PDA

View Full Version : On the subject of AI gunners



anarchy52
05-28-2005, 08:43 AM
http://czechwar.vwings.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=6895#6895

Brain32
05-28-2005, 10:48 AM
Yes it's true I'm going completely nuts because of them every time I play FB. Online or offline for the past few months I never go at bombers or near flak zones, because I play this game to relax and have fun, not to be irritated like hell by some AI.
Just to add my story: I was shot down/killed/severly damaged 8 times in row playing a campaign mission where I was flying at 3500+ m over a mild cloud coverage.

F19_Olli72
05-28-2005, 11:49 AM
If you really think the ai gunners are overmodelled then try my ubergunner challange:

"Try to experience it from the other end. Go to a server with moderate difficulty, like GG. On a filled (or at least 20 - 25 ppl on) server, take a bomber like B-25, A-20 or He-111 (which are the most suitable planes to test the gunners with). Look for enemies. Never man the guns, only let AI fire. And dont go near flak, cos that would screw up the statistic test value.

Play about 10 sorties, record tracks, and let us know your kill/death ratio and your AI gunners hit %. If the AI gunners are uber, there should be no problems right?"

Id be most interested to know your results http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Funny thing is; i've seen ppl complain about ai gunners before. But as soon as i ask them to take on my challange the thread dies...isnt that strange? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

anarchy52
05-28-2005, 12:37 PM
AI gunner on AI plane = uber
Ai gunner on player controlled plane = still better then they should be

I took that giant japanese hidroplane...I (my gunners) shot a few (2-5) fighters on each sortie

My challenge would be take all human bomber in coop all gunners human...and see the difference

F19_Olli72
05-28-2005, 01:05 PM
Originally posted by anarchy52:
AI gunner on AI plane = uber
Ai gunner on player controlled plane = still better then they should be

I took that giant japanese hidroplane...I (my gunners) shot a few (2-5) fighters on each sortie

My challenge would be take all human bomber in coop all gunners human...and see the difference

In the Emily you need to have externals to be able to fly it. That gives you an advantage no pilot had ... You give no details if it was singleplayer or online, but i have to add if you get 2 -5 planes/sortie i can guarantee all enemy pilots were rookies.

http://www.greatergreen.com/stats/il2/sortiedetails.php?id=1115558015&playerid=106 Check that uber hitrate of Emily!!! If thats ubergunners....i dont want regular gunners http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

What would your challange prove? Whenever i man the gunposition at least i dont fire 60m to the side of the attacking plane ....or fire from impossible angles just to reveal my position when hiding in clouds. Even nosegunners will fire at planes way above you...DUH!

Like i said....noone has done my challange to prove me wrong. If your not up to it...just say so http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Here im giving you the chance to prove it once for all that AI is uber (which would be very simple if you can get 2 - 5 planes/sortie)...and you reject it? Strange...

anarchy52
05-28-2005, 01:39 PM
Now I've seen everything...

Fennec_P
05-28-2005, 02:02 PM
The AI does shoot and hit things in impossible situations. Blind, high deflection, 0-reaction, etc.

But the AI is otherwise ******ed. So it evens out.

There is simply no comparison between human gunner and AI. Human is always better.

Think of it this way, I like to use Ju-87D as a fighter in dogfight servers. My kill rate is well over 3-1 at this point, and most of those are with the tailgun.

If I let the AI do my gunning, I would die every time. It doesn't shoot nearly enough, it doesn't know how to lead properly, it just stares dumbly at the enemy even when he's sawing my rudder off with his prop.

I cannot begin to fathom how anyone could consider the gunner AI to be excessively hard in any respect. Sure, it's not realistic, and don't expect it to be; just learn the flaws in the AI and exploit them. I mean, you can down 4 ace B-17 with a 109F2 if you try a little.

Conversely, I remember doing a high speed 6-high pass on a human flown He-111 in a Yak-9. He managed to hit me a dozen times as I went by, as least 4 or 5 of which struck the pilot. I turned around and came again, straighter this time (screen was almost all red), and he managed to take out my engine, controls and put a bullet in my head as I zipped by.

An AI He-111 wouldn't even have touched me under the same circumstances.

anarchy52
05-28-2005, 03:08 PM
all those undiscovered forum aces...

The point is it's unrealistic to get hit from incredible distances, deflections and opportunity windows. Anyone who ever fired a gun would know it's bull$hit

I watched a lot of real guncams and if you'd do that in FB you'd be dead.

As for humans manning gunner positions: mostly easy kills

DS-Turret
05-28-2005, 04:29 PM
I record Play Tracks. Those who claim that all my shooting comes from my AI Gunners then I respond that I can send Play Tracks.

zaelu
05-29-2005, 02:12 AM
This is an old discusion. The AI eats CPU... the rest of the game needs it also, so a compromise had to be done.

If u want to see AI doing its worst try to hunt down Li-2s with 109F2 in bad weather... Or fly with Me163 at 900Km/h at 1000m over enemy airfield.

My opinion... we can live with it.

polkku
05-29-2005, 04:20 AM
Has anybody a good knowledge about what the hit% of AI gunners is. I think it was something like 2-3%, but I'm not sure. When I shoot with reargunners my average is 10%.

I fly a lot with bombers and I can assure you, the Ai gunners of atleast human piloted planes are terrible. I use them only as a warning signal. When the AI starts shooting I hop to gunnerseat and prevent the AI gunner from waisting all the ammo. Then when it is possible to actually hit the attacker, I shoot. Maybe the AI cannot respond very well to the course changes of a human pilot and it messes its aim? Then again it AI shoots equally stupid when the level stabilizer is on.

DS-Turret
05-29-2005, 10:13 AM
I am what my name is, Death Star Turret. Some complained about my AI Gunners & I responded that I have Play Tracks showing that most rounds hit were coming from the Gunner position that I was using. He then told me that my rounds didn't hit any important components while my AI Gunners hit important components that caused his Fighter to crash. I told him that he can't know that because there is nothing in the Command Console that will show details of which Gunner position on a Bomber hit certain components against enemy Fighters.

Ratsack
05-29-2005, 09:54 PM
Originally posted by Fennec_P:
... just learn the flaws in the AI and exploit them. I mean, you can down 4 ace B-17 with a 109F2 if you try a little.

.

Track, please.

4 Ace B17s in an F2 without unlimited ammo. Yes, a track to support that please.



Ratsack

Antonio_MRZ
05-30-2005, 02:32 AM
That the AI can fire (and hit) in clouds, in smoke (from own aircraft on fire!), with aircraft spinning and doing hard manouvres, and through its own aircraft's tail, is a matter of fact.

In this sense AI is overmodeled.

It's also true that AI is dumb, it sometimes fires at directions were there is no enemy, fires at impossible ranges, cannot do deflection shots, etc

In a dogfight server, a lone bomber, (particularly in a late war scenario) is cannon fodder, just as it should be (there must be a reason because the Americans sent huge packs of escorted bombers instead of sending single lone bombers...).

Often the gunners will give a bloody nose to the fighter, but a fighter pilot in a dogfight server is never too worried about a smoking engine or even a wound (as it should be in RL) so he can press the attack further and get the kill. In an early war scenario things are a bit more even, but life is still hard for bombers.

I often fly bombers and the hit ratio of AI gunners is between 3% and 5%, that is not bad but is overall uneffective, also for the reason given above. The only chance of a lone bomber is sneaking unseen among enemy fighters.

It's also true that human-manned guns are much more effective in game than AI-manned guns.

This is unrealistic, as every war report states that it was almost impossible to hit anything (except maybe aicraft parked in your six, which anyway seldom happened) with a flexible gun. These guns shook in your hands while firing so had a huge dispersion. Things were a little better with turret guns, though moving a turret with its two axes in RL should be more difficult than moving a mouse in game (I mean in game there should be two different axes allocated for turret movement in azimuth and elevation instead of the simple mouse pointing).

So on one hand, a more realistic behaviour of AI gunners should be desirable; not better nor worse, just more realistic: more realistic arcs of fire, no visibility through clouds and smoke, impossibility to fire beyond a given G number, better modeling of dispersion from handheld flexible guns. But on the other hand a better tracking algorithm is also desirable.

Some of these limitations (arcs of fire, G) should be applied also to human gunners, together with more realistic turret movement.

In dogfight servers, if the player is killed it should be possible to revert to the pilot's position.

Of course these are suggestions for BoB, no chance of seeing this in IL2FB-PF...

Antonio

polkku
05-30-2005, 05:57 AM
Actually 80% of the time in DogFights and coops, human fighters do come drom straight six and go past you from very close or ram you. They start from ~1km higher and 2km behind and dive on you. So when they are at 600m they are in dead six and closing the distance. Not very hard to hit 100 rounds to that kind of target, when you have 1000 rounds to spend. Most of that 100 rounds hit the engine and it's not a miracle if few hit the pilot too. That's when you hear the "**** AI snipers got me with one bullet!" phrase.

If the attacker knows what he is doing, he will do slashing attacks from sides or straight above and below. There is no way you can hit many shots to the fighter then. Even in such cases if the fighter is also missing a lot, he parks behind the bomber after five or six unsuccesful attacks. That puts him 50m behind the bomber and a nice target for the gunners.

p1ngu666
05-30-2005, 10:58 AM
saying gunners sometimes fire in random directions is like saying, "i sometimes breathe" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

ai gunners on a human plane will fire in random directions, at things out of range, which they cant see. for example a20 gunner fires at things AHEAD of u.

they also fire while your turning hard etc, at things miles off. they also have a handy knack of not firing at whos attacking u. if they was in the RAF they would be kicked out and labeled LMF.

imo if the ai gunners hit a fighter, its most likely tobe aiming at another aircraft http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Brain32
05-30-2005, 12:39 PM
Ok, first thing, I was online less than 10times(got 12kills though http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif) so most of my expiriences are based on offline play.

Second, when somebody says that AI gunners are not uber I take that as if we are looking at a yellow square but some people are claiming that it's actually red.
Ok, guys maybe you are some uber-aces or maybe things are completely different online.
I'm not saying that this is a spoiler, or even that it should be corrected, I'm simply amazed with some of above comments...
I already told you one of my stories in the post above, but there are hundreds of others just like that one or even worse.

MS_Siwarrior
05-30-2005, 11:37 PM
I am getting the popcorn out, this is gonna be a long thread http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Ratsack
05-31-2005, 01:15 AM
Still waiting for that track of the Bf109F2 driver smoking four ace AI B17s without unlimited ammo.

Ratsack

Sturm_Williger
05-31-2005, 03:16 AM
Yes, I agree, I would shoulder-charge little old ladies out of the way to see a track of a limited ammo F2 take down 4 Ace B17's.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Don't get me wrong, I'll be the first with the http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif if it can be done, but I have <ahem> "strenuous doubts".

NorrisMcWhirter
05-31-2005, 03:24 AM
Originally posted by Ratsack:
Still waiting for that track of the Bf109F2 driver smoking four ace AI B17s without unlimited ammo.

Ratsack

Yes, I'd quite like to see that gem, too.

Cheers,
Norris

SeaFireLIV
05-31-2005, 09:31 AM
Well, I`m sure some of you remember how deadly AI bomber gunners used to be. They used to pick your eyeball out easily at 1000 metres! They have been toned down twice since and are quite rubbish, as they now shoot at weird angles in their mission to miss you. And all this because of previous heavy whines.

I personally feel they should be a tad less wayward shooting and suffer the effects of gravity/hard manouevers but NOWAY should they be made any noobier or we may as well just remove the bomber gunners altogther.

Fennec_P
05-31-2005, 03:52 PM
Still waiting for that track of the Bf109F2 driver smoking four ace AI B17s without unlimited ammo.

What, your joystick's broken? Do it yourself. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif Fine, I'll make one when I get home. Don't whine if it happens to be 4 consecutive head on attacks...

tad less wayward shooting and suffer the effects of gravity/hard manouevers

That's one thing that would be nice. Nothing more strange than seeing a inverted bomber shooting at you. Especially if it's an IL-2 or a TB-3 or something (the ones without seat belts for the gunners).

I like how Aces High does this. If the plane is banked more than X degrees, the guns simply don't fire.

But I maintain that human gunners are far better than AI, and that the claims of it being too hard are silly. Please, any of you, find me when I'm on hyperlobby, and we can do a test. 109F2 versus Stuka, first with AI, then with human gunner.

And one more thing, does anyone think a 109F2 should be able to shoot down 4 Ace B-17? I get the distinct impression the average flight simmer expects to shoot down 10 heavy bombers without getting touched, or fly through a box and get away scot free. This isn't realistic, you know. Getting even 1 should be hard, especially if your silly enough to be in a 109F2, attacking bombers.

A more interesting test would be to see how many B-17s you can kill with a FW-190A9. I tell you, those bomber crewman must be spinning in their graves at these 'AI gunners are uber' posts. You'd think a staffel of fockes could down the whole US bomber force in one day.

anarchy52
06-01-2005, 03:59 AM
Originally posted by Fennec_P:
What, your joystick's broken? Do it yourself. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif Fine, I'll make one when I get home. Don't whine if it happens to be 4 consecutive head on attacks...

4 ace B-17s in 4 head-on passes with bf-109F-2.
Can't wait to see your 1337 skI117

Ratsack
06-01-2005, 04:27 AM
Cheers, Fennec. I look forward to it.

Ratsack

corsairf4u
06-01-2005, 05:02 AM
Originally posted by anarchy52:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Fennec_P:
What, your joystick's broken? Do it yourself. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif Fine, I'll make one when I get home. Don't whine if it happens to be 4 consecutive head on attacks...

4 ace B-17s in 4 head-on passes with bf-109F-2.
Can't wait to see your 1337 skI117 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>yes ,,,it does sound dubious about an f2 downing 4 b17,scince the yanks only arrived in uk in42/43 and the f2 was then obselete on that front anyway,and only lightly armed ?

Sturm_Williger
06-01-2005, 05:13 AM
Originally posted by Fennec_P:
What, your joystick's broken? Do it yourself.


Mate, if I even thought I could do it myself, I'd be up there. Unfortunately, I don't have 200 hours in which to attempt to get it right.

Then again, I'm a cr@p shot and not much better pilot. But I'd really love to see a track of it being done ( will probably teach me a thing or two, which is always good. )

If you do get the chance to post said track, I will be grateful.

Cheers

AndyJoyhill
06-01-2005, 08:45 AM
It would be interesting to see flak gunners on planes. They manage to shoot mostly in your general direction, but don't hit all the time.

Brain32
06-01-2005, 10:45 AM
Don't whine if it happens to be 4 consecutive head on attacks...

One pass per one B-17 in a ME109F2?!?? I simply can't wait to see that http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif


And one more thing, does anyone think a 109F2 should be able to shoot down 4 Ace B-17?

I don't but I am not the one that is claiming it can be done in this game anyway. Since this topic started I've been doing some attempts of my own; I tried with ME109G2 with 20mm gondolas, they make so little damage to the B-17G(yes I know how and where to shoot), it forces you to make too much passes and I was eventually killed(black screen) barrel rolling away at 400km/h.

About head on attacks, I really don't believe(understatment in effort not to be impolite http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif) fighter pilots used head on's for every attack on a bomber...

Fennec_P
06-01-2005, 07:48 PM
Here we go, 4 ace B-17Gs. Not in 4 consecutive attacks, I'm afraid, despite trying 10 times. Managed 3 down in 3 head-ons, and one machine gunned to death.

Since you don't like head-ons, I threw in a bunch of 4/8 o'clock high attacks. It was almost sad watching the gunners shoot at air. Mind you, my shooting was not much better.

I'll be the first one to say the fuel tanks on the B-17 are wayyyy too easy to light. I wish it was more like the B-24 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

I even managed to avoid getting hit at all. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Though, to be fair, two or three of my earlier trials ended in flames.

http://members.shaw.ca/fennec/109fvsb17.zip

And here's with 109G2 w/pods. If you don't have time to do a head-on, attack from below is almost as good.

http://members.shaw.ca/fennec/109g2vsb17.zip

Ratsack
06-02-2005, 04:39 AM
G'day Fennec,

What I get when I download your files is an invalid zip for the Bf109f zip, and an empty zip archive for the G2.

There's nothing wrong with my zip or winrar installations, my OS, or my connection. Could you please repost your tracks.

cheers,
Ratsack

stubby
06-02-2005, 07:51 AM
Originally posted by Antonio_MRZ:
Often the gunners will give a bloody nose to the fighter, but a fighter pilot in a dogfight server is never too worried about a smoking engine or even a wound (as it should be in RL) so he can press the attack further and get the kill.

I've reading my second book on the BoB and there are numerous cases of RAF pilots being downed by Stuka, Ju88, Do17, He-111 gunners. Numerous. But the the most excellent point was made above. The average joe that plays Il2 (say 99.9%) don't regard their virtual pilot life. As a result, they'll do whatever it takes to get an 'easy' kill. This includes parking on the a$$ of a Betty with little regard that the Betty is equipped with a 20mm butt cannon http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Those folks that do fly with care and regard for their virtual pilot, treat AI gunners with a level of different respect than others. Most of them rarely die from Ai snipery because they fly with very conservative tactics aginst the bombers. If they're flying against He111s, they'll take the extra time to only engage in head-on passes. On DF servers, folks don't have that time because they want the kill and affraid of having they prey stolen by another. The result is poor attack tactics against bombers which lead to the frequent magicc bb syndrome. AI is tough but not Uber.

dadada1
06-02-2005, 08:21 AM
The aspect of Ai gunnery that seems to me to be off is not that gunners can hit you at longe range when you attack from 6' o clock, that seems perfectly feasible/acceptable. My complaint would be gunners of an aircraft that is taking wild evasive action and the gunner will still manage to PK you. Set up a QMB against a PE 2 then see what I'm refering to, when the pilot is bucking an turning wildy the rear gunner can still squeeze off some rather accurate shots, I defy any human gunner to do as well as the guy at the back of a PE2 under those circumstances. I'd rather tackle a B17 because at least you can predict when your likely to get nailed by the gunners.

anarchy52
06-02-2005, 10:18 AM
Still waiting since the links Fennec sent were:

a) invalid archive (Bf-109F2vsB-17)
b) invalid archive (Bf-109G2vsB-17)

Please Fennec I want to see the master at work

Frequent_Flyer
06-02-2005, 11:14 AM
My inquiry is this :if you fly the P-38, no matter what bomber you fly against they can always take out your nose mounted guns. Fly the P-39 or any 109 variant and your nose mounted cannon rarely if ever gets touched. Not to mention if the rear gunner in the Ju-87 flicks his cigerette butt at my P-47 I'm going down.

Brain32
06-02-2005, 01:22 PM
Well here is my attempt: 109G2 vs 3 Ace B17G, I shot them down but they severly damaged my engine...
Now please tell me what did I do wrong, I think I was VERY carefull but I am always opened to suggestions.

Track here: http://savefile.com/filehost/files3.php?fid=2832966

SeaFireLIV
06-02-2005, 01:34 PM
It`s all about variables. That`s one of IL2`s greatest strengths. Even though every aircraft has set parameters there`s always the variable that means where one aircraft does something easily for one flyer, it doesn`t for another. The variables vary; flyer skill, aircraft flying postion, gun distances, aircraft strength/ endurance, speed, etc, etc I could go on.

Just because one plane doesn`t do the same thing every time or other planes appear to damage or kill better doesn`t mean anything`s really wrong. These simple comparison tests you guys do are not enough proof. You would need to take a certain amount of time on certain maps, at certain heights and triple test everything before you could say this is wrong because X does this and Y does that!

The variables are what makes it more real yet more difficult to corrobate most simple user complaints.

But complain on anyway.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Fennec_P
06-02-2005, 02:45 PM
Oops. I guess I should have tested them first.

Works now.

http://members.shaw.ca/fennec/109fvsb17.zip

http://members.shaw.ca/fennec/109g2vsb17.zip

horseback
06-02-2005, 03:06 PM
This has been one of my biggest beefs with this sim since I started playing the original Il-2 three years ago. There may or may not be a different standard for online AI gunners vs offline AI gunners, but since I play offline campaigns, I would very much like to see the AI gunners toned back to the standards of real-life gunners.

The fact is that for every fighter attacking individual multiseaters hit by defensive fire, five or six multiseaters were shot down. Certainly I would agree that the odds go up if you attack a formation of bombers with several gunners in each aircraft, but that was a function of the numbers of rounds put into the air more than the gunners' accuracy. A single Me 110, a multiengine bomber or an Il-2 caught alone was a fighter pilot's dream target.

I cannot find many historic examples of aircraft gunners even approaching the levels of accuracy exhibited by the AI gunners in this sim, and it is a real immersion killer.

The AI's behavior in general is often offensive to me; I take hits from gunners who couldn't possibly see me through the clouds (and from over 600m away) or their aircraft's frame, consistant disabling hits on the nose of my aircraft taking out engines or armament with a lousy 7mm round or two when realistically, hits were much more likely to strike the wings or tail (particularly in the case of a deflection shot, which is close to 70% of the time for my attacks), and finally, the friendly 'ace' who is leading the other flight who isn't doing **** except for taking credit for the aircraft I've already disabled by following a hundred meters behind me and putting a few rounds into them before they hit the ground.

Very simply, I'm already handicapped by poor vision in the sense that I have a maximum field of vision of 85 degrees vs my natural range of over 180 degrees, and in general, every object out there is significantly smaller & harder to see than it appears in real life. Add to that my inability to move my head so that I can see around canopy framing (particularly egregious in the cases of the FW, Me 109 and P-38). Finally, I get no 'inner ear 'inputs that allow me to accurately judge my speed and direction of travel, either, and half the time, the instruments that are supposed to give that information are obsured.

Is it too much to ask that the gunners not have perfect situational awareness, that they be affected by the aircraft's maneuvers, the normal bumping and shaking that is inherent in propellor driven flight (and magnified by having someone else at the controls), at least in offline play?

cheers

horseback

Fennec_P
06-02-2005, 05:35 PM
I cannot find many historic examples of aircraft gunners even approaching the levels of accuracy exhibited by the AI gunners in this sim, and it is a real immersion killer.

Really? I've read numerous accouts of single bombers downing multiple fighters.

In one case, a B-17 claimed 7 zeros shot down during a reconnasaince mission.

Again, not saying the gunners behave realistically. Just saying, by no means are they too difficult, even on ace.

Brain32: Nice moves http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

p1ngu666
06-02-2005, 09:21 PM
indeed, even a lone fairey battle with a 303 took down 3 me109s http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

too say a gunners situational awareness is perfect is utterly rediculous.

firstly, he will NEVER say anything to thats of any use. no contacts, 7 oclock high.
no "CORKSCREW PORT GO!"

no help on navigation, target spotting etc.

what he MAY do is fire when theres a enemy aircraft about
he MAY well NOT fire with enemy in a firing position

theres a small chance that he will actully shoot something down (if its a human flying)

the gunner may aswell be a monkey really.

a "full" ai plane, then yes, the ai are better, varies from plane to plane tho, stuka is uber deadly, while b29 is useless.

also i bet ppl will moan when we get the bomber without gunners, because they cant shoot it down.
mossie, and lucky for allied, theres no ju88S series which is a shame http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

F19_Olli72
06-03-2005, 06:29 AM
Heres a prime example:
On GG this morning i flew a TB-3..i have the track if anyone wants to check it.

Over the target im attacked by a 109 from six oclock, my tailgunner apparantly is too busy to fire for some reason. But hey my dorsal gunner is shooting at something at 2 oclock position,,,
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/Olli72/news/gunner.jpg

Lets check out whats he shooting at: Yup, thats right...at absolutely nothing. Or maybe the grass needed trimming or something?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/Olli72/news/gunner1.jpg

Horseback, there is only one point i can fully agree with you: the gunners behaviour is often offensive to me. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif But uber? Comeon!!! Lets face it, the AI gunners are cretins and nincompoops.

anarchy52
06-03-2005, 07:10 AM
Isn't that a smoking 109 behind you?

SeaFireLIV
06-03-2005, 08:24 AM
The wayward shooting AI, I`m afraid, is the fault of previous heavy whining. Sometimes, when I attack a bomber and see it shoot in the completely wrong direction I can feel the `whiner` effect throwing the gunner out.

I agree gunners should not be able to see through clouds of course and the AI gunners should be thrown off accuracy if there`s heavy manouevers, but I wish Oleg would take a little more care not to please so much sometimes. Often it`s the people who don`t complain that should be heard.

F19_Olli72
06-03-2005, 09:56 AM
Originally posted by anarchy52:
Isn't that a smoking 109 behind you?

Correct anarchy52, but you forgot to ask the more important question; why is he smoking?

Heres why:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/Olli72/news/gunnerbomb2.jpg

I believe it was this bomb that hit him http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v40/Olli72/news/gunnerbomb3.jpg

Brain32
06-03-2005, 10:06 AM
Fennec_P I just saw the tracks = http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif
I noticed you always shooted at the same place(apparently with a good reason), is that where the fuel tanks are located?

I always get hit at the engine, and then it's the annoying oil splatter sindrome or a dead engine; I think I will avoid direct 3 or 9 o'clock attacks because that's when I get theese fatal hits.

Tater-SW-
06-03-2005, 10:15 AM
Why is it the tail gunner on the Il-2 will yell at you when you fly, um, agressively, but won't call out a contact? Really odd. That needs fixng in BoB at the very least.

tater

horseback
06-03-2005, 10:36 AM
First of all, those episodes quoted from historical events are recorded because they were exceptional, not remotely the norm. In the case of the B-17 vs Zero story, I was immediately reminded of what an old Navy pilot (my former landlord flew with Fighting 6 through most of 1942) said about fighting the Japanese early in the war:"...they flew so beautifully, so by-the-book, that their flight path was instantly predictable, and you knew exactly where to point your guns and when to fire. Of course, you had to be able to bring your guns to bear in the first place, and by Guadalcanal, they learned to fly a little more random."

I expect that the Fairey Battle episode also took place early on, with the German pilots still flying "by the book," assuming that the story wasn't a classic case of propaganda and/or gunner overclaiming.

I cannot speak for what happens when your own crew acts stupidly; I don't fly mudmover (I can't see **** on the ground 95% of the time), and I don't care nearly as much about 'friendly' AI stupidity. I expect it as part of the penalty of dealing with AI. However, my primary objection, as stated, is to opposing Davy Crockett gunners with X-Ray Vision.

For example, last night I flew a sorty where my flight of 109F-4s ran into some Pe's. We broke up the flight, and I chased one down a good 3km away from his nearest buddy. I approached from his low 4 o'clock, low enough that the rear top gunner couldn't bring his guns to bear, and far enough to one side that the 'tunnel' gunner shouldn't have been able to see me, much less aim his gun at me.

I got the oily windshield treatment at 600m range, from the tunnel gunner's first burst, shooting a 45 minute effort straight to hell with an absolutely impossible shot.

If it were the one in one hundred exception, I wouldn't mind nearly so much, but this sort of thing happens no less than half the time. If I flew a 'dead is dead' campaign, I'd never be able to engage a bomber from the rear or sides if I wanted any hope of surviving the war.

As it is, between the kill theiving of my wingmen and the impossible marksmanship of enemy bomber gunners, I'm wearing the 'Refly' button out about every third mission in every campaign, and I'm gonna keep harping on this theme until this kind of garbage ends.

cheers

horseback

F19_Ob
06-03-2005, 11:44 AM
Hello lads.
Strange that we all think so differently. I wonder if the sniper claimers really fly bombers frequently?

The ai gunners aren't snipers in my experience.
Many times they just dont fire on clear shots or shoots at the empty sky like olli described.
We have been shot down together on so many occasions in the Tb3, he111's and il-2's, stukas ,bf110's and others where the gunners seemingly were drunk or on vacation, and often none of our combined gunners even hit the enemy. (hard to call that sniping)
Very seldom my gunners shot down a plane but sometimes they hit ofcourse.
This forced us to fly in an offensive manner like a fighter, wich give better results than relying on gunners, especially in the il-2 and bf110.

A funny thing! On several occasions online my gunners have been accused of uberness and sniping but it was me manning the guns.
Usually I try to go in a shallow dive when attacked so the attackers closingspeed is low, and since I dont trust my gunners IQ , I myself do the long range shooting on fighters directly behind and then switch to pilot seat for evasions at close range.
I usually hit better than my gunners.
At close range I try to maneuver my bomber so the attacker must bleed energy. A slow fighter is the easiest target for the ai gunners but fastmoving ones often go untouched because the gunners cant pull lead and are to slow in their movements.

With a groundpounder like the il2 I often risk jumping into the gunnerseat and turn wich gives me a good hitprobability on the fighter turning after me. The ai misses most of the obvious shots even if the il-2 guns has very flat trajectory.

I have flown the grounpounder and bombers quite a lot and flew the 109 mainly a long time before that and I must say That I was shot down just a handful of times by a bomber and there was nothing uber about those situations. On the other hand I shot down so many bombers and groundpounders in the 109 that I felt sorry for the pounderguys in the end, and avoided to shoot them down. I just gave a short burst for luck and headed out for other game.

Later I myself converted to crappy rides and got a totally new understanding for bombers and the difficulties for them.
---------------------------------------

During the battle of brittain many allied pilots disliked the snipergunners in the he111 and Dorniers and even bf110's. (in the books I've read )
Sometimes a single hit could ruin the day.
I'm pretty sure the german bomberpilots equally disliked the snipers in spits and hurricanes and they had more guns to snipe with.

Anyway, I accept the fact that it must be hard to find a good setting for the ai. It will always have limitations of some sort.


Well, my take on it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

SeaFireLIV
06-03-2005, 11:56 AM
Perhaps those of you having trouble with bomber gunners, yet don`t want to use R\L flying tactics could try the `rudder trick`. This solution was mentioned before by a good forum member (who I just can`t remember his name, sorry, m8), but noone except me seemed to want to hear.

I`ve used it ever since, along with standard tactics. It`s not really a trick since the AI uses it to a degree to and will eventually compensate, but it gives the pilot vital seconds to aim and shoot if the AI gunner actually seems to be tracking you.

Although, as with the other guy, probably no one will want to know...

NonWonderDog
06-03-2005, 01:45 PM
"Rudder trick"?

Flying in a sideslip is a "trick"?

Fennec_P
06-03-2005, 02:25 PM
always shooted at the same place

Most of the wing has fuel tanks in the B-17. It even has the wingtip tanks that it's not supposed to have.

I like the underside of the wing root between the engines. You have 2 engines and a fuel tank all in the same spot, so you're likely to flame something.

x4btr
06-03-2005, 02:49 PM
Strange that we all think so differently. I wonder if the sniper claimers really fly bombers frequently?

Quite so! I thought it was widely accepted that the AI gunners were ludicrously over-accurate. Apparently, this is not so?... Hmm!

In my own experience, the most dangerous adversary by far in IL2/PF is the Ju 87D. An Ace pilot in any Bf 109 pales in comparison to the threat of a Rookie Stuka-D gunner. I am convinced that the rear mounted weapons were mistakenly mis-modelled as miniature 88mm guns with a 3000 rds/min ROF.

Yes, we all know that the AI gunners sometimes do daft, inexplicable things. Like the AI in other cases, as well. In the main, the defensive fire from every bomber in the game is ludicrously over-effective. I cannot see any exception to this observation.

However, perhaps I do not have the requisite skills, or the correct strategy here. I would like to propose a challenge, if I may. Could one of you chaps who disagrees with this observation please undertake to show us that we are mistaken?

I propose to use the QMB to make a mission with four Ju 87Ds, pilots set to Average. They can be from 1000-3000m, as you wish. Arm yourself with a single La-5. Now, let us see you destroy these Stukas without being shot down. I cannot imagine how you will do it, but perhaps that only means that my competence is not up to scratch?

So, please, demonstrate for us. I would love to see the resulting NTRK of your success. I will most certainly study your technique very closely indeed should you succeed!!!

I really hope one of you lads will consider this 'challenge'. I await your success with bated breath....

Fennec_P
06-03-2005, 03:18 PM
Do I get a prize? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://members.shaw.ca/fennec/la5vsju87.zip

Got greedy trying to shoot 2 in one pass, and took a bullet in the radiator. Got them all, though, and landed safely. First try, even (how hard can Stukas be compared to B-17s?)

Nothing fancy about tactics or strategy. Again, started with a head-on, because it's a 'free' kill. Attack from below, side. Weave. That kind of thing.

The MG81Z shoots fast (1800rpm, not 3000), but otherwise is a pretty crummy weapon. I took maybe a dozen hits, and other than the radiator hit, they did no damage. So long as you're not tailchasing, and taking rounds in the face, it's hard for this gun to kill you.

'Ludicrously overeffective' is certainly not the case. My favorite gunner ride is the D5, and I do a much better job than this ******ed AI.

Edit: Oh, I just realized you said to put them on average. I used ace.

F19_Olli72
06-03-2005, 05:03 PM
x4btr, ill do yours if you do mine http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif My challange is on page 1 of this thread, i posted it before but so far no takers. Ppl must be scared or something... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif But since you think the ai gunners are "ludicrously over-effective" it shouldnt be a problem for you, right?

SeaFireLIV
06-03-2005, 05:48 PM
Originally posted by x4btr:


I propose to use the QMB to make a mission with four Ju 87Ds, pilots set to Average. They can be from 1000-3000m, as you wish. Arm yourself with a single La-5. Now, let us see you destroy these Stukas without being shot down. I cannot imagine how you will do it, but perhaps that only means that my competence is not up to scratch?



I dislike silly challenges like this because people tend to just move the goalposts if you beat it, but this is not difficult to do at all.
I just went up and downed 3 of the Stukas in a basic LA5. The only reason I didn`t get the fourth one was because the **** ships were active and took down the last one. The damage was nil (I think I was hit once, maybe) I will get them all on another map if you wish, but it`s really not that hard with proper tactics.

Just patience.

Jetbuff
06-03-2005, 05:54 PM
The AI gunners ARE snipers. They just suck at it 99% of the time. Problem is, the 1% of shots they do make are usually the Hail Mary shots in a 45? bank at a plane doing 600kph on a perpendicular flight path at 1000m! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

I regularly fly both sides of the equation. As a bombardier I can tell you that my first action on any hint of gunner activity is to take over and do it myself because they really suck when it counts. On the other hand, when attacking a bomber I find that no approach angle is truly safe from a golden BB. It's sorta a$$-backwards in that regard.

SeaFireLIV
06-03-2005, 05:56 PM
p.s The LA5(basic even) is a sweet plane to fly, perhaps you should have chosen a more challenging aircraft.

edithttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gifops didn`t see Jetbuff`s reply.

Fennec_P
06-03-2005, 06:28 PM
nt

p1ngu666
06-03-2005, 07:42 PM
the sniperness, or lack of depends on 2 things.

1) is it a human controled aircraft? if yes, massively reduce the gunners abilities

2)type of aircraft, the stuka is one of tougher ones, with a sniper in the back also. many many times ive had my aircraft shot up (even il2's, jammed guns, rad hit, controls gone etc all in 1 burst)

b29 is probably one of the worst, and the tb3.

also on tb3 when u move around the guns dont fire at the centre of the crosshair for some reason http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

imo they might have done this : reduce ai on the human controlled aircraft, added in stuff to make them aim and fire in seemingly random and stupid places.

also if your a human gunner and u die, then the planes dead, this is VERY annoying.

BfHeFwMe
06-03-2005, 08:12 PM
I've got a much easier challenge. Someone provide some links to all the Gunner and top Ace Crew lists.

Shouldn't be much of a problem, should it? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Jetbuff
06-03-2005, 09:35 PM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
the sniperness, or lack of depends on 2 things.

1) is it a human controled aircraft? if yes, massively reduce the gunners abilities
Placebo effect methinks... related to how uncoordinated a human pilot's flight path is compared to the AI or the simple fact that the AI pilots can't complain about the uselessness of their gunners. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Oleg, we need whining-capable AI for BOB! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

It is highly unlikely 1c:Maddox would go through the trouble of coding two different routines for bomber gunners just to spite human bomber pilots. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

2)type of aircraft, the stuka is one of tougher ones, with a sniper in the back also. many many times ive had my aircraft shot up (even il2's, jammed guns, rad hit, controls gone etc all in 1 burst)
Again I disagree, flying the Stuka is a painful experience in gunner frustration, it's by far one of the easiest multi-seat aircraft to down bar the Japanese crates - as it should be.

also if your a human gunner and u die, then the planes dead, this is VERY annoying.
Now this is a very valid gripe... rather ridiculous when you lose the entire bomber because you just happened to switch to a gunner just as he was being shot up.

x4btr
06-04-2005, 01:57 AM
First of all, thanks Frenec_P for your TRK file. I noticed a number of things on this that really have me wondering all the more....

In the first case, I see that your gunnery is better than mine, and that surely is part of the explanation. Fair enough. However, you did here use the La-5FN. That is a very different proposition to the La-5. It is my observation that closing speed is the best form of 'safety' against AI pilots. I will try this myself in the FN and see what happens.

Tactically, I noticed that you stayed below the Junkers, and that is also more easily done in the FN. After all you need better power and such to accomplish this and still close at a reasonable speed. Still, this is a good tactical adjustment, and I will also try it.

However, that said, it would appear that the AI in your copy of IL2 does not respond like the AI in mine! That sounds extremely daft, I know, but I am going to put it to the test.

Meanwhile, this has got me wondering if PC hardware plays a role here? I know that my poor old contraption would be laughed at by most gamers, and it is too slow for the job. We also know that AI eats up CPU very well. Are the two related? How fascinating.

I am going to make a TRK of my own attempt, with an La-5 this time, and perhaps if I fail some of you better chaps can point out what has gone wrong? Also, I suspect that there will be a sharp contrast in behaviour bewtween the JUs in this TRK, and what I will see.... But, that remians to be proven.

As for on-line challenges, well... I can only say that the variables are impossible to sort out. What with cheating, time distortions, and all sorts, what would be responsible? I have no idea.

Watch this space....

F19_Olli72
06-04-2005, 02:39 AM
Originally posted by x4btr:
As for on-line challenges, well... I can only say that the variables are impossible to sort out. What with cheating, time distortions, and all sorts, what would be responsible? I have no idea.


Maybe so, but my online challange has less impacting variables than testing the ai gunners from the fighters point of view. As you said yourself, the variable of pilot and gunnery skill of human pilot is very wide. Where as in flying a bomber, theres not much you can do to affect the ai gunners behaviour.

Im still very dissapointed not a single one of the "ai gunners is uber" claimers has the courtesy to at least give it a go. It is as i expected, theyre afraid that the ai gunners wont give them the result they're looking for.

To critisize something you dont have full perspective of, is ignorance. Ive experienced the ai gunners online, offline, in a fighter and in a bomber. Is it too much to ask for the participants in this debate to do the same? I was hoping i was wrong, but sadly i wasnt. I can only hope Oleg isnt paying too much attention to the "ai gunners are uber" claimers. Because obviously, they dont want to see the whole picture.

If i was on the same level, id claim all who thinks ai gunners are too hard are just darned cr@ppy pilots. Learn to fly.

Cheating online is such a small variable it can be dismissed alltogether. As for lag, a possibility. But are you saying ai gunners are totally **** because of lag? I dont think lag is more of an issue for ai than for humans in regard of accuracy. I dont think lag explains the forward firing gunners when you have a bandit on your six either.

SeaFireLIV
06-04-2005, 02:58 AM
Originally posted by x4btr:


Fair enough. However, you did here use the La-5FN. That is a very different proposition to the La-5. It is my observation that closing speed is the best form of 'safety' against AI pilots. I will try this myself in the FN and see what happens.

Tactically, I noticed that you stayed below the Junkers, and that is also more easily done in the FN. ...

It wouldn`t have made that much difference if he`d used an LA5. The LA5FN`s real difference shows in dogfights, against Stukas they`re all sweet.

Just to let you know tactics vary from one pilot to another (again, the beauty of this sim). In my try mentioned earlier my approaches were slightly different:

1.I aproached the line of Stukas hoping to take a couple out with a head on. I missed and slightly smoked one. I heard the shots of gunners as I was not hit.

2. I drove high up and over flew straight high and above then dived on the Leader, leaving him smoking badly.

3. Now the other 2 untouched Stukas started splitting up. I took the wing of the 3rd as he turned with a deflection shot. His gunner, I think, hit me then. No damage.

4. I went after the fourth, but we were over friendly ships and they took his wing off. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

I went back and checked the leader who was now on fire, so left him. With the remaining slightly smoking Stuka I dove right underneath popped up at the last and ripped his under belly apart. This is my least favourite way of killing bombers.

I would provide a better track but I see the ease of it has already been proven albeit with the LA5FN. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Oh and I`m of course one of those who believes that AI gunners are very ineffective, as I already pointed out TWICE toned down from before. Way too watered down. I guess this just proves we have to be careful of people who complain alot, but don`t prove a whole lot. I hope Oleg takes note.

Fennec_P
06-04-2005, 05:03 PM
Yesterday I ran a DF server, fighters vs. bombers, to find out the basic effectiveness of human controlled gunners.

I pitted one team with only lightly armed fighters (109Fs, Yak9s, HurriMKIs, etc) against a team of only bombers (anything with a tailgun). I might have a track or two saved; I'll put those up later.

In short, the bombers raped the fighters. Kill ratio was something like 3-1 (mind you, a lot of these were from forward guns on A-20, IL-2 and Stuka). People were manning their guns, and combined with the poor tactics of your average fighter jock, resulted in a lot of flamed engines.

I was afraid to go anywhere near the B-25s. When I flew straight for even a moment, the player would ventilate me. Even crazy angles that stump the AI are nothing for the human gunners. Range is not a factor either; they'll fire and fire, adjusting their aim, until they score hits. AI gunners are never so frightening! One time I got shot down 3 times trying to kill the same bomber.

Flew a TB-3R against a Bf-109F. I flamed his engine on the first pass (head-on, even). He came again with a Yak-9, and attacked from above. By his second pass, his controls were kaput and was pouring fuel. I reflew and formed up with another TB-3. A 109F attacked from 10 o'clock, and we tore him apart, getting pilot kill as he zipped past, going at least 450km/h.

As usual, the AI gunners were firing in the wrong direction all the time. Ended up turning most of them off, so they didn't waste ammunition. Especially on A-20, it doesn't have many rounds to spare.

StukaD vs. I-16, I banked and sprayed bullets until one blew his head off, 200m+. Unfortunately, he was doing the same, and lit me on fire.

P-40C comes at my He-111 from 6 o'clock. Passes by me 2 or 3 times, doing some damaged to me, but is covered in holes from my return fire. He heads toward an airfield, I turn to bring the MG/FF to bear, and he's toast.

My fave was the A-20. Flys like a fighter, but has 4 M2s pointing out the rear. Got 5 kills or so, 2 of which from rear gun fire, for not a single loss. I probably look really stupid with my arms crossed, hands on stick and mouse, but it works good. Just when he thinks he's outturned me, the dorsal gun opens up and turns him to swiss cheese. I ran out of rounds for the dorsal, so when the next 190F came, I bunted the nose forward and opened up with the ventral gun. No hits. Let him get closer (150-200m), bunted nose down again, fired 2 second burst, and flamed his engine.

All in all, had a blast, and will be doing that mission more. Flying bombers in your average Ki-84/Yak-9K uberplane server is just aggravating, but against early war planes its a lot of fun.

Ratsack
06-04-2005, 09:15 PM
G€day Fennec,

I€ve looked at your Bf109F2 track.

First of all, nice shooting. Couple of things:

1. Those B17s are pretty docile. They fly straight on, taking no evasive action. When I set this up in QMB, the B17s jink. In a formation of 4, one even dropped below the other three during my first head-on pass. How come yours are like Mary€s little lamb?

2. Your B17s don€t seem to shoot straight. In my first two attempts to recreate your track, my engine was pinged from about 500 m during the first head-on pass.

Is there something you€ve done in the mission builder €" like making the bombers fly waypoints or something - that makes them go like drones? Just for comparison, try setting up a low altitude intercept like that on the Crimea map in QMB. Leave the AAA off, so there€s no complications, and have a look at how the bombers behave. Their behavior bears no resemblance to the behavior of the bombers in the track you posted.

On another matter, somebody in this thread (and I know it wasn€t you, Fennec) said something about people not being willing to use historical tactics. As a matter of interest, try historical tactics (aiming for the nose and cockpit instead of the wing) on the B17. It takes an awful pounding before the pilots or gunners are killed. I tried this the other night in a FW190A6, and had a look at the tracks in close-up slow mo. The forward fuselage was riddled with large holes from the 20 mm, all over the crew positions for the bombardier, navigator, pilots and flight engineer. None of them were injured enough to stop them shooting after repeated passes. Those guys seem to be bullet proof.


Ratsack

Fennec_P
06-04-2005, 09:54 PM
1. Nothing special. They have 2 regular waypoints, thats all.

2. My B-17s must be defective. New B-17s on order. But seriously, like I said, it took quite a few tries to succeed. In other tries, I did get shot down. In some cases, I failed to shoot B-17s down in one pass, and they did break formation. I think your 500m value is an exxageration.

They appear to behave the same in QMB. In fact, QMB missions are set up the same way as mine. 2 waypoints per flight, that's it. The only difference I can think of is loadout. I gave mine bombs.

As for historical tactics, it was common to target the engines. As for hitting the crew, I don't find it hard, least of which with a FW-190. Mind you, you're shooting at the flight deck, not the nose (so you need to approach from 12 high).

I do agree it's quite a bit harder than other planes to kill the pilot. But then, all bombers with that configuration are hard to Pkill. He-111 style planes are easier.

Ratsack
06-04-2005, 10:19 PM
As a matter of interest, I did multiple beam attacks on the nose in a FW190A6, and the buggers were untouched. I'll see if I've still got the track.

What I find surprising is that they werer unhurt after repeated attacks from the sides, where there would be no armor.

Strange.

Ratsack

PS- regarding the 500 m, I was surprised as hell. I hadn't started to fire and the windscreen was covered in oil. Complete bullsh1t.

p1ngu666
06-04-2005, 11:08 PM
Originally posted by Jetbuff:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p1ngu666:
the sniperness, or lack of depends on 2 things.

1) is it a human controled aircraft? if yes, massively reduce the gunners abilities
Placebo effect methinks... related to how uncoordinated a human pilot's flight path is compared to the AI or the simple fact that the AI pilots can't complain about the uselessness of their gunners. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Oleg, we need whining-capable AI for BOB! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

It is highly unlikely 1c:Maddox would go through the trouble of coding two different routines for bomber gunners just to spite human bomber pilots. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

2)type of aircraft, the stuka is one of tougher ones, with a sniper in the back also. many many times ive had my aircraft shot up (even il2's, jammed guns, rad hit, controls gone etc all in 1 burst)
Again I disagree, flying the Stuka is a painful experience in gunner frustration, it's by far one of the easiest multi-seat aircraft to down bar the Japanese crates - as it should be.

also if your a human gunner and u die, then the planes dead, this is VERY annoying.
Now this is a very valid gripe... rather ridiculous when you lose the entire bomber because you just happened to switch to a gunner just as he was being shot up. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

nope, ive come across this ALOT in coops, stuka's are one of teh most feared aircraft by many, ive seen a flight rip up 109's in 2mins, no trouble at all, then when the stuka's come along ppl attack, and get shot down.....
and yes, flying as a stuka rear gunner is a pain...
i think the full ai stuka is possibly tougher and stronger than a human one, the rear gunner might well have a wider field of fire too. also **** hard to knock out a gunner on a AI stuka, easy on a human one...

as too lag, i think it effects bomber gunners negativly, as when the server is busy, my guns seem alot less effective. its surprising how few bullets u actully need to kill a engine, perhaps 12 or less, a few anyways..

also on gunner aces, there where a few, but to shoot down a aircraft, they will likely be firing at u, so to succeed tobe a gunner ace is MUCH more dangerous. also bomber crews may only average 20missions before there shot down. bomber command did 40ish missions per loss, for all types.
read a few different stories of guys getting 3 kills on one sortie tho http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

x4btr
06-05-2005, 02:43 AM
Right. Here then are the results of my own experiments. This was a useful exercise, as you will see. Firstly, you will note several things, my poor gunnery for one. Also, there will be spots in the TRK where I appear to have a shooting position and do nothing; those are episodes of severe screen 'freeze' and low frame rates. Part of having an old PC.

In the first mission, using the QMB, I had success and downed all four. I suffered no damage. The approach from below tactic worked very well, indeed. However, I noticed that the JUs acted rather oddly, being drone-like. I had never seen this before. This is so because I never use the QMB; I see no point in it. This relates directly to my observation that the JUs in Frennec_P's TRK did not behave like my game's AI. In the QMB the behavior was the same as with Frennec_P's. However....

The second track shows a scenario using the FMB. Very basic, no major tasks or items of note. I did notice that in the QMB the JUs were cruising rather slowly, much more so than one would normally encounter (whether on-line or whilst doing something purposeful). Thus, I increased their waypoint speed to 380 km/h. Now, observe the results. Same flying and tactics by myself, UTTERLY different results and AI behaviour.

In the first case, the closing speed was slower, due to the higher speed of the JUs. In fact, I think they accelerated even more during the combat. Their tactics were extremely aggressive, by far more clever in evasion, and not at all drone-like. Indeed, I also claim that their gunnery was 100% better than the same aircraft in the QMB. The end product was a few damaged, and I was basically put out of action. This is what I experience in my own IL2 flying. There was simply no way to keep approaching the JUs from below, as was so easy to do in the QMB version. The closing speed was virtually nil. Their gunnery was excellent --I claim obsurd-- and in no way resembled that of the same aircraft and settings in QMB.

Thus, my original claim. The JUs in FMB were completely different to those in the QMB. Whatever for? What is the explanation of this observation? I have no idea.... However, I would say that from my own experience this is what one sees whilst flying on-line. Hyper-accurate AI gunners, combined with competent human flying, and low closing speeds, makes for impossible bomber targets.

Frennec_P (cheers, mate) also made another outstanding test and observation with regards to on-line bombers. This test, which demonstrated the phenomenon which I am describing exactly, is significant. Something is obviously fundamentally wrong when bombers "rape" numbers of attacking fighters. This is historically absurd. It deviates completely from any reality. I cannot say what, exactly, the problem may be. Are the guns to easy to aim? Perhaps so. Is their firepower disproportional? Perhaps so, as well. I do not know. What I do know, however, is that when one obtains consistently ahistorical results, something is amiss in an historical simulation. Common sense.

And why the massive difference in AI behaviour? What is it about the QMB which turns the AI into doltish sheep who cannot aim? Why are human gunners (ones with practice, anyway-- I cannot hit a thing with those bloody guns) so effective? Are we to believe that IL2 gamers are infinitely more effective than actual gunners in real aircraft? No, silly. This is quite a mystery to me.

I, personally, maintain my original observation-- 'typical' in-game AI gunners (i.e. non-QMB) are by far too effective. Human gunners are worse still, for reasons unknown. Something is amiss, but I really do not know what it may be, exactly....


http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/Skins/examples/ju87 tests.zip

Ratsack
06-05-2005, 03:50 AM
I would like to run a test on critical hits from AI gunners to disprove or prove my anecdotal observation that they seem to get a lot of critical or near critical hits with very few rounds. It seems like a fighter more and heavier weaponry can bang away at you and knock a few holes in your plane, but that it€s unusual to get flamed by one. The gunners on the other hand€¦

Anyone have any suggestions on how to test this?

Ratsack

Fennec_P
06-05-2005, 04:19 AM
the problem may be...

Lots of things come to mind.

Reloads are not modeled. For example, the MG15 magazine only holds 75 rounds. Ingame, magazines disappear while firing, but there is no wait time for reload. If this were modeled, the He-111 and Ju87B would become easier to kill, because the rear guns could only fire 4 seconds between reloads.

The guns are handled and aimed too easily. Hand operated guns would be heavy and difficult to point. Powered turrets can only rotate at a certain rate. Ingame, it's all mouse controlled, with no rotation speed limits.

Manuever limits. You can aim and fire regardless of the attitude of the bomber. Rolling even 45 degrees would make shooting difficult or impossible. In some planes, crewmembers would even fall out of the plane if it rolled upside down.

Injuries don't affect gunners. Often, many crew will be injured, but they will still operate at 100% skill until they are killed.

Human bomber pilots are much smarter than AI. They'll dodge if you try to attack from blind spots, or head on. They'll dive, forcing you into a tail chase. They get far more opportunities to shoot back.

This is probably why the 380kmh Stukas nailed you. I mean, you flew past 2 Stukas, then were virtually flying in formation with the third one that took out your motor. In the QMB track, your exposure was much less, and you didn't linger behind any of them.

As for the evasive manuevers, I'm sure you'd find they jink just as much in QMB as FMB if you did more than one test of each. Also, the evasive manuevers are completely dependant on the players position in relation to them, which will be different since you used two different speeds. QMB missions are, after all, just FMB missions. No different than one you make yourself, or with DGEN, or QMB. The AI is the same, be sure.

x4btr
06-05-2005, 04:40 AM
As for the evasive manuevers, I'm sure you'd find they jink just as much in QMB as FMB if you did more than one test of each. Also, the evasive manuevers are completely dependant on the players position in relation to them, which will be different since you used two different speeds. QMB missions are, after all, just FMB missions. No different than one you make yourself, or with DGEN, or QMB. The AI is the same, be sure.

Common sense would suggest that you are correct, but that is not what I'm finding. I have just replicated these results five different times, using five different QMB and FMB scenarios. In each case, the behaviour was exactly as I have described-- drones in QMB, aggressive in FMB. In the last two FMBs, I even decreased the waypoint speed to 300 km/h, then 275. Same results; the JUs merely accelerated whilst under attack. I never observed this in the QMB.

In each QMB I destroyed all four JUs. I managed only one confirmed kill in any FMB. I was killed twice by pilot-kill shots, for good measure.

Whatever the seeming illogic of it all, I have to maintain that the AI is completely different in QMB vs FMB. At least on my own PC. This is to say nothing of the fact that these observations are also in agreement with what is seen in the on-line experiments.

I respectfully have to suggest that something is certainly going on here....

Frennec_P, could you test this behaviour on your own PC? What happens when you fight these same four JUs in an FMB scenario?

NonWonderDog
06-05-2005, 05:25 AM
I'll have to say that I've had it both ways in QMB. Usually they just fly along doing nothing, but the last one I flew I ended up getting into a dogfight with an He-111. After my first pass they all spread out vertically; when I damaged one he dove to the deck and started jinking. That's the only time I've ever had that happen, though.

Remember how Oleg said that the pilot's gunsight view was stabilized to help gameplay? It seems the gunner views are stabilized just as much. I'd imagine that there'd be a fair bit of turbulence around a bomber formation, too.

F19_Olli72
06-05-2005, 07:15 AM
Originally posted by Fennec_P:

The guns are handled and aimed too easily. Hand operated guns would be heavy and difficult to point.

I have to disagree with that. MG81 for example, in the original aircraft version wieghed 6.5kg empty. Add that it was mounted i wouldnt call that heavy. Also, have you seen those old B17 clips when they film gunners in action? Even with their bulky protective suits and gear they can point their guns rather quickly and without difficulty. And those are 'heavy' machineguns.

Weight is no issue on mounted guns, thats why they're mounted. Anyone who has fired a mounted light machinegun irl (i have) knows that.

Does this Mg look heavy?
http://www.luftarchiv.org/waffen/mg17_bf110.jpg

Another example perfectly illustrates what i mean: Look at the gun mount and notice the bulk of the gun are at the end, if the gun was mounted at the tip of the barrel, then perhaps it would be heavy to point. But actually the weight of the back end of the gun and the lighter weight of the barrels is making it easier to point. Simple physics in work.
http://www.luftarchiv.org/waffen/mg81z_ar.jpg


Originally posted by Fennec_P:
Powered turrets can only rotate at a certain rate. Ingame, it's all mouse controlled, with no rotation speed limits.


But since were talking about AI gunners here, thats no issue, AI turrets has rotation speed limit.

p1ngu666
06-05-2005, 07:42 AM
the turrets have a limit, certainly the top one on b25 and a20 (same turret)

the hand held ones dont have a limit

some planes are also harder to aim with than others, tb3 its VERY hard to get rounds on target.

if your running into uber bombers online, 90% certain thatll either be a human manning the guns, or a full ai plane.

main thing we have over gunners irl is respawn, and we arent tired and cold

F19_Olli72
06-05-2005, 07:54 AM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
main thing we have over gunners irl is respawn, and we arent tired and cold

But at least irl the pilot didnt die as well if the gunner bought it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

p1ngu666
06-05-2005, 12:55 PM
indeed
with RAF crews, the nav, flight engineer and bomb aimer could all fly to okish level i think, as they had done some pilot training