PDA

View Full Version : Thoughts about the AI...



XyZspineZyX
10-26-2003, 07:49 AM
Hmm, I've been thinking about this for a while.
Is it possible to make the AI take different responses to cope with the situation it finds it self in?

Example: If the AI engages a bomberformation it will attempt continious head-on passes and even after the first set up for another one.

What I mean is, can it be implemented in this (or the next) sim, that the AI's reactions depends on the aircraft it flies and the opposition it meets and how experienced the AI is supposed to be?

Another example is the experienced AI flying a Bf-109 against a Rata won't turnfight but conduct "boom'n zoom"-tactics.

But if the AI in the Bf-109E meets a P-39 it won't hesitate to turn.

I guess it would take a lot of different responses programmed, and the AI would only use the ones fit for the situation.

Right now it seems the AI only knows scissors and some sort of pulling-up-until-near-stall-and-wait-for-the-inexperienced-to-ram-him manouver/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

My thoughts

rgds

XyZspineZyX
10-26-2003, 07:49 AM
Hmm, I've been thinking about this for a while.
Is it possible to make the AI take different responses to cope with the situation it finds it self in?

Example: If the AI engages a bomberformation it will attempt continious head-on passes and even after the first set up for another one.

What I mean is, can it be implemented in this (or the next) sim, that the AI's reactions depends on the aircraft it flies and the opposition it meets and how experienced the AI is supposed to be?

Another example is the experienced AI flying a Bf-109 against a Rata won't turnfight but conduct "boom'n zoom"-tactics.

But if the AI in the Bf-109E meets a P-39 it won't hesitate to turn.

I guess it would take a lot of different responses programmed, and the AI would only use the ones fit for the situation.

Right now it seems the AI only knows scissors and some sort of pulling-up-until-near-stall-and-wait-for-the-inexperienced-to-ram-him manouver/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

My thoughts

rgds

XyZspineZyX
10-26-2003, 08:18 AM
Good idea, but AI should vary response. There was one story of how a Fb109 ace attacked a Yak~3 ace trying to land and he shot up the Yak pretty bad.

So the 109 dude thought he would get away with staying on the Yak tailhttp://www.boardy.de/images/smilies/kopfpatsch.gif


but it didn't happen and the Yak dude snapped round and Fb109 dude was captured at the Yak airfield.



Message Edited on 10/26/0307:19AM by LEXX_Luthor

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 02:36 AM
LEXX_Luthor wrote:
- Good idea, but AI should vary response. There was
- one story of how a Fb109 ace attacked a Yak~3 ace
- trying to land and he shot up the Yak pretty bad.
-
- So the 109 dude thought he would get away with
- staying on the Yak tail.

Not a bad idea, you could let the AI pick the wrong responses, let's say, 50 percent of the time for an rookie and only 5 for an ace, and let the AI change tactics during the fight as opposition or the state of the enemys aircraft changes?

Something like after "booming and zooming" the escort then head-on the bombers or even nailing a lone bomber with a dead reargunner from it's six'o'clock where the bomber now it without protection?

rgds

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 05:20 AM
I've been doing quite a bit of research into AI. It'd take more work than you'd think to get it to do these things, but the ability to do these things are I think well within the grasp of the next simulation.

http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/icefire/icefire_tempest.jpg
"Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." - Winston Churchill

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 05:50 AM
VW-IceFire wrote:
- I've been doing quite a bit of research into AI.
- It'd take more work than you'd think to get it to do
- these things, but the ability to do these things are
- I think well within the grasp of the next
- simulation.

I'd never disagree on that argument, it was also seen as a suggestion to the next sim if not FB.

Something like a tree, where the AI can select one of two options until it's final execution, like the first be how many enemies or something like that?

I guess it would demand a very big computer, but we should be getting there?

rgds

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 06:24 AM
It would be nice to be able to set the "degree of aggresiveness" for the AI. For example, a small party of fighter-bombers on a hit and run raid would avoid a pitched battle at all costs. So would a recon flight. (A typical manoever would be a long shallow dive back home.)

You could also tie this to the skill settings: rookies might be more likely to flee the battle once they've lost contact with the rest of the squadron. Vetrans would be more likely to dig in. Some kind of randomness here would help.

And since we're on the subject, as it stands the AI will always spot your flight. Again, it would be better to tie this to skill and add some randomness. Rookies will spot you 40% of the time, Aces 99%. And if they're flying in a formation, the ace will "inform" the rest of the squadron. (i.e. planes flying in a group will default to the highest skill setting)

Just my 2c. Hope this hasn't been covered elsewhere.

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 09:52 PM
These are all great suggestions. & I hope we see every one of them at some point. But I think they need to concentrate more on the basics before getting into these complicated behaviors.

#1, AI escorts should be able to fly at a reasonable speed, weaving gently above the bombers if the escortees are too slow.
#2, AI should be able to fly a 110 km mission without running out of gas. (related to #1 above.)
#3, AI should be able to let down from altitude without going into hysterics.
#4, AI should be able to fly nap of the earth without doing cartwheels or crashing into the hills.
#5, If you call for help in a Stuka or other bomber/ground attack aircraft your whole group will break & go after the bandit. They will then forget all about their mission. Meanwhile the escorts are busy cartwheeling all over the sky three km away.
#6, If you're flying in #2 position in a four plane flight then #s 3 & 4 can no longer land.
#7, The AI enemy will always find you if you are their target even if you fly 100km the wrong direction.
#8, AI should not be able to see you through clouds, aircraft structure, smoke or darknes.
Did I leave out anything?
Sorry if I seem negative but these aspects of this sim have me really frustrated at the moment!

Cheers.....Smokin256

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 10:15 PM
-- Sorry if I seem negative

Not at all. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Every problem #1-#8 is no different from the others' ideas above, and in fact may be related to them. For example, all AI fighters begin to engage the nearest enemy from exactly 7km distance including through clouds, and this should be easy to randomize somewhat, while lowering the probability when other aircraft are near cloud level or when in poor weather or at night.

The one *nice* thing is that our FB AI calculates that 7km engagement distance with the Pythagorean Theorem, instead of using mere horizontal distance like Flanker 1.0. But then the Flanker 1.0 AI were not bothered by mountains and flying at tree top level over hilly terrain. It can be done!

Now if there were fog or bad weather, I can understand flying into mountains. That *would* be a neat feature to see, from time to time, if there were a reason for it.