AI Strike Group shows poor coordination and technique

[Exorcet]

I'm hoping this report will go toward future AI improvements. I've spent quite a lot of time experimenting with the F-15E strike group in the attached track, but I was unable to ever get them to successfully make a one pass attack where all members drop their bombs, which is the expected result. I've tried changing formations, waypoint spacing, when formation is changed, etc.

The outcomes I've seen include:

3 of 4 AI at best drop weapons, last AI brings weapons back to base for no reason this is usually seen in conjunction with the next issue:

AI attacks in two separate waves for some reason, about 10 minutes apart, there is no reason for this and it just leaves the group vulnerable to attack

Flight lead gets so far ahead during attack that the group leaves before others drop weapons

AI do weird maneuvers for no reason when starting attack, partially solved by moving attack waypoint from 25 miles to ~75 miles from target, but still present to a degree

AI crashes into each other when starting attack

Some of the issues that contribute to the above problems seem to be very poor AI flying when changing formation or setting up attacks, AI randomly falling behind when flying formation either by suddenly slowing down or maintaining a slow flight speed, and AI needing excessive space to line up for bombing attacks. These behaviors need to be looked at in order to improve general AI performance. Thanks for taking the time to look at this report.

AI_poor_bombing_technique.trk

[NineLine]

Thanks for the report, I will take a look.

[Grimes]

It seems to be a multifaceted issue, though AI formation behavior appears to be the linchpin. If the AI are able to maintain their formation and are close to each other then it is possible for them to drop together as seen below. Its not perfect, but it was functional in getting the AI to attack within a 30 second window. The problem is that whenever the task is given the AI drastically get out of formation and some flight members seem to get stuck between wanting to climb and gain speed. Neither of which is achieved. 

  
 

The way tasking functions also plays a role. Chiefly the AI are trying to follow one another and each bombing task is effectively assigned one at a time. They aren't thinking about the next bombing task or the wingman knows when it is their turn to start bombing. A way to counter-act this is to assign bombing tasks individually via pushing a specific bombing task to each AI unit individually. I did that here: https://i.imgur.com/PyCC4tb.mp4

The other thing that can help substantially is the cause of the AI "shuffle" that occurred when the tasks are assigned. You see it in the video I posted. The altitude above parameter appears to be causing AI to maneuver like that when assigned the task. When not checked they will more gradually fly toward the target. In your mission the AI flight lead doing a 180 degree turn then another 180 degree turn all the while losing a ton of altitude in the process is what is messing up the formation. 

Edited September 13, 2022 by Grimes

[Exorcet]

3 hours ago, Grimes said:

It seems to be a multifaceted issue, though AI formation behavior appears to be the linchpin. If the AI are able to maintain their formation and are close to each other then it is possible for them to drop together as seen below. Its not perfect, but it was functional in getting the AI to attack within a 30 second window. The problem is that whenever the task is given the AI drastically get out of formation and some flight members seem to get stuck between wanting to climb and gain speed. Neither of which is achieved.

Thanks for the detailed analysis. I continued to do some testing as well and was finally able to get a satisfactory result by adding waypoints after the formation change where the flight lead would slow down. So it seems like the AI really needs some accomodating whenever there is a chance that formation is disrupted. I tend to do the same on takeoffs for groups of more than 2 aircraft, the first waypoint is always 5-10 miles along runway heading about 5000 AGL to let everyone form up, else flight members 3 and especially 4 will sit on AB until they catch up and usually call out bingo fuel before getting to do anything. In both cases it would help if the AI was more organized in getting into formation.

3 hours ago, Grimes said:

The way tasking functions also plays a role. Chiefly the AI are trying to follow one another and each bombing task is effectively assigned one at a time. They aren't thinking about the next bombing task or the wingman knows when it is their turn to start bombing. A way to counter-act this is to assign bombing tasks individually via pushing a specific bombing task to each AI unit individually. I did that here: https://i.imgur.com/PyCC4tb.mp4

So those are individual aircraft and not a group of 4? Or am I misunderstanding. DCS seems to handle 2 ship flights a lot better than 4, so I did consider splitting this group into two 2 ships. This is usually more work though, but not really much more when copy and paste is available I guess.

3 hours ago, Grimes said:

The other thing that can help substantially is the cause of the AI "shuffle" that occurred when the tasks are assigned. You see it in the video I posted. The altitude above parameter appears to be causing AI to maneuver like that when assigned the task. When not checked they will more gradually fly toward the target. In your mission the AI flight lead doing a 180 degree turn then another 180 degree turn all the while losing a ton of altitude in the process is what is messing up the formation. 

 

Yeah and it probably doesn't help that they're near maximum weight as well with CFT fuel, two external tanks, and 3 Mk84's (side note I originally wanted 4, but then they'd be in AB the entire route). I've set them as high as I could without sending them over the tipping point of using AB for the sake of fuel conservation, but that also really cuts down on their maneuverability.

[Grimes]

Just messing with it has made me look at some of the other formations and any issues that may occur with them. Formations with larger spreads appear to be the most problematic.  Really makes me wish the AI could do Tactical Turns. 

1 hour ago, Exorcet said:

So those are individual aircraft and not a group of 4? Or am I misunderstanding. DCS seems to handle 2 ship flights a lot better than 4, so I did consider splitting this group into two 2 ships. This is usually more work though, but not really much more when copy and paste is available I guess.

Its a group of 4. Think of it as something similar to how you can command different units within your own flight to do different tasks as its the same premise. Via the editor everything is done via the "Group controller". Via scripting you have additional access to unit controllers, so it is possible to give individual orders to individual units. Unfortunately it only works with AI aircraft and helicopters while is non existent for ships and ground vehicles. In that example it generated 48 targets and assigned 12 to the group controller, then a different set of 12 to the unit controllers for 2, 3, and 4. I'd have to retest the specifics but there are some specific order to assigning tasks to get desired results due to which units follow each other. 

[Grimes]

I did a thing. 

https://imgur.com/a/TLFegLW

Unless the formation is specified to be within a few hundred meters of each other you should avoid using "Open" formations. 

[Exorcet]

7 hours ago, Grimes said:

Just messing with it has made me look at some of the other formations and any issues that may occur with them. Formations with larger spreads appear to be the most problematic.  Really makes me wish the AI could do Tactical Turns. 

Its a group of 4. Think of it as something similar to how you can command different units within your own flight to do different tasks as its the same premise. Via the editor everything is done via the "Group controller". Via scripting you have additional access to unit controllers, so it is possible to give individual orders to individual units. Unfortunately it only works with AI aircraft and helicopters while is non existent for ships and ground vehicles. In that example it generated 48 targets and assigned 12 to the group controller, then a different set of 12 to the unit controllers for 2, 3, and 4. I'd have to retest the specifics but there are some specific order to assigning tasks to get desired results due to which units follow each other. 

Ah scripting, now I get it. I was wondering if somehow I missed individual unit options in the ME.

5 hours ago, Grimes said:

I did a thing. 

https://imgur.com/a/TLFegLW

Unless the formation is specified to be within a few hundred meters of each other you should avoid using "Open" formations. 

Good to know. The Modern Bomber formation looks promising, I haven't actually messed with it yet. Seeing the Line Abreasts made me nervous as I tend to use them from time to time, but for air to air. I wonder if that makes a difference.

[b0bl00i]

I reported something very similar along time ago and it's still an issue.
The AI is horribly inefficient in doing single attacks, formation attacks or anything package related (of most types, SEAD or ground attack with all types of weapons). The same is true for A2A engagements. There's no package tactics or anything in place. The "AI", follows the pattern defined in the mission editor and more or less flies right into what ever trap might lie ahead.

And just to comment, the way to fix this shouldn't fall on the user (mission designers) by spending additional hours in the mission editor, detailing each and every move of the "AI".  This should just work.

Things like this breaks immersion, causes a lot of frustration and unnecessary grief.

I believe ED can fix this, if prioritized.