Smart and fully programmable AI ... I'll pay :)

[oldcrusty]

I know, this would probably take another 5 years.  Currently... we have this :

 

[MadKreator]

I had 5 harriers in a flight coming into tarawa at the end of a liberation mission, I landed and parked. Others took the pattern,1st came in on final about 65 knots and 30 degree AoA crashed into the back of the ship, two more flew right into him the exact same way, one tried to vertical land and ejected and the last one just flew away somewhere, maybe to try to refuel idk

[draconus]

3 hours ago, MadKreator said:

I had 5 harriers in a flight coming into tarawa at the end of a liberation mission, I landed and parked. Others took the pattern,1st came in on final about 65 knots and 30 degree AoA crashed into the back of the ship, two more flew right into him the exact same way, one tried to vertical land and ejected and the last one just flew away somewhere, maybe to try to refuel idk

Should've made report and upload a track to help devs actually do something about it.

Edited November 30, 2022 by draconus

[MadKreator]

7 hours ago, draconus said:

Should've made report and upload a track to help devs actually do something about it.

 

I’ve run into it many times of these really quirky things happening. You’re right, I 100% should have but I also  take it with a grain of salt since its really not consistent. Nothing I can reproduce turn to turn or anything. Next mission after that one, every flight took off, did their thing at their targets, made it back, some refueled even , every a/c landed safe and sound Sometimes it kind of comical to see those WTF moments. I don’t take DCS at a serious level, I’m here for having fun. I’ve learned over the years that the devs will get to it when they get to it.

On the more cynical side though,  its also  back to the fact that these things have been reported for years and seemingly nothing gets done so really what’s the point. The ai learned some new maneuvers in a dogfight recently, but they’ll still chase them down straight over an enemy Sam site without a care in the world. Or a CAS flight will dive head first into a battery of AAA and manpads, trying to shoot them with guns when they have two full racks of mavericks or laser guided rockets which could keep them well in the clear. Why are my a-10’s flying at 1500 feet over the front lines , getting mowed down when they’re loaded with bombs?

Back on the lighter side, it is just a game, its not real life. Sometimes everything works, sometimes it doesn’t. No way to expect the ai to have thought processes like a human would. With the infinite amount of unit combinations and scenarios all playing out at the same time, it seems like a next to impossible task to try to code them to react to every situation. 

[draconus]

One step at a time I guess. Most of the smart things can be programmed or set in ME. Can't be too smart though since there are performance considerations

Edited November 30, 2022 by draconus

[oldcrusty]

41 minutes ago, MadKreator said:

I’ve run into it many times of these really quirky things happening. You’re right, I 100% should have but I also  take it with a grain of salt since its really not consistent. Nothing I can reproduce turn to turn or anything. Next mission after that one, every flight took off, did their thing at their targets, made it back, some refueled even , every a/c landed safe and sound Sometimes it kind of comical to see those WTF moments. I don’t take DCS at a serious level, I’m here for having fun. I’ve learned over the years that the devs will get to it when they get to it.

On the more cynical side though,  its also  back to the fact that these things have been reported for years and seemingly nothing gets done so really what’s the point. The ai learned some new maneuvers in a dogfight recently, but they’ll still chase them down straight over an enemy Sam site without a care in the world. Or a CAS flight will dive head first into a battery of AAA and manpads, trying to shoot them with guns when they have two full racks of mavericks or laser guided rockets which could keep them well in the clear. Why are my a-10’s flying at 1500 feet over the front lines , getting mowed down when they’re loaded with bombs?

Back on the lighter side, it is just a game, its not real life. Sometimes everything works, sometimes it doesn’t. No way to expect the ai to have thought processes like a human would. With the infinite amount of unit combinations and scenarios all playing out at the same time, it seems like a next to impossible task to try to code them to react to every situation. 

Agreed.  I don't mind seeing AI fail or act like absolute rookies, varying levels of randomness, etc. as long as it doesn't look like glitches or 'unfinished' code.  I'm not even getting into MP part. I would also get a kick out of 'programming' AI myself...  if some day, the devs decided to expand the programmability of AI in some sort of mission editor (just for SP initially)... would be lots of fun... and coding for the devs, before something like this could happen.  Well, this was just a thought since I fly SP only, for now.  When I flew online in the past, long time ago, the AI was never included as part of our air assets, no matter how few people were online at a time.  There were enough net glitches to deal with...  OK, now I'm drifting off a bit   

[Exorcet]

1 hour ago, MadKreator said:

On the more cynical side though,  its also  back to the fact that these things have been reported for years and seemingly nothing gets done so really what’s the point.

Read the patch notes if you want to see stuff getting done. ED kills countless bugs, the problem is that there are always more. Nothing getting done is a myth and I have no idea where it has come from. Yes there are long standing bugs, but that doesn't mean that ED does nothing. Unfortunately that have to pick their battles.

[MadKreator]

3 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

Read the patch notes if you want to see stuff getting done. ED kills countless bugs, the problem is that there are always more. Nothing getting done is a myth and I have no idea where it has come from. Yes there are long standing bugs, but that doesn't mean that ED does nothing. Unfortunately that have to pick their battles.

I do read them and see what they do, it doesn’t go un-noticed and I definitely do appreciate what they do. Everyone has their wants and there’s no way ED can satisfy everyone, I get that. I was just playing devils advocate in my own post. I see and understand both sides equally. I’m very pro-DCS, I do enjoy it 99% of the time, bugs or no bugs. To me though, I don’t see where improved dogfighting takes precedence over the basics. Why have a wingman that can now maneuver correctly and possibly out smart a human in a dogfight, but cant land, or they eject as soon as fuel hits bingo, even if only a few miles from base.  Different people all want different experiences and thats okay. To each his own. 

1 hour ago, draconus said:

One step at a time I guess. Most of the smart things can be programmed or set in ME. Can't be too smart though since there are performance cinsiderations

100%. All in all the steps are heading in the right direction!

[SkateZilla]

.

 

Edited November 30, 2022 by SkateZilla

[draconus]

Being a leader is also a skill. Watch for your wingman and they'll not fall of the sky that often.

[dmatsch]

20 hours ago, Exorcet said:

Read the patch notes if you want to see stuff getting done. ED kills countless bugs, the problem is that there are always more. Nothing getting done is a myth and I have no idea where it has come from. Yes there are long standing bugs, but that doesn't mean that ED does nothing. Unfortunately that have to pick their battles.

please stop mindlessly defending ED.  They've released many, many paid modules over the past 10 years and for the past 10 years the same glaring bugs still exist in the core and make DCS nothing more than an empty sandbox pure flight simulator.  I'm sorry, but the "C" in DCS stands for Combat - it always has, and this means AI effectiveness -- always has and literally NOTHING has changed in the past 10 years regarding these (many) ineffective AI issues.

The "stuff they're getting done" is mostly fixes to recent paid modules (because if they didn't fix those first, people would stop buying modules) and little for core DCS (which is free to all).

The majority of us have invested hundreds, if not in the low thousands on modules, maps, upgrades, campaigns etc.  This is WAY more than the average AAA game at at ONE TIME $70 payment to a game company where you play the game once and you're done.  

I, for one would like to see ED's complete focus to the core game for XX amount of months and bring the game up to 21st century standards, THEN split off into the various module groups and make money off the new and improved core.

[draconus]

1 hour ago, dmatsch said:

The majority of us have invested hundreds, if not in the low thousands on modules, maps, upgrades, campaigns etc.

You're funny. You couldn't wait to throw the money at ED out of pure joy and amazement, you played thousand hours and now it's a bad company, that do nothing and robbed you

[NineLine]

1 hour ago, dmatsch said:

I'm sorry, but the "C" in DCS stands for Combat - it always has, and this means AI effectiveness

If it were easy to do, it would be done. That said can it ever really be done? Nope. DCS World is an ever evolving sim, and the AI has to be able to adapt to it. Guess what though. We cannot have AI that can completely function on their own. We need a balance between AI that can make decisions, but also can follow orders. Look just adding more detail to maps can send ground AI for a loop. We also have to try and keep performance at a maintainable level which is already hard enough as it is with the wide range of computer builds out there. AI take computer power. 

Now, again back to this nothing has changed in 10 years point. Sorry but let me be blunt and do not take this as an insult, but that is just rude to everyone that works on this Team. NO we are not the fastest when it comes to fixing things, but we try our best. Some things are held back by other things that need to be completed (Mass unit movements are getting better with early tests of Multithreading, that is a big deal). We just made a ton of path finding fixes, but AI are still AI, and I mean game AI. They are going to have a bad day or the mission will need tweaked so they are better equipped. 

Plane AI is the same. They have to be programmed to not only fly but they need to be limited by the same limits of the player. Older FMs (and sorry this affects all flight sim games) Older AI FMs are very simple, so is ours. So you get weird things, the ability to fly more perfect or sometimes beyond that with the AI. We know this, and this is why we are working on AI combat skills and just as, if not more, important a new FM for the AI that has not been done before. None of this stuff is a flip of the switch. None of this stuff is easy. We have very talented people some of the most talented in the industry working on these things. It all takes time. And no 10 years ago it probably wouldnt have even been possible. 

So the TLDR is yes our AI needs to improve. Yes our AI has improved. Yes it will continue to improve. No it will never been completed (because the game will continue to evolve and need more from the AI). 

We appreciate everyone that has spent their hard earned money on DCS World. We appreciate your devotion and passion for this very niche hobby. We have the same devotion and passion as you do, and we are trying our very best to make DCS a little better every time we release a new patch or update. 

[Exorcet]

2 hours ago, dmatsch said:

please stop mindlessly defending ED.

I don't. I try to make sure criticism directed at them is fair so that problems are actually addressed. Saying that "nothing works" for example is ridiculous, false, and unhelpful. Absolute nothing good comes from a statement like that. What helps is focused discussion on problems and proposing solutions. Something I am very familiar with:

https://forum.dcs.world/profile/8656-exorcet/content/?type=forums_topic&change_section=1

 

2 hours ago, dmatsch said:

They've released many, many paid modules over the past 10 years and for the past 10 years the same glaring bugs still exist in the core and make DCS nothing more than an empty sandbox pure flight simulator.

ED has released many modules and fixed many bugs and greatly improved DCS over the past 10 years. That is a fact. They aren't focusing on modules and totally ignoring the bugs. The reality is that things take time and effort to fix and because of this they can't make DCS bug free over night.

At the same time, there are very old bugs that many players eagerly want to see fixed. Valid criticism. It's totally fair to point these out to vocalize the demand to see them addressed.

As for DCS being empty, that's a point of view. It's my most played game and I do more than fly around. DCS is fully functional. It has massive untapped potential, but at the same time I think it's one of the best games ever made.

2 hours ago, dmatsch said:

I'm sorry, but the "C" in DCS stands for Combat - it always has, and this means AI effectiveness -- always has and literally NOTHING has changed in the past 10 years regarding these (many) ineffective AI issues.

You claim that literally nothing has changed, while quoting a post replying to another post that mentioned AI changes. This is why I post as I do. People exaggerate needlessly to make ED look bad. It's silly. It doesn't get things fixed. Stop doing it and instead provide useful feedback so that DCS can improve.

2 hours ago, dmatsch said:

The "stuff they're getting done" is mostly fixes to recent paid modules (because if they didn't fix those first, people would stop buying modules) and little for core DCS (which is free to all).

DCS today is not DCS 1.5. The modules are nice, but it's the core improvements that really drive longevity. ED has done more than "little" for the core of the game. Whether or not you think they've done enough is your opinion and whatever it is, so long as it's based in reason, it's fair to have. I don't know how you've been using DCS, but I can certainly appreciate how much the core game has changed over the years for the better. Again, this doesn't mean ED has achieved all that they can, but they deserve recognition for the effort that they have put forward.

2 hours ago, dmatsch said:

The majority of us have invested hundreds, if not in the low thousands on modules, maps, upgrades, campaigns etc.  This is WAY more than the average AAA game at at ONE TIME $70 payment to a game company where you play the game once and you're done.

I don't even buy those $70 games anymore. They're not worth the money. DCS has provided me with a decade of enjoyment, AAA games don't. I honestly feel like ED is ahead of the curve as a developer. They provide better content and better pay models than the industry standard.

2 hours ago, dmatsch said:

I, for one would like to see ED's complete focus to the core game for XX amount of months and bring the game up to 21st century standards, THEN split off into the various module groups and make money off the new and improved core.

Makes no sense. 3D modelers can't improve AI. Where I work, I have a specific task. When my work volume is low I don't get transferred to another department to do a job I wasn't trained for. The module developers are going to develop modules, or they're not going to have anything to do and they're going to get laid off.

[MadKreator]

    A lot of us like to complain about things the we think should be done a certain way, myself included. But the vast majority of us have no idea how any of this software stuff actually works, myself most definitely included!  I see AI do dumb dumb stuff, and whine about it. Then @NineLine points out of why some things are the way they are, most of which I haven’t considered because I don’t know what involved. I’ve never considered the old FM of the AI to have anything to do with how they act, nor do I have any idea how any of that works. I try not to sound disgruntled in my posts because I am not, if any ever come off that way, i do apologize.

     The ED team does do a great job of updating DCS whether its what any of us want at the moment or not. What may seem agonizingly slow to me, may be leaps and bounds from a devs perspective. As @Exorcet pointed out, other AAA games are a total ripoff in comparison to DCS, if you think of it in long term engament.  Think of COD, Every year( about)  a new one is released which really isn’t much more than a re-skinned version of its predecessor, yet you pay $70-100 each time and in that year between is usually spent just getting everything in the game to work, all while pumping out micro transactions for skins and useless trinkets. ( can you imagine paying $20 per livery for each aircraft in DCS) Then the previous rendition is all but abandoned. DCS you could buy one module for $70 and literally never have to spend another penny on it, yet ED still keeps pumping out updates, free maps, engine upgrades and users still make a LOT of mods and content, which ED very graciously allows, all for nothing. If that’s not standing behind your product and supporting the community, I don’t know what is.

@draconus commented earlier on this post to me “ Should've made report and upload a track to help devs actually do something about it.“ and I thought about that. Straight to the point and 100% correct.  Having a mouthful of something to say on a forum, doesn’t help the ED or DCS in any way. Correctly presenting a bug or any odd things happening in the proper format, no matter how insignificant it may seem, is literally the only way we can all help to make progress.

We should all be thankful that @NineLine, @BIGNEWY, @Flappie, @SkateZilla and others do respond to us. I’d love to see other big studios actually engage with their community on a day to day basis the way the ED team does.  -edited

Nuff said, afternoon rant over. Time to hit the skies before picking kiddos up from school!

Edited December 1, 2022 by MadKreator

[SkateZilla]

2 minutes ago, MadKreator said:

    A lot of us like to complain about things the we think should be done a certain way, myself included. But the vast majority of us have no idea how any of this software stuff actually works, myself most definitely included!  I see AI do dumb dumb stuff, and whine about it. Then @NineLine points out of why some things are the way they are, most of which I haven’t considered because I don’t know what involved. I’ve never considered the old FM of the AI to have anything to do with how they act, nor do I have any idea how any of that works. I try not to sound disgruntled in my posts because I am not, if any ever come off that way, i do apologize.

     The ED team does do a great job of updating DCS whether its what any of us want at the moment or not. What may seem agonizingly slow to me, may be leaps and bounds from a devs perspective. As @Exorcet pointed out, other AAA games are a total ripoff in comparison to DCS, if you think of it in long term engament.  Think of COD, Every year( about)  a new one is released which really isn’t much more than a re-skinned version of its predecessor, yet you pay $70-100 each time and in that year between is usually spent just getting everything in the game to work, all while pumping out micro transactions for skins and useless trinkets. ( can you imagine paying $20 per livery for each aircraft in DCS) Then the previous rendition is all but abandoned. DCS you could buy one module for $70 and literally never have to spend another penny on it, yet ED still keeps pumping out updates, free maps, engine upgrades and users still make a LOT of mods and content, which ED very graciously allows, all for nothing. If that’s not standing behind your product and supporting the community, I don’t know what is.

@draconus commented earlier on this post to me “ Should've made report and upload a track to help devs actually do something about it.“ and I thought about that. Straight to the point and 100% correct.  Having a mouthful of something to say on a forum, doesn’t help the ED or DCS in any way. Correctly presenting a bug or any odd things happening in the proper format, no matter how insignificant it may seem, is literally the only way we can all help to make progress.

We should all be thankful that @NineLine, @BIGNEWY, @Flappie, @SkateZilla and others do respond to us. I’d love to see the day that anyone from Activision, EA, even Microsoft actually engages with their community on a day to day basis.

Nuff said, afternoon rant over. Time to hit the skies before picking kiddos up from school!

 

MS Actually Does, As I do work for MS and Affiliate Studios (343,Turn 10 etc).
343 has a bad habit of actually just talking themselves into holes their PR Team can't dig them out of.

 

[MadKreator]

9 minutes ago, SkateZilla said:

MS Actually Does, As I do work for MS and Affiliate Studios (343,Turn 10 etc).
343 has a bad habit of actually just talking themselves into holes their PR Team can't dig them out of.

 

I was just throwing out random examples, no offense meant , I will edit the previous statement.

Edited December 1, 2022 by MadKreator

[SkateZilla]

5 minutes ago, MadKreator said:

I was just throwing out random examples, no offense meant , I will edit the previous statement.

 

no edits needed, was just pointing out, that some studios communicate too much, then when something happens they have to do a 180 and the fanbase riots.

it's the equive of someone from ED coming on the boards and saying Vulkan was scratched, we are sticking with DX11, lol, well not really.
more like Vulkan will be here with 2.9, then day before 2.9 is released, say it was Scratched and we are sticking with DX11.

ie: 343 Advertised features for Halo:I, delayed it a few times, communicated that it was coming hundreds of times, then poof, said the feature was cut.
they should have never mentioned it nor promoted it as coming until they were 100% sure it was going to make the cut.

Edited December 1, 2022 by SkateZilla

[MadKreator]

7 minutes ago, SkateZilla said:

no edits needed, was just pointing out, that some studios communicate too much, then when something happens they have to do a 180 and the fanbase riots.

it's the equive of someone from ED coming on the boards and saying Vulkan was scratched, we are sticking with DX11, lol

I’ve seen many an uproar on here even regarding MT/Vulkan/DC with just a very prospective release date. Even an announced module will ruffle peoples feathers if even a year is hinted at. I totally understand why things are kept quiet. It might be frustrating to some of us, sometimes, but all for good reason in the grand scheme.

Edited December 1, 2022 by MadKreator