PDA

View Full Version : Some serious flaws of the game



tigertalon
09-17-2004, 08:14 AM
Hello all.

This is based on my experience flying offline and besides the common topics i think those things should be improved - at least I hope I will see this fixed in PF and BOB.

1. It really pisses me off when (during a daylight attack on an airfield) I order my wingmen to strike AAA first, and they begin strafing and bombing searchlights first!!! They should also attack only light flak first, and then deal with 88s or 85s... But no, they strike searchlights, heavy flak and then the light one...

2. Also, the plane covenrings on an airfield, those green camouflage ones, made out of net, rope and greenery, are impenetrable for bullets and shells. To take out aircraft under this cover you need a rocket or a bomb. Nonsense.

3. If and AI is landing and he is jumped by enemy fighters during the landing procedure, he is unable to fight back. He will just fly on straight to his death... This way you can down enormous numbers of AI in offline campaign. Just wait for them to return to their base and dispatch them one by one during landing. Turkeyshooting.

4. I am not awarded with victory if my plane crashes before opponent does. For example, I attack 8 sturmoviks, place a few bullets in an oil radiator of each of them, but the last one shoots me down and I crash before any of sturmoviks. After a while all sturmoviks will crash, but I will not get a single victory (although I bailed over friendly territory and survived).

5. Fuel tanks and especially bombs should brake away under high G. If you enter 5 g turn with 500kg bomb, it should brake away as its weigth is 2500 kg... In fact this happened a lot during ww2 (have no source at the moment tho), for example when pilot had to react instantly (being jumped or something) and he forgot or had no time to drop the tanks or bombs...

Those 5 points are not whining, they are not something based on my feeling or opinion, they are based on the facts. They are not subjective, but IMO objective. I also did not post screenshots and tracks about first 4 points as they are obvious and anyone can try it out himself.

Thanks for posting your thoughts about that.

regards, tt

tigertalon
09-17-2004, 08:14 AM
Hello all.

This is based on my experience flying offline and besides the common topics i think those things should be improved - at least I hope I will see this fixed in PF and BOB.

1. It really pisses me off when (during a daylight attack on an airfield) I order my wingmen to strike AAA first, and they begin strafing and bombing searchlights first!!! They should also attack only light flak first, and then deal with 88s or 85s... But no, they strike searchlights, heavy flak and then the light one...

2. Also, the plane covenrings on an airfield, those green camouflage ones, made out of net, rope and greenery, are impenetrable for bullets and shells. To take out aircraft under this cover you need a rocket or a bomb. Nonsense.

3. If and AI is landing and he is jumped by enemy fighters during the landing procedure, he is unable to fight back. He will just fly on straight to his death... This way you can down enormous numbers of AI in offline campaign. Just wait for them to return to their base and dispatch them one by one during landing. Turkeyshooting.

4. I am not awarded with victory if my plane crashes before opponent does. For example, I attack 8 sturmoviks, place a few bullets in an oil radiator of each of them, but the last one shoots me down and I crash before any of sturmoviks. After a while all sturmoviks will crash, but I will not get a single victory (although I bailed over friendly territory and survived).

5. Fuel tanks and especially bombs should brake away under high G. If you enter 5 g turn with 500kg bomb, it should brake away as its weigth is 2500 kg... In fact this happened a lot during ww2 (have no source at the moment tho), for example when pilot had to react instantly (being jumped or something) and he forgot or had no time to drop the tanks or bombs...

Those 5 points are not whining, they are not something based on my feeling or opinion, they are based on the facts. They are not subjective, but IMO objective. I also did not post screenshots and tracks about first 4 points as they are obvious and anyone can try it out himself.

Thanks for posting your thoughts about that.

regards, tt

p1ngu666
09-17-2004, 08:44 AM
good points
infact high g pull ups where used when a bomb stayed hung up and wouldnt drop, just to break it off http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg
<123_GWood_JG123>NO SPAM!
<badsight>my name is tracy and pingu is the Antichrist of Combat Flight Simmers
<lexx_luthor>flowers across the land in BoB
<stiglr> Ctrl+F1.

WWMaxGunz
09-17-2004, 09:57 AM
#2 has also been posted about before, long ago.

But consider is it really that important?

Troops in trucks don't turn to casualties by close strikes either.

None of that kills it for me except for the AI but then decent AI is an art in itself.
IMO the AI should fly tabled FM since they won't have to deal much with flying and
they would do far fewer impossible moves anyway. Tabled FM AI's were only so bad in
being predictable IIRC. They didn't collide with each other. They're also less load
on the hardware. But... it's wayyyy too late for that.


Neal

Luftcaca
09-17-2004, 10:07 AM
excellent points mate

I'd like to add this about bombing (been mentionned already but not corrected)

Sometimes you order your wingmen to attack a particulat target thats wasnt the designated target of the mission. They will "Jettison" their bombs b4 starting their attack...I mean....they should at least try to drop their bombs on the target you want em to attack heh?

thats one of the 12905 flaws of the AI

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

wants flyable:

early 110's
IL-10
Pe-3

tigertalon
09-18-2004, 02:00 PM
Got another one, which I forgot to mention in 1st post, about AI. AI fighters have wrong calculation of prediction point. They simply don't give enough lead when on your 6. When there is a fighter on your 6, you just have to pul some 40 degree bank and turn slowly. He will just discharge all his ammo a few meter away from you. You can even cool down your engine during that! And when AI runs out of ammo he and especially his wingie really become sitting ducks.

IMO it would be worth to sacrifice one or two new flyables in new patch and instead of that fix milion bugs like those...

regards, tt

Luftcaca
09-18-2004, 02:08 PM
tigertalon I agree with you 110%
cuz of all the whining here, devs focused on mostly offline issues and fixing stuff about FM's and guns while the AI remained almost the same

and I'd like to add something else:

if you engage bombers far from their bombing waypoints, the escort will completely ignore you, even if they are as close as 500 meters from you
You can also try to shoot down the escort, they wont even notice... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

wants flyable:

early 110's
IL-10
Pe-3

Vrabac
09-18-2004, 02:25 PM
I would be happy with 30 flyables sacrificed for bug fixes. But no, there has to be many product features so they can write long texts at the back of the box. Yak9m,u,k,ut,o,nj,gmq,a,fs,a... AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! Bf109G2,G6,G6late,G6AS,G10,G14... AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! But bullets don't penetrate tents and AI likes AAA so much hey always fight over it. And this ammo wastage too...

Obi_Kwiet
09-18-2004, 09:58 PM
You got serious and minor mixed up.

tigertalon
09-19-2004, 02:30 PM
Bump and another one: Offline there should not be an option to switch to enemy radio frequency.

+ radio communications are far from real now. Pretty important IMO.

regards, tt

Aaron_GT
09-19-2004, 03:47 PM
AI is very difficult to create by programmers in rules that seem to be 'reasonable' as there are far too many possible options.

Ultimately the only way to do things is to use a learning algorithm, and build it up gradually 'rewarding' appropriate behaviour (including disengaging when appropriate). One complexity is determining how long a sequence of actions should be chained together, the other being how to represent the battle situation in a suitably fuzzy way. Finally it needs to be able to make tactical mistakes on lower levels of skill.

The IL2 AI is not perfect but given the complexity required and the time it would take to train a system it isn't too bad. Hopefully there will be better things coming in the future.

HansKnappstick
09-20-2004, 07:47 AM
Honestly, the disengaging algorythm needs reworking and it should not be sooo difficult to do.

If 12 Blue fighters engage 12 Red ones, and after a while there are 10 Reds and 3 Blues intact, I think, I suppose, I imagine that those Blues would see the light and head for home at their top speed! But, in the game, an AI plane never leaves the battle unless seriously damaged - but then it is too late usually.

I don't think there were many encounters in WW2 where one side lost 100% of its forces! But in the offline play it happens almost constantly.

Vrabac
09-20-2004, 08:29 AM
Here's an example. Polish campaign, September 3rd, Luftwaffe attacked PZL factory, major air battle occured. Zerstorers destroyed 3 Polish fighers, lost 1 of their own number. And there were 40 Polish fighters involved, don't know how many 110s. THere are 2 reasons for such results.

1) Pilots weren't very good at shooting, because they didn't have the opportunity to get KIA for 50 times and learn something out of it. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

2) They were playing with their lives. I know what would I do if I was a Polish figter pilot: RUN! You are very careful when you can burn out in the cockipt. No engaging as soon as you see them. No engaging when in a non favorable position. No engaging if you don't feel like it.

But than the game would be a bit boring. Pilots flew dozens of sorties without a single kill, many times not even seeing the enemy. However, I'd like something to be done with this. At least to make survival rate a little higher.

Willey
09-20-2004, 11:43 AM
Sound.

Flak.

Gunners.

Visibility.

Willey
09-20-2004, 11:43 AM
AND LOADOUTS. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

BM357_TinMan
09-27-2004, 05:40 AM
Good points.

I've often wished that landing AI would re-engage if they were bounced.

I even think that LANDED AI should scramble when hostiles are obviously attacking the a/b

nearmiss
09-27-2004, 05:12 PM
First...I'm an offliner, and the 128 multiplayer thing just sounds like "Age of Empires" to me. This little 128 multiplayer has GAMER written all over it. Maybe Ubi has finally gotten to Oleg http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

1C:Maddox has tweaked the original IL2 sim program occassionally and keep pushing new aircraft at us. MSFT opened the architecture in all their CFS series and let the 3rd party guys do it for free. I understand why Oleg does it like he does. He likes to practice his craft. He does a good job with his airplanes, but the sim part is sadly lacking.

PF is just another $39.95 add-on with nothing substantial. Same old stuff in a colored wrapper.

Hopefully, the BOB will be a for real improvement, to which I'm looking forward.

I'll have to think long and hard before I buy the PF early, because nothing substantial about the program is mentioned. The addition of carrier landings is great, but we had them in CFS2 and they were'nt that big a deal. You took off and landed...OK

I can buy FB for $5 US and AEP $10 at used bookstores, at Fry's $19.95 for AEP. I paid $40 for each at EB on the date of release. I'll most assuredly buy the PF, but I think I'll just save a few bucks this time.

I'll do the "wait a bit routine".

Oh! I forgot to address the flaws...

These boards are full of comments on flaws, anomalies, and other twit junk. I just wanted to say that being a 2+ year old game, the graphics <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">ADD ONS LIKE THE PF ARE NO IMPROVEMENT IN THE ACTUAL PRODUCT</span>

Oleg has always managed to keep just enough tweaks going to keep people buying. The onliners are in airplane heaven, and with the 128 multiplayer new life will be generated. The sim will still be the same, just with more players whining about the issues.

The AI have always been a problem, and those issues mentioned in this thread are just the tip of the iceberg.

Do you see anyone official responding on these threads? I don't think so.

Again, this is a 2+ year old game, and 1C:Maddox knows it. If they can keep it alive until BOB, they may be able to keep a following of users. As for me, I know a lot of competent people who used to post these boards...they're gone.

If you research carefully, you'll probably find every issue named on this thread has been discussed many, many times before with no resolution.

As we've heard since the days of IL2 1.0 "he's going to hell". Even the stupid comms are the same...

I need a break http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

NorrisMcWhirter
09-29-2004, 10:05 AM
Hi,

There's more than a grain of truth to what you say but, commercially, you cannot expect Oleg to churn out a brand new engine every time some new market impetus needs to take place. There has been a lot of hard work put into the updates and I feel torn between admiration and disappointment because, IMO, I've watched this 'sim' [d]evolve into something that is more of a 'game'.

With respect to the issues not being resolved point, I entirely agree with one exception - the .50 cals. I truly believe that this one was whined into existence purely to offset the risk of losing revenue from the large US market.

I look forward to better times and am fairly optimistic about PF but, like you, my real interest is in BoB.

Cheers,
Norris

Brain32
10-01-2004, 09:51 AM
All you said is true, but "serious flaws"?
I guess you haven't tried to play LOMAC http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Atomic_Marten
10-01-2004, 04:28 PM
Gee.. what we have here is a bunch of people that were playing IL-2 for just to long. I admit I'm guilty of that as any of you are. I was also found out every major and bunch of minor issues in this game that should be fixed but any whining about it will not make those ppl that are in charge to do anything about it.

That statement is based on observing IL-2 forums for a really long time. We just have to wait untill next game that covers WW2 air combat.

DarthBane_
10-01-2004, 04:56 PM
Muzzle flashes, absence of smooth transition in 3 zoom positions http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif(this is very important flaw!), and unfortunate FW series of underdogs -flies like fast bomber, not one inch a fighter, worst forward view, porked 20mm guns, absence of guns select switch, easy to criple with any gun, something like nightmare difficulty setting that has nothing to do with RL. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-01-2004, 07:10 PM
"It's easier to throw more candy at baby, rather than fix the wheels on the pram."


"I know, I know, let's fix the problem by giving it a new coat of paint.

See!, it looks great.


- Same problem still exists.
But look at the colours
-But the same problem is still there.

Hey !, It took us hours to repaint and took so much material and resources.
-That is very much appreciated but...the same problem is still there.
Yeah, but the colours and the detail...all the effort we went to.
-Same problem still exists.


Well, if you don't like the flaws, go and make your own game."



Sound familiar????

tigertalon
10-04-2004, 02:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Brain32:
All you said is true, but "serious flaws"?
I guess you haven't tried to play LOMAC http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In fact I have bought Lo mac when it came out, but have played it for max 10 hours... From then on, the CD box just lies on the shelf, waiting for the "magic patch". Yes, I'm disappointed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Oleg_Maddox
10-04-2004, 04:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tigertalon:
Hello all.

This is based on my experience flying offline and besides the common topics i think those things should be improved - at least I hope I will see this fixed in PF and BOB.

1. It really pisses me off when (during a daylight attack on an airfield) I order my wingmen to strike AAA first, and they begin strafing and bombing searchlights first!!! They should also attack only light flak first, and then deal with 88s or 85s... But no, they strike searchlights, heavy flak and then the light one...

2. Also, the plane covenrings on an airfield, those green camouflage ones, made out of net, rope and greenery, are impenetrable for bullets and shells. To take out aircraft under this cover you need a rocket or a bomb. Nonsense.

3. If and AI is landing and he is jumped by enemy fighters during the landing procedure, he is unable to fight back. He will just fly on straight to his death... This way you can down enormous numbers of AI in offline campaign. Just wait for them to return to their base and dispatch them one by one during landing. Turkeyshooting.

4. I am not awarded with victory if my plane crashes before opponent does. For example, I attack 8 sturmoviks, place a few bullets in an oil radiator of each of them, but the last one shoots me down and I crash before any of sturmoviks. After a while all sturmoviks will crash, but I will not get a single victory (although I bailed over friendly territory and survived).

5. Fuel tanks and especially bombs should brake away under high G. If you enter 5 g turn with 500kg bomb, it should brake away as its weigth is 2500 kg... In fact this happened a lot during ww2 (have no source at the moment tho), for example when pilot had to react instantly (being jumped or something) and he forgot or had no time to drop the tanks or bombs...

Those 5 points are not whining, they are not something based on my feeling or opinion, they are based on the facts. They are not subjective, but IMO objective. I also did not post screenshots and tracks about first 4 points as they are obvious and anyone can try it out himself.

Thanks for posting your thoughts about that.

regards, tt <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1)
- AI is not a human. That to make it like a human, forget about PC processor and real time calculations.
- AI execute at first what is designed in a missions (or generated in campaign missions) Search lights is importan part of AAA - most impiortant at night. in our sim AI of search lights conneted to AI of AA guns and if Earch light destroyed tthen the closest AA gun will fire with much worse precise or even fire for nothing. However in a day light time they simply should not be existed. Again probably it is a point of mision design. If you speak about quick mission builder. then there may happenes different things if you are not using proper aircraft for the proper goal.

2) This is known, but can't be done by other way without rework completely of this code. So we stay with this in Il-2 series sims. Just in BoB and new objects in PF this will works by other way.

3) This is work for the next sim - BoB. The proceduere of AI landing can't be changed easy. Or we will need to rework a lot of things in a system from single and online code cross functions. For this we need more time then you can even imagine.

4) We will keep as it is. See item 3 why.

5) For BoB. However only for these plane that was known with that fact. Lets say that IL-2 was free from such thing... The bomb racks inside and ourside was able to get more than 9G... Just for the sample. Same I can tell about most Soviet and German planes.

Oleg_Maddox
10-04-2004, 04:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tigertalon:
Got another one, which I forgot to mention in 1st post, about AI. AI fighters have wrong calculation of prediction point. They simply don't give enough lead when on your 6. When there is a fighter on your 6, you just have to pul some 40 degree bank and turn slowly. He will just discharge all his ammo a few meter away from you. You can even cool down your engine during that! And when AI runs out of ammo he and especially his wingie really become sitting ducks.

IMO it would be worth to sacrifice one or two new flyables in new patch and instead of that fix milion bugs like those...

regards, tt <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Try with PF or in a merget istall of PF+FB+AEP.... I will see how you will win agains Aces AI....

WOLFMondo
10-04-2004, 04:09 AM
Wow...thats nice to knowhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Aeronautico
10-04-2004, 06:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
Try with PF or in a merget istall of PF+FB+AEP.... I will see how you will win agains Aces AI.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's a pleasant news!

Welcome back Oleg http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif,
and "greetings" to your son! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

tigertalon
10-06-2004, 05:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tigertalon:
Hello all.

This is based on my experience flying offline and besides the common topics i think those things should be improved - at least I hope I will see this fixed in PF and BOB.

1. It really pisses me off when (during a daylight attack on an airfield) I order my wingmen to strike AAA first, and they begin strafing and bombing searchlights first!!! They should also attack only light flak first, and then deal with 88s or 85s... But no, they strike searchlights, heavy flak and then the light one...

2. Also, the plane covenrings on an airfield, those green camouflage ones, made out of net, rope and greenery, are impenetrable for bullets and shells. To take out aircraft under this cover you need a rocket or a bomb. Nonsense.

3. If and AI is landing and he is jumped by enemy fighters during the landing procedure, he is unable to fight back. He will just fly on straight to his death... This way you can down enormous numbers of AI in offline campaign. Just wait for them to return to their base and dispatch them one by one during landing. Turkeyshooting.

4. I am not awarded with victory if my plane crashes before opponent does. For example, I attack 8 sturmoviks, place a few bullets in an oil radiator of each of them, but the last one shoots me down and I crash before any of sturmoviks. After a while all sturmoviks will crash, but I will not get a single victory (although I bailed over friendly territory and survived).

5. Fuel tanks and especially bombs should brake away under high G. If you enter 5 g turn with 500kg bomb, it should brake away as its weigth is 2500 kg... In fact this happened a lot during ww2 (have no source at the moment tho), for example when pilot had to react instantly (being jumped or something) and he forgot or had no time to drop the tanks or bombs...

Those 5 points are not whining, they are not something based on my feeling or opinion, they are based on the facts. They are not subjective, but IMO objective. I also did not post screenshots and tracks about first 4 points as they are obvious and anyone can try it out himself.

Thanks for posting your thoughts about that.

regards, tt <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1)
- AI is not a human. That to make it like a human, forget about PC processor and real time calculations.
- AI execute at first what is designed in a missions (or generated in campaign missions) Search lights is importan part of AAA - most impiortant at night. in our sim AI of search lights conneted to AI of AA guns and if Earch light destroyed tthen the closest AA gun will fire with much worse precise or even fire for nothing. However in a day light time they simply should not be existed. Again probably it is a point of mision design. If you speak about quick mission builder. then there may happenes different things if you are not using proper aircraft for the proper goal.

2) This is known, but can't be done by other way without rework completely of this code. So we stay with this in Il-2 series sims. Just in BoB and new objects in PF this will works by other way.

3) This is work for the next sim - BoB. The proceduere of AI landing can't be changed easy. Or we will need to rework a lot of things in a system from single and online code cross functions. For this we need more time then you can even imagine.

4) We will keep as it is. See item 3 why.

5) For BoB. However only for these plane that was known with that fact. Lets say that IL-2 was free from such thing... The bomb racks inside and ourside was able to get more than 9G... Just for the sample. Same I can tell about most Soviet and German planes. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thnx for answers, Oleg. Nice to see you around.
Looking forward for BOB.

Alexi_Alx_Anova
10-07-2004, 04:35 AM
I'll add one more observation about AI I'd like to see fixed in BoB.

If you miscalculate the amount of fuel your section will need and the AI run out, they will not bail out of their aircraft. They remain in the gliding plane waiting for their death. Surely, if the AI's fuel reaches zero, the normal critical damage-bail AI routine should be called. Not a massive rework of the AI code as far as I can imagine.

Thanks for your time on the forums Oleg.

Alexi