Jester unable to hook or lock targets inside 30 miles. Something I don't understand or Jester limitation?

[Aries144]

The biggest issue I have when flying the F-14, since its release, is with Jester and his frequent inability to TWS hook or hard lock targets inside about 20-30 miles, when I can plainly see them on datalink on the TID repeater in the front seat. This leaves a huge engagement gap until I can lock and engage targets myself with VSL or PAL. Obviously, against targets with fox 1 or fox 3 missiles, this is very frustrating.

The most recent occurrence was trying to engage two J11s that took off about 30 miles from me. I was at 25,000. I turned to engage, could see them clearly on the TID repeater, but Jester wouldn't hook them with Phoenix selected and also wouldn't lock them. "Unable." "Uh, I can't do that." I held them on the nose until inside PAL range and Jester refused to either TWS or hard lock when STT was selected from the com menu.

Am I the first person to notice this? Is there a Jester mechanic I'm not understanding?

[FMBluecher]

What exact command(s) were you issuing? Sometimes, if you tell him to "STT Lock Enemy Target Ahead," he'll say "unable," not because he can't lock the target, but because he's not 100% sure the target is an enemy. AFAIK this can happen even if the datalink identifies the target as hostile.

Maybe that's not your specific issue, but either way, more details will help us help you.

[Callsign JoNay]

1 hour ago, Aries144 said:

The biggest issue I have when flying the F-14, since its release, is with Jester and his frequent inability to TWS hook or hard lock targets inside about 20-30 miles, when I can plainly see them on datalink on the TID repeater in the front seat.

The only way Jester can lock a datalink contact is if you choose STT specific, and then choose one of the blue options.

The contacts are almost certainly above or below your scan volume if you can only see them on datalink and not the radar. Jester can only TWS on contacts that are seen by the radar, within the scan volume.

[draconus]

On 6/16/2022 at 4:52 AM, Aries144 said:

The most recent occurrence was trying to engage two J11s that took off about 30 miles from me.

In this case you have to work fast or extend if you fail to get them on the radar quickly. Send the wingman if available. No need to risk it despite having big altitude advantage.

Most helpful would be to listen to the AWACS message and get exact azimuth and altitude - with this you go to Jester > BVR radar > set alt at range - and you get them right away.

If you've only got DL then look at the number next to the contact which is their alt in thousands +/- 5k and you do the same: Jester > BVR radar > set alt at range until they show up as radar contacts. Remember that if you stay at alt flying toward them you have them at more and more down angle.

[WelshZeCorgi]

It cuz hee dum

[Aries144]

So, essentially, the player or a human can see the datalink contact, but Jester can't. Is that correct?

The player must talk jester's radar onto a datalink contact via the menu commands?

[Baaz]

It's not that Jester can't "see" them, but rather your radar isn't scanning the appropriate section of the sky.  Jester can't lock what's not on radar.   This functions the same in any other aircraft with data link.  You can see them on the "scope", but they're not on YOUR scope.  Your radar is projected as a top down 2D image.  Your radar however, is scanning in 3D.  If the bandit is at 2000', but you're at 25,000'  scanning 10,000-30,000', There's nothing for Jester to lock until you tell him to scan the 2000' range.  I hope that simple scenario helped to explain it a little further.

[Exorcet]

AI is hard. Jester doesn't really have common sense. When things go as expected according to how he's coded, he usually does an OK job. Anything outside of the coding can produce frustrating results.

I think Jester needs to "cheat" a little more like enemy AI do. Of course too much cheating is bad, but AI needs to cheat a little to compete with humans. If Jester loses a target he should know where to look, roughly, to reacquire. Jester should be able to see and lock targets outside of the current radar FoV if it makes sense (like the situation described above with enemy aircraft taking off). There are too many situations where Jester just throws up his hands at trivial problems. Again, AI is hard so it's not like this is because HB is slacking, but I'd like to see some changes to make Jester act more like a human RIO. The F-14 being a 2 seater is what holds it back the most in DCS.

[Aries144]

Yeah, I think this is the area I'd like to see Jester's next bit of development time go. If I'm in the back seat and I see a datalink contact at 30 miles at 1000ft, I'm going to get my radar slewed down to check him out, especially if the datalink contact says he's hostile.

Right now, Jester doesn't seem to react to datalink contacts at all. They're for human reference only.

Knowing that, for now I just need to treat Jester like a noobie back seater and micro manage him a bit more.

Thank you all very much for your input. It saved me a lot of time experimenting!

Edited June 24, 2022 by Aries144

[draconus]

1 hour ago, Aries144 said:

Right now, Jester doesn't seem to react to datalink contacts at all.

But he can STT lock specific target, even if DL only atm.

It's easy to implement AI behavior if there's only one target but it'd quickly get conflicting between Jester's choice and pilot's when there's more bandits or you want to search another part of the sky anyway.

I'm open to the idea where Jester commands us - not the other way - but I can see how many players would oppose that.

[IronMike]

5 hours ago, Exorcet said:

(...) but I'd like to see some changes to make Jester act more like a human RIO. The F-14 being a 2 seater is what holds it back the most in DCS.

This is where we disagree a little bit. Don't get me wrong - we want to overhaul and improve Jester and make him more clever. But what we do not want, and never will want, is for Jester to replace a human RIO. The F-14 being a 2 seater is in fact what propells it the most in DCS, provided you have a good crew. Thus, keeping an incentive to enjoy it like it was fully meant to be (flown in real life and) in DCS - in multicrew - is always something we will uphold.

The JESTER-AI - which isn't really an AI in the classic sense mind you - is there to provide the ability for Singleplayer guys to fly the Tomcat at all, to provide RIO functionality. While not replace a human RIO, to at least provide a whiff of the experience a two seater fighter offers. Now, of course, as you know Jester, we put in more than just functionality, to make him compelling, have a personality, all that kind of stuff. So it needs to settle in between. It should always approach what a human RIO offers, and I am certain we can do more and better cometh the overhaul, but it should never aim to replace a human RIO.

Hope that makes sense.

[Hiob]

55 minutes ago, IronMike said:

This is where we disagree a little bit. Don't get me wrong - we want to overhaul and improve Jester and make him more clever. But what we do not want, and never will want, is for Jester to replace a human RIO. The F-14 being a 2 seater is in fact what propells it the most in DCS, provided you have a good crew. Thus, keeping an incentive to enjoy it like it was fully meant to be (flown in real life and) in DCS - in multicrew - is always something we will uphold.

I really don't think, that providing the best possible single-player experience (thus making Jester as capable and "human-like" as possible) will in any way limit the experience of human multicrews or disencourage people from doing multiplayer.

I have a human fly buddy and we occasionally fly the F-14 as Pilot and RIO, but what holds us back the most is limited time budgets due to real world responsibilities. And of course that limited time budget is devided further by multiple different Aircraft in DCS we want to fly. Also - there is a natural disparity between the amounts of people who wants to be "Goose" and those who wants to be "Maverick".

Long Story short - it may be impossible or maybe some people don't want to find a human RIO. Artificially holding back Jester (IF that is the case), to somehow promote the Multiplayer Experience, is ill-advised. I M H O !

Edit:

Same applies to Iceman of course!

Edited June 24, 2022 by Hiob

[Spurts]

Heck, I'd rather have Iceman be as good as Jester than have Jester be perfect.  I love flying the Tomcat in BFM and around the boat, but any other time I prefer the back seat.

[Karon]

4 hours ago, Hiob said:

I really don't think, that providing the best possible single-player experience (thus making Jester as capable and "human-like" as possible) will in any way limit the experience of human multicrews or disencourage people from doing multiplayer.

I have a human fly buddy and we occasionally fly the F-14 as Pilot and RIO, but what holds us back the most is limited time budgets due to real world responsibilities. And of course that limited time budget is devided further by multiple different Aircraft in DCS we want to fly. Also - there is a natural disparity between the amounts of people who wants to be "Goose" and those who wants to be "Maverick".

Long Story short - it may be impossible or maybe some people don't want to find a human RIO. Artificially holding back Jester (IF that is the case), to somehow promote the Multiplayer Experience, is ill-advised. I M H O !

Edit:

Same applies to Iceman of course!

 

My .02 here. What really puts aside Jester compared to a human is the proactivity: depending on which phase of the mission you are flying, it should tell the pilot what to do and when. I suppose this is not hard to implement per sé and, besides the "guts" or "two steps ahead" decisions a human can make, an AI is perfectly capable of assessing a couple of elementary angles.

What I'm wondering is: how many players would follow the instructions of an AI? The same AI should also call the intercept off if the player won't follow its instructions, making the intercept disadvantageous. Would players get frustrated and deactivate it, or RTB / reset as instructed?
Considering that I fly only as RIO and get quite annoyed when my pilot does not fly at the values I tell him (happens very rarely and only when I used to fly with random free pilots on a server), I wonder how you would script the AI to react. As a human, I simply moved back to spectators and call it a day. Would the AI simply carry on giving instructions? What would be the point? It sounds like a cubic ton of work on the scripting side for something most players won't appreciate.

 

Something that can be done, perhaps, is adding a menu to request a certain geometry on a target, or a collision course.
For instance, command Jester to press the Collision button on the TID, and a commentary to it. Example:

1. Select "Collision Course" from the Jester menu;
2. Jester replies something like: "ok, come left, steady 320 for collision intercept";
3. When the player gets to 320: "steady up".

It's like a button, but it sounds better in Single player, I suppose.
You can even do that for a Timeline, with Jester calling the range and where to turn to centre the T or the centroid. Actually, it'd work better with STT, TWS is too temperamental for that, probably.

What do you think?

[Exorcet]

21 hours ago, IronMike said:

This is where we disagree a little bit. Don't get me wrong - we want to overhaul and improve Jester and make him more clever. But what we do not want, and never will want, is for Jester to replace a human RIO. The F-14 being a 2 seater is in fact what propells it the most in DCS, provided you have a good crew. Thus, keeping an incentive to enjoy it like it was fully meant to be (flown in real life and) in DCS - in multicrew - is always something we will uphold.

The JESTER-AI - which isn't really an AI in the classic sense mind you - is there to provide the ability for Singleplayer guys to fly the Tomcat at all, to provide RIO functionality. While not replace a human RIO, to at least provide a whiff of the experience a two seater fighter offers. Now, of course, as you know Jester, we put in more than just functionality, to make him compelling, have a personality, all that kind of stuff. So it needs to settle in between. It should always approach what a human RIO offers, and I am certain we can do more and better cometh the overhaul, but it should never aim to replace a human RIO.

Hope that makes sense.

In a way it makes sense, but I think something is being left out. Not everyone can get a human RIO. Jester is pretty much my only option with how and when I play and how he compares to a human AI really doesn't matter to me as a single player pilot because I can't choose another RIO. And to be honest, even if Jester was a 99 percentile RIO in every respect, he still couldn't replace human RIO unless he was linked to cleverbot or something and could hold conversation while navigating to the target or speak with me during a mission briefing to discuss how we're going to get through enemy defenses. Multicrew sells itself. It doesn't need to be artificially inflated by a limited AI RIO, and I think attempts to do that just end up frustrating those that can't easily access multicrew.

Again I kind of get it, but I don't think the experience I have with the Tomcat is what you were aiming for. I've never wanted Jester to replace a second human crew, I just want him to not have immersion breaking faults, even if he's only average at what he does.

  

15 hours ago, Karon said:

What I'm wondering is: how many players would follow the instructions of an AI? The same AI should also call the intercept off if the player won't follow its instructions, making the intercept disadvantageous.

I've actually asked for similar functionality from AWACS in DCS. As long as it works well*, it will only add to the sim.

It's all configurable anyway, not everyone has to fly the same way or at the same level of realism. Even one specific player might go full simulation one day but the next turn on infinite missiles and just go for a joyride. So make it an option and we're set.

*Jester kind of does this as he'll select targets as he pleases. The problem is you can't really get him to follow a mission briefing, or sometimes any kind of self preservation. I've had situations where he will ignore escort fighters that are very much a threat and become focused at lobbing missiles at things a hundred miles away. Then I've also had situations where we could bypass enemy fighters and launch at a transport or something, but Jester just won't do it because he has no way of knowing that the Transport is the mission objective. In these cases, I override whatever Jester tries to do.

15 hours ago, Karon said:

Something that can be done, perhaps, is adding a menu to request a certain geometry on a target, or a collision course.
For instance, command Jester to press the Collision button on the TID, and a commentary to it. Example:

1. Select "Collision Course" from the Jester menu;
2. Jester replies something like: "ok, come left, steady 320 for collision intercept";
3. When the player gets to 320: "steady up".

It's like a button, but it sounds better in Single player, I suppose.

I have to be honest, I'd like to avoid using the Jester menu as much as possible. I think instead of a menu option, some kind of mission pre planning needs to be available. We need to be able to tell Jester what the mission is, what the objectives are, and how to prioritize targets. All ahead of time. Then when we're in the air Jester wouldn't need to be told what to do (within reason, I'm not trying to eliminate communication entirely, but I think it's reasonable for Jester to know to connect with a specific datalink based on mission brief or to focus more on fighters than bombers to target for example) and what he does would align with the player's understanding of the mission.

Edited June 25, 2022 by Exorcet

[Callsign JoNay]

Well written post Exorcet, but I disagree with setting pre-flight parameters for what kind of targets Jester will look for based on mission objectives. That might work well for scripted single player story based missions, but not so well in PVP or PVE when the human factor can create situations that you never expected and can't plan for. I definitely would not want to see a system like that implemented. I'd prefer better base logic for Jester that can get the AWG to operate in intuitive ways that would be useful for most general situations.

[Karon]

@Exorcet I wrote a lengthy reply and then deleted it because I think it did not convey the message: Jester, is the interface between the human pilot and the AWG-9 WCS and the avionics. It is not a virtual RIO.

 

The number of tasks the RIO performs is long, very long and most of them happen in background and they are all based on proactivity, the ability to interpret information, communicate with the controllers and build SA. Scripting them is simply not worth it because the AI does not know fundamental parameters such as the mission tasking, ROE, conditions for mission complete or failed and so on.

Also, as you said, this won't even be a core feature, rather something that can be toggled off, making this even less worth it.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy if Jester is improved. I think HB did a terrific job with it, but the more I think about the thousands of conditions that should be scripted, the more I'm convinced that only simple and straightforward features should be implemented (see the collision calls / AWACS calls we mentioned).

I'm more than happy to write a flow chart of the basic operations a RIO performs, but I'm worried about how long and how big it will be.

[DD_Fenrir]

1 hour ago, Karon said:

@Exorcet I wrote a lengthy reply and then deleted it because I think it did not convey the message: Jester, is the interface between the human pilot and the AWG-9 WCS and the avionics. It is not a virtual RIO.

 

The number of tasks the RIO performs is long, very long and most of them happen in background and they are all based on proactivity, the ability to interpret information, communicate with the controllers and build SA. Scripting them is simply not worth it because the AI does not know fundamental parameters such as the mission tasking, ROE, conditions for mission complete or failed and so on.

Also, as you said, this won't even be a core feature, rather something that can be toggled off, making this even less worth it.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy if Jester is improved. I think HB did a terrific job with it, but the more I think about the thousands of conditions that should be scripted, the more I'm convinced that only simple and straightforward features should be implemented (see the collision calls / AWACS calls we mentioned).

I'm more than happy to write a flow chart of the basic operations a RIO performs, but I'm worried about how long and how big it will be.

This, this and again this.

So much of what a RIO does is abstract thought processes; prediction, estimation, extrapolation and gut instinct. Not to mention how much of that is coloured by character and experience.

These aspects are some of the the most difficult - if not impossible - to program on AI.

Throw multi-bandit groups of different types at varying ranges and azimuths and who do you think is going to best recognise which is the greatest threat? And to what? If you’re on a TARCAP you may want to prioritise threats against your flight; if running escort then you might want to prioritise the threat to the strike package; and if running an intercept against a formation of escorted Backfires threatening the carrier group you’ll want to make sure you’re launching on them rather than the escort.

Asking the AI to manage all that nuanced combat decision making is expecting too much. 

[Exorcet]

6 hours ago, Callsign JoNay said:

Well written post Exorcet, but I disagree with setting pre-flight parameters for what kind of targets Jester will look for based on mission objectives. That might work well for scripted single player story based missions...

 

4 hours ago, Karon said:

@Exorcet I wrote a lengthy reply and then deleted it because I think it did not convey the message: Jester, is the interface between the human pilot and the AWG-9 WCS and the avionics. It is not a virtual RIO.

 

The number of tasks the RIO performs is long, very long and most of them happen in background and they are all based on proactivity, the ability to interpret information, communicate with the controllers and build SA. Scripting them is simply not worth it because the AI does not know fundamental parameters such as the mission tasking, ROE, conditions for mission complete or failed and so on...

 

2 hours ago, DD_Fenrir said:

This, this and again this.

So much of what a RIO does is abstract thought processes; prediction, estimation, extrapolation and gut instinct. Not to mention how much of that is coloured by character and experience.

These aspects are some of the the most difficult - if not impossible - to program on AI...

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I don't want a scripted RIO. I want to be able to give Jester context so that it's possible for him to make some of the complex decisions that a RIO would make. I don't like scripted events and missions. The ones I make I try to make as unpredictable as multiplayer. However each mission still has a goal and that goal is going to influence tactics. Right now Jester has no way of knowing what the goal is and won't adapt to your mission. That's one of his flaws in my opinion. The way to change that is to provide a way to tell him what the mission and the goal is.

This won't be a step by step scripted list of events. It would instead be something like a set of priorities. And of course it would be optional so if you don't want to set it up, you get what we have now. For example if your mission is preventing transports from reaching a certain airbase, Jester would avoid committing on fighters until they are a threat to you. Instead of focusing the radar on the first thing he sees, he's try to keep searching until he finds a transport, or some non transport flights become threatening. On the other hand if you're flying escort, Jester would prioritize fighters over transports. The system would not be "Jester AI task push - Attack Group "Ariel 1"" with the visual checkbox enabled. I hope this clears things up a little.

 

[DD_Fenrir]

56 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

 

 

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I don't want a scripted RIO. I want to be able to give Jester context so that it's possible for him to make some of the complex decisions that a RIO would make. I don't like scripted events and missions. The ones I make I try to make as unpredictable as multiplayer. However each mission still has a goal and that goal is going to influence tactics. Right now Jester has no way of knowing what the goal is and won't adapt to your mission. That's one of his flaws in my opinion. The way to change that is to provide a way to tell him what the mission and the goal is.

This won't be a step by step scripted list of events. It would instead be something like a set of priorities. And of course it would be optional so if you don't want to set it up, you get what we have now. For example if your mission is preventing transports from reaching a certain airbase, Jester would avoid committing on fighters until they are a threat to you. Instead of focusing the radar on the first thing he sees, he's try to keep searching until he finds a transport, or some non transport flights become threatening. On the other hand if you're flying escort, Jester would prioritize fighters over transports. The system would not be "Jester AI task push - Attack Group "Ariel 1"" with the visual checkbox enabled. I hope this clears things up a little.

 

Understood and an understandable desire, frankly. It would be a step towards helping the AI RIO relieve the pilot of some workload, which is his job essentially.

[Karon]

10 hours ago, Exorcet said:

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I don't want a scripted RIO. I want to be able to give Jester context so that it's possible for him to make some of the complex decisions that a RIO would make. I don't like scripted events and missions.

 

You understand the logic is a script, right? I'm talking about coding here.

 

For the sake of the discussion, let's assume that the biggest problem (how would you brief Jester on mission parameters, timelines and so on) is already solved. Let's see now some common situations Jester would have to deal with. There are dozens of similar situations, but I'll stick to 3 to keep this brief:

Question #1, how would Jester identify the correct contact? A RIO collects "clues", but there are situations where he cannot really figure it out what is going on. A much more realistic alternative would be having a controller either datalinking or committing the fighter (but the controller we have is absolutely rubbish and one of the worst aspects in DCS at the moment).

Question #2, Jester sees some targets, perhaps multiple RWS tracks, but a single clustered TWS. How would he handle this?

Question #3, Jester knows which one is the target, but the track is lost, then the target is found again, but now he does not know which one it is or if the target is still there in the first place (exactly the same issue the WCS has). A human can guess, should Jester guess too? Based on what percentage? Like, press 30%, reset 70% and roll a die?

 

I don't mean to be rude, but I have the feeling you are not familiar with the work in the virtual backseat. There is a lot of guesswork and intuition to figure out what is going on, compared to any modern aircraft in DCS, where building SA is elementary, RWRs are precise to the nanometre, and you even know what is what. But please, try answering my questions, and perhaps I'll better understand what you have in mind.

[Bremspropeller]

Nobody is calling for a one-size-fits-all Jester that is the ultimate death-dealer. It's already an achievement if he would be better at what he's doing right now.

What people want (people = me) is a Jester that spends less time giving me sh!t, calling out friendlies 500 miles away when I'm in the pattern or trying to stick it in *giggity* and who drops a lock because he's unable to do a little basic logic.

And maybe a function to step through datalink/ TWS targets, so things can get sorted without needing a Ph.D. in Jesterism. There's no need for nuanced AI background-action - just give the pilot the capability to tell Jester to "light up this guy in particular" or to sort contacts.

And please give us the opportunity to tick a box for "serious Jester". All the banter is fun for the first 20 times, but it's getting old after a while. If the probe is out = shut up and call out fuel only. If the gear and hook are down !=! shut up.

[Coxy_99]

If the bandit is already 30nm, Id wait a further 5 to 10nm 25 to 20nm and switch to PAL by that point with jester. As already stated switch to STT. Having super human A.I would be horrid.

[Kageseigi]

On 6/24/2022 at 7:02 AM, IronMike said:

The JESTER-AI - which isn't really an AI in the classic sense mind you - is there to provide the ability for Singleplayer guys to fly the Tomcat at all, to provide RIO functionality. While not replace a human RIO, to at least provide a whiff of the experience a two seater fighter offers. Now, of course, as you know Jester, we put in more than just functionality, to make him compelling, have a personality, all that kind of stuff. So it needs to settle in between. It should always approach what a human RIO offers, and I am certain we can do more and better cometh the overhaul, but it should never aim to replace a human RIO.

 I just want to say that I'm still amazed by Jester and everything he does, so I want to thank you guys for putting so much work into him (and the whole F-14 experience)! This is coming from a singleplayer flyer, so I truly appreciate it! 

P.S. If you're taking requests for the overhaul, is there any chance of adding the option for Jester to be a hot blonde chick who constantly praises my skills and strokes my ego with her sultry voice? You know, for squadron morale! 

Edited June 26, 2022 by Kageseigi

[Karon]

6 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

What people want (people = me) is a Jester that spends less time giving me sh!t, calling out friendlies 500 miles away when I'm in the pattern or trying to stick it in *giggity* and who drops a lock because he's unable to do a little basic logic.

And maybe a function to step through datalink/ TWS targets, so things can get sorted without needing a Ph.D. in Jesterism. There's no need for nuanced AI background-action - just give the pilot the capability to tell Jester to "light up this guy in particular" or to sort contacts.

What if there was a sort of hook function for the pilot, active on the TID repeater, to tell Jester to centre the radar on a particular track, either datalinked or from the radar (RWS and TWS)? Would that work in your opinion? The radar would be still subject to all its limitations (e.g. centering on a Datalinked notching target in TWS won't make it magically appear), but most of the micromanaging would be removed.

About the first sentence, I guess it's just a case of adding a condition where callouts are limited to hostiles within X nm if the landing gear is down (I wouldn't use the flaps as a condition, tbh).