Guns only dogfight is a PITA!

[Sparrow_1976]

Greetings,

I'm looking for some suggestion...

I started the Zone 5 campaign, in the second mission I have to do a guns only dogfight against an F-5. I can get to its 6 and follow it without too much difficulty, and if I had the -9s I could almost certainly launch one. The big problem, having to shoot it with the gun, is that the F-5 moves like a mad fly, jumps from side to side and I can't get it in my sights. The only thing I can do is try to shoot in the moments when I think I might get lucky (but that almost never works). Do you have any advice?

Many thanks.

[Kula66]

Get closer ... when he fills the screen, fire!

DCS AI defends like a demon.

[cw4ogden]

1 hour ago, Sparrow_1976 said:

Greetings,

I'm looking for some suggestion...

I started the Zone 5 campaign, in the second mission I have to do a guns only dogfight against an F-5. I can get to its 6 and follow it without too much difficulty, and if I had the -9s I could almost certainly launch one. The big problem, having to shoot it with the gun, is that the F-5 moves like a mad fly, jumps from side to side and I can't get it in my sights. The only thing I can do is try to shoot in the moments when I think I might get lucky (but that almost never works). Do you have any advice?

Many thanks.

Hitting very maneuverable targets is easier if you try to draw or pull a line of fire with your guns over the target, as opposed to firing when the enemy is in your pipper.  Pull a burst thru his flight path, as opposed to trying to nail him in the gun sight.

 

[Callsign JoNay]

3 hours ago, Sparrow_1976 said:

Greetings,

I'm looking for some suggestion...

I started the Zone 5 campaign, in the second mission I have to do a guns only dogfight against an F-5. I can get to its 6 and follow it without too much difficulty, and if I had the -9s I could almost certainly launch one. The big problem, having to shoot it with the gun, is that the F-5 moves like a mad fly, jumps from side to side and I can't get it in my sights. The only thing I can do is try to shoot in the moments when I think I might get lucky (but that almost never works). Do you have any advice?

Many thanks.

Shooting down the AI when you're on their dead-6 is actually super hard in the current build of DCS. It's much easier to shoot down a human opponent, even a good one. 

When I'm on the 6 of an AI, sometimes I intentionally maneuver way out of plane to try to coax them out of that jinky back and fourth defense they default to. If you move out of plane they will actually pull a more sustained turn to break back into you in a way that more closely resembles a normal dogfight, and they give you more surface area to shoot at. It will be more of a snapshot than a tracking shot, which is also difficult in the Tomcat with it's massive canopy bow, but it can be easier than the other situation.

[captain_dalan]

19 hours ago, cw4ogden said:

Hitting very maneuverable targets is easier if you try to draw or pull a line of fire with your guns over the target, as opposed to firing when the enemy is in your pipper.  Pull a burst thru his flight path, as opposed to trying to nail him in the gun sight.

 

This!
Or, alternatively, start practicing snap shots without a lock and just eyeball the tracers. In a system where the pilot has no stamina and fatigue bars/metrics a human or an AI can jink or stay at bellow blackout pull indefinitely. So try reading where the target's gonna be and fire in that general area. Humans do these jinks much more rarely then the AI, and usually are less erratic at it. But still. practicing firing without a lock is always a good idea. 

[bonesvf103]

Ever since the AI update I've had issues with their behavior.  Why is it that we have to change tactics to adapt to behavior that probably would not happen in real life, which results in our actions being something that would not be done in real life.  It has been said a couple of times in the above that a human would not do that, or would not be able to.  It seems bogus to me that we have to fight against AI opponents that are not realistically simulated and/or do things that such as never losing energy in turns or being able to see you know problem in the clouds, but you can't see him, etc.

After being able to gunfight with AI before the update, and now getting mediocre results when fighting them, it results in a huge exercise in frustration.  I've used the tactics that HB suggested to me, and they work the best, but results though successful usually result in me being dangerously low or completely running out of gas, or in stalemating the engagement because of running out of ammo, or both.  I doubt fighter pilots in real life would ever have to resort to tactics where they randomly have to guess at where the target MAY be and shoot, or always have a snapshot and rarely a tracking shot, or otherwise have the tactic that they learn in flight school or TOPGUN or what have you be "spray and pray."  I don't even flip the ACM cover or hit HI gun rate anymore even though that's what an F-14 driver would do (I've seen it on fence check lists) because I'll be out of ammo in a minute or two fighting these AI.

On the plus side, I'm always on the offensive and he almost never gets a shot at me.

Nonetheless, for now, I will see about incorporating the new suggestions in the above and seeing if that helps, so thanks for those other tips.

v6,

boNes

[draconus]

3 hours ago, bonesvf103 said:

Why is it that we have to change tactics to adapt to behavior that probably would not happen in real life, which results in our actions being something that would not be done in real life. 

The pilot should always learn and adapt. IRL you either Fox-2 or win the training sortie after 3s with piper on him. And watch you fuel to actually rtb - not only to win the fight.

[RustBelt]

7 hours ago, bonesvf103 said:

Ever since the AI update I've had issues with their behavior.  Why is it that we have to change tactics to adapt to behavior that probably would not happen in real life, which results in our actions being something that would not be done in real life.  It has been said a couple of times in the above that a human would not do that, or would not be able to.  It seems bogus to me that we have to fight against AI opponents that are not realistically simulated and/or do things that such as never losing energy in turns or being able to see you know problem in the clouds, but you can't see him, etc.

After being able to gunfight with AI before the update, and now getting mediocre results when fighting them, it results in a huge exercise in frustration.  I've used the tactics that HB suggested to me, and they work the best, but results though successful usually result in me being dangerously low or completely running out of gas, or in stalemating the engagement because of running out of ammo, or both.  I doubt fighter pilots in real life would ever have to resort to tactics where they randomly have to guess at where the target MAY be and shoot, or always have a snapshot and rarely a tracking shot, or otherwise have the tactic that they learn in flight school or TOPGUN or what have you be "spray and pray."  I don't even flip the ACM cover or hit HI gun rate anymore even though that's what an F-14 driver would do (I've seen it on fence check lists) because I'll be out of ammo in a minute or two fighting these AI.

On the plus side, I'm always on the offensive and he almost never gets a shot at me.

Nonetheless, for now, I will see about incorporating the new suggestions in the above and seeing if that helps, so thanks for those other tips.

v6,

boNes

DCS is an imperfect system. Don’t forget the opponent AI is part of a Free program you happened to buy a 3rd party add on for. How good an Opponent system do you think you get for 0 money?
 

It would be sweet if a 3rd party could make a superior AI, but planes and scenery seem to be enough of a handful as it is. 

[Lionheartwolf]

I don't have Zone 5 DLC but it sounds an awful like the Caucasus Dogfight against the Flanker.

I've found the best strategy that worked for me (at least initially while you learn more) is to take the AI head on instead of staying at their six. In a real dogfight, or against real players I'd imagine it's insanely risky, (so don't get in the habit) but the AI is just plain bad at it. After enough practice you can snapshot them head on, and they will never get a shot off. I'd say they only even try 10% of the time, and I might have only been hit by it once or twice at most, if you miss they are more than happy to let you try again.

After awhile being at their six isn't too bad, sometimes I find it easier to just uncage and let them fly into my guns instead of trying to wrestle with the piper at .3nm. I think my least favorite part about gunfighting AI in the F14 is when the AI just wants to take off. Listening to Jester tell me how much I suck for going too fast while I'm at a negative closure rate is pretty annoying. 

If the AI is universal it should work for you too, but out of all the Instant Action dogfights I've played across various maps that Flanker was the only one I've seen that cares to dodge similar to how you describe. Even the F-5 in Nevada during the Fox-2 fight can be hit with guns pretty easily. Heck, the 2x F-16s from Syria are pretty easy comparatively as well. They just don't try to dodge nearly as much. Maybe none of this advice will work, but at the very least, if it were me that would be the first thing I'd do with my combined knowledge from similar annoying fights. 

[draconus]

2 hours ago, Lionheartwolf said:

I've found the best strategy that worked for me (at least initially while you learn more) is to take the AI head on instead of staying at their six

Seriously? You call it dogfight?

Doing it IRL you either break the training rules or lose sanity - you should've use missiles instead if it was real fight.

[Dragon1-1]

Yup, head-on guns shots are not allowed in most training, in WWII they were a thing in real combat, but modern jets fly too fast and they have missiles anyway, so that's what you use for head-on shots.

As for the jinking, this is a real maneuver called guns defense or guns-D. The whole point is to make the actual shot difficult and frustrate the other pilot into making mistakes and/or wasting ammo, usually while you have no other option left and he's glued to your tail. IRL, it usually only delays the inevitable (unless you have a wingman who can help), but I suppose the AI doesn't get the extreme drag penalty such maneuvers should cause. You can't do it for very long IRL because you'd fall out of the sky, but it can keep you alive for a while.

[draconus]

53 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

I suppose the AI doesn't get the extreme drag penalty such maneuvers should cause

It doesn't seem like they do any extreme maneuvers either.

[Dragon1-1]

No, but sideslip is pretty draggy, and when you get into a guns-D, you're usually pretty slow. Guns-D consists of aerodynamically dirty maneuvers, which should probably cost more airspeed than they do for AI.

[FR4GGL3]

21 hours ago, captain_dalan said:

This!
Or, alternatively, start practicing snap shots without a lock and just eyeball the tracers.

yep. I find the fixed pipper that you get by pressing the seam lock Button helpfull at times. But this might be me because it looks more like the typical 3D Shooter Crosshair.

@ whoever it wrote: Don't get frustratet from the AI. I like the Fighting it does these days way more than the infinite YoYos they did before. And if you think the Caucasus Map Flanker is tough, try the Nevada Mig 29.

Edited April 18, 2023 by FR4GGL3

[bonesvf103]

On 4/17/2023 at 11:17 AM, draconus said:

The pilot should always learn and adapt. IRL you either Fox-2 or win the training sortie after 3s with piper on him. And watch you fuel to actually rtb - not only to win the fight.

Yes, but note that I said that it was for situations that would not happen in real life.

So, if the AI suddenly can make perfect square corner turns while spinning 180 deg to face you to fire a shot, you're supposed to be able to adapt to that in the sim?  It's an extreme example but that's what I'm trying to get across...you shouldn't have to adapt to something that wouldn't happen in real life.

Also, I was talking a guns-only dogfight.  Of course if I had missiles it would be over much sooner and easy.

v6,

boNes

Edited April 18, 2023 by bonesvf103

[lunaticfringe]

7 hours ago, bonesvf103 said:

Ever since the AI update I've had issues with their behavior.  Why is it that we have to change tactics to adapt to behavior that probably would not happen in real life, which results in our actions being something that would not be done in real life.  It has been said a couple of times in the above that a human would not do that, or would not be able to.  It seems bogus to me that we have to fight against AI opponents that are not realistically simulated and/or do things that such as never losing energy in turns or being able to see you know problem in the clouds, but you can't see him, etc.

There's nothing that the AI is doing with regards to its roll, jink, reversal dynamic that breaks the laws of physics, or is not something capable of being employed by a human.  That it's not tactically advantageous- as it's not generating larger offset, is erroneously solving range dynamics for the shooter, and makes no attempt to cause a closure problem, doesn't mean it doesn't work in isolation, which is why so many seem to have trouble with it.  The AI currently gets stuck in the tail-chase loop for a very interesting reason, though- because the shooter missed their first shot attempt.  It also breaks out of the loop quite easily- let it get 45+ degrees off the nose, and it stops.  This is why you can get into a flat scissors with the AI, rather than it immediately going off to the tail chase races.  So if it gets stuck in the loop, redefine- which is what you should be doing, anyway.  

 

7 hours ago, bonesvf103 said:

I doubt fighter pilots in real life would ever have to resort to tactics where they randomly have to guess at where the target MAY be and shoot, or always have a snapshot and rarely a tracking shot, or otherwise have the tactic that they learn in flight school or TOPGUN or what have you be "spray and pray."

Every air to air gunshot in history has been taken at a guess; the instrumentation making the guess has gotten better, but it's only ever been based on where the target was historically, and compensating for one bullet time of flight.  To whit: "always a snapshot, rarely a tracking shot"- you literally just described the Thach weave, and it wrecked havoc all over the Japanese.  Now acting as a virtual descendant of the First Team, we don't like high aspect gunnery?

Deflection and high aspect gunnery is a thing, and it remains a thing everywhere outside of the training bubble.  If you're beating a guy one circle, you need to be capable of finishing without a reversal- otherwise, all you've done is extend his life expectancy.  Same applies for large out-of-maneuvering plane entry.  The sight is giving plenty of corrective drift data even without a lock.  The canopy centerline is there, as is the upper handle bolts on the frame that can be used as a visual gauge.  The more comfortable you are transitioning from high to the boresight cross, and applying the rudders to catch the bandit along the line the gunsight is drifting along, the more successful you're going to be.

[Lionheartwolf]

13 hours ago, draconus said:

Seriously? You call it dogfight?

Doing it IRL you either break the training rules or lose sanity - you should've use missiles instead if it was real fight.

I call it what DCS called it. Talk to ED about that one. When you click on Instant Action it's clearly labeled "Dogfight." If you are talking about something specific to Zone V's campaign I can't comment too much, my commentary was mostly in response to AI behavior. 

[Vakarian]

15 hours ago, Lionheartwolf said:

I call it what DCS called it. Talk to ED about that one. When you click on Instant Action it's clearly labeled "Dogfight." If you are talking about something specific to Zone V's campaign I can't comment too much, my commentary was mostly in response to AI behavior. 

It also clearly says no fight until merge, but who has time to read the mission briefing...

[Despayre]

20 hours ago, bonesvf103 said:

Yes, but note that I said that it was for situations that would not happen in real life.

So, if the AI suddenly can make perfect square corner turns while spinning 180 deg to face you to fire a shot, you're supposed to be able to adapt to that in the sim?  It's an extreme example but that's what I'm trying to get across...you shouldn't have to adapt to something that wouldn't happen in real life.

 

Which laws of physics are you claiming are impossible that the AI is doing? I think what you're suggesting is, it's "extremely unlikely", and that's definitely something worth training for. I get that the AI is way too good at it, but individually, there's nothing it's doing that's not possible, and the fact that it's *really* good at some things, is balanced pretty well by all the incredibly stupid things that the AI does, like not fire at things, not engage targets when it should, etc, but no one complains about that for some reason...

[bonesvf103]

5 hours ago, Vakarian said:

It also clearly says no fight until merge, but who has time to read the mission briefing...

Yes, there are mission briefings that say gentleman's rules, no shooting at the merge but the AI does it anyway.  But I just write that off as the AI changed but they didn't change the briefing.

v6,

boNes

[lunaticfringe]

Re: shots before the merge:

"Credibility down, kill ratio up."

- D-Hose

[bonesvf103]

1 hour ago, Despayre said:

Which laws of physics are you claiming are impossible that the AI is doing? I think what you're suggesting is, it's "extremely unlikely", and that's definitely something worth training for. I get that the AI is way too good at it, but individually, there's nothing it's doing that's not possible, and the fact that it's *really* good at some things, is balanced pretty well by all the incredibly stupid things that the AI does, like not fire at things, not engage targets when it should, etc, but no one complains about that for some reason...

The same kinds that I've seen and read people talk about where the AI bandits go UFO even after the last AI patch.  I had a tacview where the bandit was tightly turning and turning and turning literally 7 times at around 400+ kias and never lost any energy whereas I was bleeding energy as I should be (because of physics), or they climb and climb and climb...stuff like that.  Or there have been times when I am slow so I point my nose down in full burner and she sloooowly accelerates.  I have a hard time believing a 54000 lb fighter with all that afterburner thrust in a dive and using God's G can only crawl from slow to fast and not have it  happen quickly.

It's just not intuitive to me in these cases; it doesn't make sense.

v6,

boNes

5 minutes ago, lunaticfringe said:

Re: shots before the merge:

"Credibility down, kill ratio up."

- D-Hose

I think that was Hoser that said and demonstrated that...unless D-Hose is the same person?

v6,

boNes

[draconus]

12 hours ago, bonesvf103 said:

The same kinds that I've seen and read people talk about where the AI bandits go UFO even after the last AI patch.  I had a tacview where the bandit was tightly turning and turning and turning literally 7 times at around 400+ kias and never lost any energy whereas I was bleeding energy as I should be (because of physics), or they climb and climb and climb...stuff like that.  Or there have been times when I am slow so I point my nose down in full burner and she sloooowly accelerates.  I have a hard time believing a 54000 lb fighter with all that afterburner thrust in a dive and using God's G can only crawl from slow to fast and not have it  happen quickly.

It's just not intuitive to me in these cases; it doesn't make sense.

Everybody knows the AI flies by Simple FM while we are limited by Professional FM rules (EFM by ED naming). Better General FM for AI is in plans or WIP. It's not a UFO though and the acceleration is just not that you'd imagine it to be. The heavier the slower it accelerates, mind you.

Edited April 20, 2023 by draconus

[Quid]

7 hours ago, bonesvf103 said:

I think that was Hoser that said and demonstrated that...unless D-Hose is the same person?

v6,

boNes

D-Hose = Da Hose = The Hose = Hoser [Satrapa].  He would sometimes sign "D-Hose" instead of "Hoser."

[FR4GGL3]

Sometimes it might help to accept the idea that DCS is still a game. Even if no one likes that. That mindset could help stopping frustration and accepting a few things that could be optimized - do it sporty.

I mean, after all it is not the real thing. You can have almost all the fun without the pressure and the risk. Because of this, I would call it a game.