PDA

View Full Version : A couple of questions on AI pilot settings.



PSYOP_mongoose
12-01-2006, 02:40 PM
Hi guys, I know that nothing can be done about the AI "magic bubble", but is there a config setting that can activate blackouts for them?

I hate flying without blackouts because it completely takes away energy management aspect, but there's no way to stay with AI pilots with out blacking out.

Is it possible to alter AI dead stick settings? I'm tired of seeing AI tumble around like circus acrobats at over 500km/h, while I can barely maneuver, especially when they kick full rudder with out slowing down a bit.

In reality side slip dumps more speed then combat flaps and prop pitch combined, because the entire fuselage creates a huge air brake.

It is precisely why it's so hard for green pilots to execute a proper hard side slip, because with out a good feel for it they spin out into a stall.

AI planes also do not to lose much maneuverability and don't bleed speed after sustaining massive damage to wings and fuselage, while pilot controlled planes correctly slow down to a crawl with heavy drift and buffeting.

Any suggestions?

p.s. I've been flying IL-2 series for years now, and even though I have no problem placing kill shots, still, to this day gunnery just does not feel natural. I still constantly second guess, and it just doesn't feel right.

The rouds feel like they are just to slow, almost like they are subsonic at around 400 meters per secons.

In LockOn for example I don't need any assisted sighting at all, and actually prefer a grid to a pipper, because the lead/trajectory feels so natural that even while maneuvering heavily, I have a natural feel to where the rounds will go.

Another thing that bothers me is that when enemy planes shoot at me, first I hear the shots and then literally half a second later the round impact, thus by nature making them subsonic. Strange. Also, to this day it's very hard for me to get used to incredibly wide lead on deflection shots, because around 80% of the time the target is completely out of the view of not just the sight, but the entire cockpit.

Sorry for the gripes, but if it was really that difficult to pull lead, a vertically actuated gun mount would have been necessary to allow for even a marginalia degree of a successful kill.

Again, in LockOn even at much higher speeds pulling lead and deflection shooting is not a problem at all, and it feels completely natural. You can actually see the rounds drop, while in IL-2 it's just a vague tracer trail that's completely straight, and I can't even see where the drop begins.

Just griping a bit, not a big dealhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Thanks for the suggestions guys, and Happy Holidays!

FritzGryphon
12-01-2006, 03:27 PM
The rouds feel like they are just to slow, almost like they are subsonic at around 400 meters per secons.

I've tested the velocity of bullets in IL-2 in some detail, and can attest that they're certainly not subsonic. I've found the M2, UBS and MG151 have their correct muzzle velocities, and decelerate at a logical rate.

If the shells seem easier to lead in LO:MAC, it's probably because of the elevated trajectory. The guns in modern fighters fire at an upward angle to help with leading, and shooting in a turn. The only plane in PF that has this is the P.11C. Also, the cockpits of modern fighters have a good forward view. It is nothing at all like a propellor plane with the engine in front.

PF doesn't model sound delay, nor does LOMAC (though in LOMAC, they try and fake it by cutting off the engine sound while you're supersonic). You will hear sounds immediately regardless of range.

AI planes do lots of goofy things, in this sim and all others. It's best not to think about it, and play with real people.

Speed of sound is only ~340m/s at sea level, btw.

Here's some info for the M2 gun in PF.

http://members.shaw.ca/evilgryphon3/compare.mov

http://members.shaw.ca/evilgryphon3/m2speed.jpg

PSYOP_mongoose
12-01-2006, 04:38 PM
Furthermore, 400m/s is not subsonic. Not sure where you got that.

You're right, I though of .45 ACPs 800 feet per second and just cut in half, while it's actually closer to around 250m/s.


I've tested the velocity of bullets in IL-2 in some detail, and can attest that they're certainly not subsonic. I've found the M2, UBS and MG151 have their correct muzzle velocities, and decelerate at a logical rate.

Muzzle velocity is not an accurate measure for bullet trajectory. Exactly the same round can be fired at exactly the same muzzle velocity from different barrels and with different pressure loads while performing completely different.

Barrel length, rifling twist, and bullet aerodynamics dictate the actual performance.

If fired at higher pressure and from a shorter barrel the round will become unstable much sooner and dump energy much faster then a bullet fired at the same muzzle velocity but from a longer barrel and at lower pressure.

I'll do some calculations given a 18 degree per second turn rate and a set speed for both the target and the shooter.

Any way you spin it from 50 meters the impact is literally instantaneous. It takes around 100 to 150 milliseconds for a human eye to blink.

It take less then a millisecond for a typical rifle bullet to go through a full length barrel, so even out to 100 meters it's a matter of a few milliseconds, and It's just hard for me to imagine the need for such massive lead requirements from such short distances.


M2 graph is interesting, I'll look into it more.

Lurch1962
12-01-2006, 05:20 PM
You mentioned that in LOMAC you can see the rounds drop (due to gravitational acceleration, I presume you to mean), whereas in IL2 bullets fly in a straight line.

To see that gravitation-induced drop is indeed in operation in IL2, fly as steadily in pitch as possible while in a VERY shallow dive towards some ground feature or target that you can maintain an aim on. Fire a burst and see how the impacts are well below the pipper when they hit while still well beyond your convergence range setting. Of course, there will be some scatter in the impact pattern, but ignore that.

Some time ago I verified that bullet deceleration is modeled, too. While flying level, I went to the external view and pulled back so that my viewpoint was from off the beam (i.e., looking at my A/C perpendicular to the direction of flight) and from at least 2km away. Because the tracers are still well visible from great distances, it's easy to see deceleration because the further the rounds fly the more they bunch up due to slowing down.

And it's interesting to compare the differences in velocity and degree of deceleration between MG and Cannon rounds on A/C equipped with both types of gun. While I haven't done anything like exhaustive testing, in general the weightier cannon shells seem to decelerate more slowly than lightweight MG bullets, i.e., they maintain more speed.

PSYOP_mongoose
12-01-2006, 06:23 PM
You mentioned that in LOMAC you can see the rounds drop (due to gravitational acceleration, I presume you to mean), whereas in IL2 bullets fly in a straight line.

In LOMAC I use tracers to correct fire and don't even think about it. It's a natural feel. Little rudder, little stick, and the rounds go right where I want them to. In IL2 I can't use tracers as reference at all, they just disappear somewhere.

Most of my kills are either unrealistic long range tail shots, or up close reaction shots.

Mid-range maneuvering shots just don't happen because with the way ballistics are modeled, the target is simply out of the kill zone 90% of the time. I don't like to waste ammo, and just end up bouncing around like an idiot.

In IL2 .50 cal Browning's are totally devastating and are actually incredibly easy to use. Just point, shoot and sweep, while at least for me, using nose mounted guns is a complete pain in the butt. Logically it's supposed to be the other way around, since nose mounted guns fire directly, and wing mounted guns have to be toed in for convergence points.

If in reality that was the case, everybody would have been stuffing wings with MGs to spray rounds all over the place, but it just wasn't so.

Bearcat99
12-01-2006, 06:28 PM
I have noticed that depending on the AI skill level it seems that a certain amount of equalizing is there... for instance... I like to set the AI in missions I make staggered.... I never set them all at ACE.. I usually make the flight and element leads Veterans, sometimes I make the flight lead an ace.. and therest are average. Sometimes I can loose them in clouds.... sometimes n not.... but yeah.. it would be nice if the AI at least appeared to suffer the same G tolerance as I do.... Too often I see my screen go black.... and the AI pilot behind me is still peppering away and even gaining on me..<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>http://star.walagata.com/w/bearcat/tuskegeebondposter.jpg (http://www.tuskegeeairmen.org)[/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE> 332nd V.F.G. (http://www.geocities.com/bearcat99th/) [/list]
<span class="ev_code_GREEN">It is easier to train a boy than to repair a man.</span>

Sturmovik Essentials (http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=51910959) | Magnum PC.Com (http://www.magnum-pc.com/) | Joint Operations (http://www.joint-ops.com/joil2fb/default.asp)

<span class="ev_code_white">Oleg: I think players should upgrade their PC after the release of Storm of War: The Battle of Britain, but not now. Minimum system would be probably like last year good system for IL-2 series. The simulation has gone from what was to be a study sim involving one aircraft to a real monster anthology of WWII aviation. The engine has been stretched to fit multi-engined bombers, aircraft that are linked (such as the Mistel and the TB-3/I-16 combinations), aircraft carriers, runway cratering, working searchlights, etc.



</span>

BillyTheKid_22
12-02-2006, 11:24 AM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
I have noticed that depending on the AI skill level it seems that a certain amount of equalizing is there... for instance... I like to set the AI in missions I make staggered.... I never set them all at ACE.. I usually make the flight and element leads Veterans, sometimes I make the flight lead an ace.. and therest are average. Sometimes I can loose them in clouds.... sometimes n not.... but yeah.. it would be nice if the AI at least appeared to suffer the same G tolerance as I do.... Too often I see my screen go black.... and the AI pilot behind me is still peppering away and even gaining on me..

Cool!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Glad NICE!!!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://members.cox.net/bkid/pacificfighters/PacificFightersSignature.JPG

.................................................. ..............

"All I got was a bellyful of English Channel."

PSYOP_mongoose
12-02-2006, 11:12 PM
It sure would be nice to have a "all things equal" setting for ace AI in order to keep aggressive AI maneuvering, but to even things out a bit.

I always fly against ace AI, because at lower settings they just sit there waiting to be shot at, even though it is annoying to see ace AI pilots begin evading as soon as I'm close to a firing solution, and as soon as I pull the trigger.

It would be nice to see them go into evasive maneuvers at least after my traces passed them by, because as it stands, element of surprise is simply not existent, and we all know that that's exactly how the overwhelming majority of kill were scored.

The gun issue is a bit irritating. German guns are modeled with absolutely outstanding performance, and clearly outperform Shvak/UBS.

I tried many different combinations, and in IL2 Sov guns just don't cut it here.

Surprisingly La-5s twin Shvaks appear to be less effective then Yaks combo. I used 109G2s for comparison.

109s take MASSIVE punishment, and keep flying like it's not a big deal after I literally keep walking twin 20s through them back and forth. Giant holes in the wings, fuselage, shredded control surfaces, we all know how it is.

Unless I get a clean engine shot the overwhelming majority of my 109 kills are basically forced ejections and damage to control lines/surfaces.

While flying 109 against 109, I can cut them like a Ginsu knife cuts through a soda can. Splitting them in half, sheering wings, etc, no problem.

Same with Yak-9. Even though in reality it clearly outguns Gustav 2 (2 MG17 vs. 2 UBS and even on the 20mm), in IL G2 simply shreds Yaks left and right while Yak simply runs out of ammo, and believe me, I nurse ever round.

I don't want to go into the whole gun

PSYOP_mongoose
12-03-2006, 12:40 AM
Here's what I'm really missing.

If AI behavior can be set by the user, very specific flight school missions can be set up to work on particular maneuvers.

I'm for one tired of chasing everybody around when I want to dog fight.

Let's say AI behavior is set to dog fight mode, and in that mode various subcategories contain user selected offensive and defensive maneuvers, positioning, etc.

Working on SA, tactics, gunnery and energy management will be a simply a pleasure this way.

Same with high speed turns, zoom and boom, and general high speed energy management.

Such custom missions can be looped for example, so any particular maneuver can be worked on again and again.

I for one don't use much rudder because there's just no feed back, while in a actual plane you stand on pedals all of the time since they feedback continuously and work them with out even thinking about it. Such custom training mission can help develop a habit of proper rudder work.

I hate flying "flat", I catch my self on it to this day and with out practice I use rudders less and less.

It would help to have a oversize side-slip bar on the bottom of the standard full cockpit display, so compensating for torque when throttling back and forth can become a habit.

Trim steps are also excessive. I simply never have enough time to trim properly because there are at least 30 trim steps, and it's just to time consuming.

It would be nice to have a double trim control, ****+ for fine trim, and up/down for fast trim.

Man I wish multiple monitors were supported. How great would it be to have a separate screen for selectable instruments, maps, etc especially for bombers. All kinds of gages, bomb sights, rear gunner view, engine management galore, you name it.

Even with the rig I got now I can set up 3 monitors and a TV all running at one time. Multi-core SMP support will be a God send. How about 3D support for large screens, man would that be great. On a 42" LCD it will look simply spectacular, while having PC monitors for the gages and the rest.

There's still so much untapped potential left in this wonderful series, I just can't wait to see it all come together.

TimFromMA
12-03-2006, 06:55 AM
Originally posted by PSYOP_mongoose:
...Man I wish multiple monitors were supported...


Oooooo multiple monitors! I think that would be huge.