Ai low-level aircraft exposed too much, and forget sources of recent ground fire.

[zzzspace]

Ai low-level aircraft are still exposing themselves far too much, for too long, when making their attack runs.

 

This problem is being compounded by the fact that they have no 'memory', and right away forget the rough locations where AAA and MANPADs came from, that have already fired at them.

 

So if they do successfully get past the first missile shots, or AAA bursts, then move forwards so that another launcher or AAA unit fires at them, they will often then turn away, but back towards where the first missile launches or AAA came from, and then get nailed by them ... doh! :D

 

Any basically competent pilot would be very unlikely to do that in real life.

 

So the Ai pilots need to 'remember' where SAMs and AAA fire roughly came from in recent minutes, so that if you set Ai aircraft to "Evade Fire" within the Mission Editor's advanced waypoint settings, then they should evade all known recent locations of such fire, within say the past 10 mins. And to not just turn-away, from current firing zones, just to fly right back over an area they were fired at from, seconds or minutes before.

 

 

For a low-level approach and attack, "Evade Fire" to me involves:

 

(1) Dispensing CMS with a break-turn away, between 90 to 135 degrees from the source of the fire,

 

(2) Once the heading change has been achieved, to dive for any nearby low terrain depression, for cover, or between buildings for clutter, but only within a forward 30 to 45 degree arc off the nose, for 3 nm or so, whilst bobbing up and down 100 feet or so, plus weaving or yawing.

 

(3) Once clear, come back around for the next attack, but from a new direction, where the Ai aircraft has not been getting fired upon previously, or at least, not recently/

 

(4) For coming off a target, and the egress see # (1). Climbing slowly and cruising back out again at 2,000 feet for 250 kts straight-and-level, is not compatible with longevity or reduced airframe hits and low systems damage.

 

 

The complication to that is that the locked or otherwise assigned target may also be firing at you, but in that case the Ai aircraft must use "Passive Defense", and not evasion, to just keep prosecuting the actual target, regardless.

 

This I think would greatly improve the Ai aircraft's ability to survive attacks that they make, and this is very much needed, so that both the Ai behaviours, and attack results, and the suffered losses approach more realistic outcomes.

 

(get that about 'right' and the SIM will finally be approaching the pre-requisite behaviour and results, in which a dynamic campaign would actually work ... and fairly credibly)

[Speed]

You have some interesting ideas. One thing that I think AI need to use more intelligently are some very simple survival tactics- standoff range and high altitude. AI tend to dump altitude too much sometimes, bringing them right into the heart of an enemy missile envelope. You can fix some of this bad behavior though, by setting them to "Evade fire".

 

Additionally, besides remembering where threats are, they should "know" more about those threat's capabilities: for example, if they know the location of a 2S6 or SA-8, they should never allow themselves to get within like 7km of it. Additionally, they should be able to make intelligent guesses about what behaviors will get them killed (i.e., trying to gun a Tunguska) and be allowed to abort the mission if they can't engage some threat without getting themselves killed.

 

This I think would greatly improve the Ai aircraft's ability to survive attacks that they make, and this is very much needed, so that both the Ai behaviours, and attack results, and the suffered losses approach more realistic outcomes.

 

(get that about 'right' and the SIM will finally be approaching the pre-requisite behaviour and results, in which a dynamic campaign would actually work ... and fairly credibly)

 

I also view plane AI behavior as one of the big impediments to creating a dynamic campaign.

Edited August 22, 2012 by Speed

[AtaliaA1]

Your Idea would degrade "Player" involvement to a lower rating. Remember this is in the end a game intended to be entertainment for the purchaser of the "Sim" and with this in mind lower player involvment would remove the dynamic part of the entertainment intended.

 

All AI are dumned down for this reason, it allows more play time (entertainment) for the buyer. FPSs are notorious for dumn AI, shoot the guy standing next to an AI combatant and he looks around like a deer caught in headlights instead of diving for cover. This is the same concept as in the AI of this Sim. It just allows for a longer and more dynamic player involvment experience.

[zzzspace]

Your Idea would degrade "Player" involvement to a lower rating. Remember this is in the end a game intended to be entertainment for the purchaser of the "Sim" and with this in mind lower player involvment would remove the dynamic part of the entertainment intended.

 

All AI are dumned down for this reason, it allows more play time (entertainment) for the buyer. FPSs are notorious for dumn AI, shoot the guy standing next to an AI combatant and he looks around like a deer caught in headlights instead of diving for cover. This is the same concept as in the AI of this Sim. It just allows for a longer and more dynamic player involvment experience.

 

Incorrect, the Ai has never been 'dumbed-down' at any point. It was never intelligent to begin with. It's always been quite terrible, but has shown very slow and halting improvements over the past ten years.

 

This topic also has zero to do with how long you last in the sim, as far as I can see as that has to do with your tactics and skills and your own decision-making. Don't do it wrong and you'll last far longer, hit your target, and RTB. This is a technical study SIM, not a shooter, there is no comparison.

 

But if you want or require 'dumbed-down' Ai, you simply sellect the level of Ai that you want, or else can handle, within the mission editor - there is an option for it for every unit in the SIM.

 

But I also completely fail to see how making the Ai work better makes the game-play less-enjoyable for anyone! For when/if the Ai works, and wingmen do as asked, without just blundering in and getting themselves hosed in seconds, then the mission's goals could be attained, and you would have actual teamwork occurring routinely. And survival and RTB and target prosecutions would become vaguely realistic.

 

And if these things did work as one would hope and expect, I dare say most players would greatly enjoy that, a very great deal ... and considerably more than before.

Edited August 22, 2012 by zzzspace

[zzzspace]

You have some interesting ideas. One thing that I think AI need to use more intelligently are some very simple survival tactics- standoff range and high altitude. AI tend to dump altitude too much sometimes, bringing them right into the heart of an enemy missile envelope. You can fix some of this bad behavior though, by setting them to "Evade fire".

 

Additionally, besides remembering where threats are, they should "know" more about those threat's capabilities: for example, if they know the location of a 2S6 or SA-8, they should never allow themselves to get within like 7km of it. Additionally, they should be able to make intelligent guesses about what behaviors will get them killed (i.e., trying to gun a Tunguska) and be allowed to abort the mission if they can't engage some threat without getting themselves killed.

 

I also view plane AI behavior as one of the big impediments to creating a dynamic campaign.

 

 

Stand-off and altitude tactics definitely, Speed. Completely agree there as well.

 

In saying the above I'm looking at it a bit more from the direction of taking advantage of the ability to sneak in and attack at low-level now (lets presume recent INTEL is good and current) now that this sort of flight finally works within DCS World. And to leverage cover and terrain as much as possible for ingress and egress and also in between attack runs.

 

It can be done and used for CAS and ground attack but I'm also looking forward to doing strike tactics with an F-15E ... and how all this will fit and sit within a DC.

 

You'd certainly like to think the Ai would check the RAW and see what's out there and where. :) :D Obviously they have to take some risk with the SAMs, especially optical and IR. But if aware a SAM is around, and the location, they should fly accordingly when within range. You know what I mean. If the Ai can be made to work well in gun-only, then they should be able to nail dodge CMS and get out of dodge manoeuvres. I would prefer they didn't abort, but you can basically make them abort now via the ME.

 

So I'd like them to take measure risks with the sharp responses and good memory, and so care about approach and regard to terrain opportunities. At the moment the Ai use altitude and distance to get away, but they don't use cover, except by accident.

 

Been thinking for a long time that Ai is the big issue to clean up before a DC will work and make sense as a plan-able and achievable campaign.

[Speed]

Your Idea would degrade "Player" involvement to a lower rating. Remember this is in the end a game intended to be entertainment for the purchaser of the "Sim" and with this in mind lower player involvment would remove the dynamic part of the entertainment intended.

 

All AI are dumned down for this reason, it allows more play time (entertainment) for the buyer. FPSs are notorious for dumn AI, shoot the guy standing next to an AI combatant and he looks around like a deer caught in headlights instead of diving for cover. This is the same concept as in the AI of this Sim. It just allows for a longer and more dynamic player involvment experience.

 

This is simply incorrect. AI is NEVER made deliberately dumb. The developers want the most realistic AI behavior as possible. This is a SIMULATOR. Better AI makes the game better, by the definition of the genre.

 

Also, you're not correct about most FPS games. How many times have you heard some developer of some FPS game touting how smart their AI is, how their AI uses team tactics, utilizes cover, sets up ambushes, etc? I see FPS developers bragging about their AI all the time.

 

Furthermore, it doesn't even match the facts of DCS. Plane AI is currently too dumb. IMO, ground AI is currently too GOOD (at least, in being able to spot and engage and react to targets instantly).

Edited August 22, 2012 by Speed

[winz]

Your Idea would degrade "Player" involvement to a lower rating. Remember this is in the end a game intended to be entertainment for the purchaser of the "Sim" and with this in mind lower player involvment would remove the dynamic part of the entertainment intended.

 

If I would like to babysit someone, then I would be playing Sims, not a high-fidelity simulator.