a number of issues. (see https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4474305#post4474305)

 

I've had a few others - like F-15E's pilots randomly dying (heart attack?? lol) by diving into the sea to F-16s on wild weasel missions that won't engage.

 

Much like the above comments, it took me all weekend to figure out how to get a B1-b run too work and it only works sometimes.

 

I'm very concerned at the lack of clarity around if this is being addressed. Have I made a mistake in switching to DCS??

[Glide]

I do believe they have an AI software engineer job posted...:) And, Georgia has a new visa program for remote workers. Enjoy the lovely Caucasus mountains AND fix your favorite AI. Who could say no?

[TBone]

Hi All, I just joined the DCS community - was P3D for a long time. I've already experienced a number of issues. (see https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4474305#post4474305)

 

I've had a few others - like F-15E's pilots randomly dying (heart attack?? lol) by diving into the sea to F-16s on wild weasel missions that won't engage.

 

Much like the above comments, it took me all weekend to figure out how to get a B1-b run too work and it only works sometimes.

 

I'm very concerned at the lack of clarity around if this is being addressed. Have I made a mistake in switching to DCS??

 

No, you haven't made a mistake. I'm a recent adopter from P3D as well. I agree, getting AI to work properly when building missions is frustrating and time consuming. Lots of testing, fiddling and experimenting. I'm becoming better at it but it is AI after all and there is some randomness to the behavior in AI because....well...its AI.

 

I actually have a pretty good mission going which is the retaking of the Oman Peninsula. The AI can for the most part fight a layered joint forces battle without intervention and then I just assume roles within the mission to support the battle. CAP, CAS SEAD etc. The AI doesn't always do what it is supposed to but trust me, in war, most things don't go the way you plan them.

 

As far as coming from P3D, DCS is a much prettier and better performing platform. The Devs are very good at improving things that need to be addressed and seem to be interested in making an excellent product. The community is MUCH more helpful, mature and far less toxic than the P3D, X-Plane community. All my inquiries in the forums have been treated with respect and everyone is helpful even if I ask a dumb question. I stopped participating in P3D forums and places like the PMDG forums because of the condescending attitudes and developers dismissiveness of user concerns and a lot of times just plain rudeness.

 

Welcome aboard! You'll figure out the AI, just takes time. Start small. Yes it could use improvement but this is still a heck of a cool simulator.

[cnoblenyc1]

... there is some randomness to the behavior in AI because....well...its AI.

 

So true

 

 

..., in war, most things don't go the way you plan them.

 

So very true

 

I stopped participating in P3D forums and places like the PMDG forums because of the condescending attitudes and developers dismissiveness of user concerns and a lot of times just plain rudeness.

 

EXACTLY why I dropped VRS like a hot lead brick over a year ago. RUDE and took their customers for granted. PMDG, I actually had nothing but positive experiences with them. But overall, agree that the community in general leaves a rather large space for improvement. ;-)

 

 

Welcome aboard! You'll figure out the AI, just takes time. Start small. Yes it could use improvement but this is still a heck of a cool simulator.

 

Thanks! I don't suppose I can pull the "new guy card" and get a copy of your work??? (you know, as a guide... :megalol:

[TBone]

LOL! Well my friend, I'm not sure my mission is a good example of anything lol. It is a work in progress with no real mission assignments or structure yet. I've just been adding elements, working with them and testing until I get results close to what I want. I'm hardly an expert.

 

Most of the work going forward is going to be cleaning up callsigns, start times, and maybe streamlining and taking out elements that are not vital.

 

I still have some issues that I think are just inherent in the ME. For instance, you can get a group of helicopters to do what you want, run it a hundred times flawlessly and then add a completely unrelated element to the mission and all of a sudden, helicopters are broken.

 

One of my biggest frustrations is getting aircraft to RTB without driving themselves into the ground or circling endlessly until they run out of gas and crash. This is especially a problem with Harriers and Cobras on the Tarawa. I can fiddle with stuff, get them working and then all of a sudden they just break. My after action on a mission shows that I have very high attrition of aircraft but most of it is them just driving into the ground, running out of fuel or colliding with each other rather than from enemy action

 

Just start with one unit, one set of instructions, experiment until it works then add another. But like I said, you will find in some instances adding something to your mission will change the behavior of an established unit even if they are completely unrelated in task, type or location.

[Glide]

The AI is a lot of fun to play with. Try mixing skill levels within your units. Also try naming the pilots like "Veteran Pilot #007" etc. Then as you observe the battle unfold you can decide if the AI is just having a hangover or if they should be kicking butts.

[Taz1004]

They're trying to program way too much into AI. I guess they're trying to make them more realistic... for their professional clients maybe. Currently, AI's are affected by weather, visibility, time, Sun and Moon light, LOS, fuel, threats... And they purposely program errors into them for Rookie skill level as if they need more errors.

 

In my opinion, AI's need to be simpler. Just give them simple script to complete given task unless destroyed. Visibility should be simple constant multiplier at beginning of mission rather than having it influenced by fog, overcast, time of day, and cloud. Which currently is.

 

Would save a lot of CPU cycle as well. Whenever I get stutters in game, it's usually when simulation number spikes.

Edited September 3, 2020 by Taz1004

[Glide]

I like what you say, Taz. One benefit is that playing the same mission twice does not result in exactly the same experience.

 

 

 

I find that sometimes you need to delete wingmen and re-add them to sort out behaviour. I frequently check on load-outs because the wrong load-out will throw them off.

[stormrider]

I do believe they have an AI software engineer job posted...:)

 

 

Well, if that's what they call our developers are working hard on it I think we can all assume that DCS developers are actually HR managers and managers are bank clerks.

 

:megalol: