Janes WWII Fighters and CCP AI cheats
Paul Higinbotham
great. However, I have just been flying just one on one "Quick Mission" and
have been really frustrated on how the AI cheats. I haven't tried a mission
yet with multi-plane furballs but I suspect that difficulty is increased by
giving the AI pilots and planes special abilities. This might be fine for
large missions but one on ones are frustrating.
For example if I go one on one (in a P-51) with a BF-109 or FW-190 either of
these planes can out climb, out turn and out accelerate me. Even when I am
being extremely careful to not cause an accelerated stall (they come on
without warning but you can detect it by the "Stall Warning" text that
appears) I still can't stay in the "elbow" behind these planes. Through
perseverance I can usually get a kill but it is always through a head on
shot, or a snap shot, or sometimes from behind when the computer pilot gives
up and dives for the deck (for some reason they quit running at some point
and fly at about 150 MPH ... easy target).
Both the 109 and 190 feel the same to fight against. They can both go into
the vertical any time they want and if I try to follow I will stall. The
only way I can get them is to stay at lower altitude and wait for them to
return. They recover speed very quickly and I can only get them with a snap
shot (usually have to turn off the cockpit to line up the deflection shot).
When I try to reverse roles and fly the BF-109 against the P-51 it is even
worse. The 109 doesn't accelerate or climb well. When I try to duplicate
the vertical maneuvers of the CCP I stall almost immediately and the CCP
P-51 is right on my tail ... it is able to match my moves without any
problem. It seems that the AI pilots are immune to stalls and black outs.
Another thing the CCP planes can do is dive for the deck at red line speeds
and maneuver or pull out with out any problem. When I try to follow in the
P-51 I have to pull up well before the 109 or I lose control of the airplane
(even thought the 109 is out accelerating me). The 109 pulls up right at
the deck with a great deal of speed. Again, when I tried to reverse roles I
wasn't able to pull away from the P-51 in a dive ... what's more I couldn't
dive for the deck vertically like the CCP planes and pull out. Also the
P-51 behind me had no problem maneuvering for a shot even though the plane
should be barely controllable in the dive.
Anyway, I like challenging AI but cheating seems pretty lame to me. I don't
notice this when I play CFS or EAW. The CCP planes seem to be limited by
the same constraints as the player's plane in these sims. Still, this seems
like a fun sim ... maybe when playing missions the AI cheats just even
things out.
What do others think?
Thanks,
Paul Higinbotham
Paul Higinbotham
Stocky2
>problem. It seems that the AI pilots are immune to stalls and black outs
I read your post with great interest and totally agree with your observations.
It is no better in the campaign missions. The main point is that as you say,
it doesn't matter which side you are on since the same thing is happening with
the flight models. The main point of this sim is dogfighting with these planes
but if the enemy always has a very unfair advantage (huge) then it greatly
detracts from the point of playing it. When it comes down to the basic premise
it is really our human brain against computer logic from a programmer- but they
have greatly factored out the human advantage by giving the enemy superior
equipment (greatly superior)- even flack and aaa are much too deadly in the
sim.
I have found that every point you have made I can confirm as being what I see
also.
Here is what I believe strongly:
the computer ai is programmed to be perfect at the setting chosen- you will
find that they use their machines to max. advantage and strategy and only with
the luck of your manuvers beating them- when you make a mistake they have you
cold with deadly shooting
> P-51 in a dive ... what's more I couldn't
>dive for the deck vertically like the CCP planes and pull out. Also the
Amazing, isn't it, how they can fly on rails but you will crash if you try and
follow them down at their speed. It feels like you are flying a Neuport
against an F16.
And like you, in spite of the flight models, I thorougly enjoy the game anyway
for all the rest of the features in it.
Another terrible problem I have is the pauses even with my p2-300a oc to 374
and 64 mb sdram with CL TnT card. The worst pauses come when I am closing on
the tail for a shot and frames are skipped in the pauses causing lost line ups.
I am using a huge cdrom cache that shows 99% saved in transfers- that takes my
cdrom out of the pause problem.
Sto...@aol.com
Dave Speelman
I guess you missed this. This is from the Creator of the Flight Models' in
WW2 Fighters. Search for posts from Brian Morgan to see the rest.
Jane's is looking into a possible bug with some joysticks
which may explain some of the FM debate.
************************
Brian Morgan typed :
(Some irrelevant text was snipped)
Each plane has its own individual strengths and weaknesses -
the easiest way to see this is to jump
into a multiplayer game and go head-to-head with someone in a
different plane. i'm not sure what you mean by the "flight model
being the same", the basic physical equations of flight are the
same at the baseline for all aircraft, but each aircraft has
a ton of individual characteristics. a P38 climbs at such-and-such
a rate, an ME-262 accellerates like so at this speed. a
lot of these things are hard to measure in a solo game, but
believe me, you'll feel it when you fight.
The ME-262 cannot match anyone in turning. Unless the AI difficulty
is set to rookie (as the first couple 262s in the FLY NOW Missions are) they
will try and BnZ you mostly because they know this.
(*** Note this line ***)
I'll guarentee it, all the AI is using the exact same flight
model as you are.
- b
EA Janes
WW2 Fighters
****************************
Stocky2 wrote in message <19981128141310...@ng24.aol.com>...
Dan Schulz
>>problem. It seems that the AI pilots are immune to stalls and black outs
>
>I read your post with great interest and totally agree with your observations.
>It is no better in the campaign missions.
Look harder. I've seen the AI depart. Shot him in the engine while he
is vertical and he ran out of energy. What did you expect, guys? Do
you think in 'real life' that trained pilots perform manuevers that
cause them to depart? In general you won't see planes spining out of
control unless something is seriously wrong.
>The main point is that as you say,
>it doesn't matter which side you are on since the same thing is happening with
>the flight models. The main point of this sim is dogfighting with these planes
>but if the enemy always has a very unfair advantage (huge) then it greatly
>detracts from the point of playing it.
Wrong again. The only advantage he has is that he flys the plane
better. The flight models are the same. Maybe you guys should play on
easy mode?
>When it comes down to the basic premise
>it is really our human brain against computer logic from a programmer- but they
>have greatly factored out the human advantage by giving the enemy superior
>equipment (greatly superior)- even flack and aaa are much too deadly in the
>sim.
Based on what? I think you are dead wrong.
>Here is what I believe strongly:
>the computer ai is programmed to be perfect at the setting chosen- you will
>find that they use their machines to max. advantage and strategy and only with
>the luck of your manuvers beating them- when you make a mistake they have you
>cold with deadly shooting
Yes - exactly (except for the luck part). They also use the same
flight model as you do. What exactly is it that your looking for?
Historically sims have been weak in AI, now we have on that can beat
you and you scream 'unfair'. Turn the difficulty down if you need to.
>> P-51 in a dive ... what's more I couldn't
>>dive for the deck vertically like the CCP planes and pull out.
Once again, just because you can't do it, doesn't mean its not
possible. I assure you that it is, because I do it all the time. Maybe
you should throttle down in your dives (chuckle).
>And like you, in spite of the flight models, I thorougly enjoy the game anyway
>for all the rest of the features in it.
The flight model in NOT porked, and it doesn't fly on rails. Quite the
contrary, in fact.
>Another terrible problem I have is the pauses even with my p2-300a oc to 374
>and 64 mb sdram with CL TnT card. The worst pauses come when I am closing on
>the tail for a shot and frames are skipped in the pauses causing lost line ups.
> I am using a huge cdrom cache that shows 99% saved in transfers- that takes my
>cdrom out of the pause problem.
Agreed - this thing is a CPU hog. I ordered a second V2 card last week
just for this reason. Its totally understandable, tho. Graphics!
Michael J. Iverson
correctly, or that the simulation isn't reading the inputs properly. To
check this, start on the runway and switch to an exterior view. Use the
keyboard arrow keys to view the deflection of your control surfaces, and
then do the same with your joystick. If they're the same, then you
don't have a joystick problem.
I've done this myself, and I don't have a problem in that area. I must
say that I think there MAY BE an issue with the AI flight models/pilots
doing things that we cannot. With a one on one fight, I find the only
way to really win is to yank your stick back as far as possible and keep
it there. Pretty "arcade," if you ask me. Now I know how new flight
sim enthusiasts can get so used to just yanking on the joystick,
pointing his/her nose at the bad guy and pulling for all she's got.
Very bad habits can be formed if you ever plan on flying something more
realistic.
--
Michael J. Iverson
http://volunteers.warbirds.org
"We're surrounded...
that simplifies our problem."
Paul Higinbotham
their ability seem inhuman and kind of ruins the suspension of disbelief for
me. I forgot to mention that I play at the "veteran" AI level , which is
one notch down from the highest level of "ace". It is not like I just yank
and bank ... I try very hard to manage my energy state and maintain SA. I
keep a close eye on the stall warning and my air speed and will "unload" if
I begin to stall. I am constantly switching view modes so I can keep track
of my planes attitude and the bogie at the same time. Despite all of this I
find it almost impossible to stay on the six of a 109 or 190 (again at
veteran level AI).
It seems to me that maneuvers that AI can perform I should also be able to
perform ... at least to 80-90 percent of the AI's ability. After 10-15 one
on one quick missions it is easy to see most of the AI's tactics. But when
I try to emulate these in the same aircraft I immediately run into
performance limitations.
I'll admit I may not be the best sim pilot. So what I am trying to figure
out is if other people in this NG can get on the six of these aircraft (when
in the P-51), stay at the "elbow" and get a shot. If you can I'd like to
hear about your techniques to do this. Again, I really like this sim and
having a lot of fun for the most part. But after flying EAW and CFS I am
getting frustrated flying the P-51 against the Axis planes. Bud Anderson in
the Aces videos says he felt he could always out maneuver any German
airplane when flying the P-51. I certainly don't feel that way and am
wondering if I am that bad of a pilot!
Thanks,
Paul Higinbotham
Dan Schulz wrote in message <3670501e....@news3.newscene.com>...
>>> P-51 in a dive ... what's more I couldn't
>>>dive for the deck vertically like the CCP planes and pull out.
>
Mike Davis
Best post I've read in a week. I agree completely about the enemy AI just plain
being good at what they do. I think lots of folks have been lulled into believing
they were outstanding pilots by mediocre AI in previous sims. This is not limited to
computer AI either. I fly once in a while with a local LAN group that thinks I'm
some sort of Sierra Hotel pilot. I hot-seat with somebody and then proceed to clean
their (everyone else's) clocks. I'm really not that hot of a pilot, good maybe but
not fantastic. That is just the level they are used to playing to. I think it's a
natural human tendency to play to the level of the competition, be it human or AI
<ggg.>
I picked up my copy of WW2 on the first day of release, at the local Wal-Mart of
all places. I was instantly just blown away by the entire sim. The graphics of
course are killer on a fast P2 and dual 12meg V2 boards, but it was the AI that
immediatly cought my attention. As in shooting my butt down _lots_ of times in short
order <ggg.> I didn't start whining about any unfair advantage, I just realized that
Janes got this one right! The AI is killer. And of course the graphics are world
beaters. This sim marks a real turning point in PC gaming, after this there is one
very high bar to measure up to. Falcan4 looks to be good, but I'd bet that WW2
Fighters is the best were going to see until they (Janes) release the Pacific War
add-on disc. Way to go Janes, two thumbs WAAAAY up! All the best, Mike
Entire post reprinted because I'm lazy today-
Dan Schulz wrote:
--
Michael S. Davis Creative Media-Works
Computer/Audio/Video Convergence
"from Creative minds spring Creative solutions."
http://www.creativemedia-works.com
webm...@creativemedia-works.com
Member, International Webmasters Association http://iwanet.org
Brian Morgan
>say that I think there MAY BE an issue with the AI flight models/pilots
>doing things that we cannot. With a one on one fight, I find the only
>way to really win is to yank your stick back as far as possible and keep
>it there. Pretty "arcade," if you ask me. Now I know how new flight
>sim enthusiasts can get so used to just yanking on the joystick,
>pointing his/her nose at the bad guy and pulling for all she's got.
>Very bad habits can be formed if you ever plan on flying something more
>realistic.
well, you dont exactly want to pull the stick all the
way back for the whole fight.
one thing about the FM - the flight model limits
your arm strength to something in the area of 50 lbs of
force. which isnt a lot compared to what a desperate
human can do for a short time, but is probably a pretty
fair value for what you could hold for the length of a
long dogfight. there is going to be a speed under which pulling
with maximum force is going to be a bad idea, under this
speed is where the finesse comes in. but, yep, there
are times where you want to yank that stick all the way
back.
-b
WW2 Fighters
Janes EA
Brian Morgan
>
>these planes can out climb, out turn and out accelerate me. Even when I am
>being extremely careful to not cause an accelerated stall (they come on
>without warning but you can detect it by the "Stall Warning" text that
>appears) I still can't stay in the "elbow" behind these planes. Through
>perseverance I can usually get a kill but it is always through a head on
>shot, or a snap shot, or sometimes from behind when the computer pilot gives
>up and dives for the deck (for some reason they quit running at some point
>and fly at about 150 MPH ... easy target).
>
so this one is going to be quick.
the stall warning light and the stall buffet both come on
before you've reached maximum lift. you have to be willing
to push a bit into this "stall" region at times, though
hanging out here for long periods of time is a bad idea.
perhaps this stall light is part of the problem with people
believing that the AI is "cheating" by outturning them? i
have not the foggiest idea why people would see the AIs as
having "more power" in any case. so i'll just reiterate,
the AI uses the same FM as the player.
Stocky2
>doing things that we cannot. With a one on one fight, I find the only
>way to really win is to yank your stick back as far as possible and keep
>it there. Pretty "arcade," if you a
I tried the hardest setting and it should be called the spin setting. I could
barely fly going from one spin to another spin- the model wont let you use full
deflection without a spin which you can recover quickly from but you are to
busy to fight anything while it happens. The first notch down from hard is
playable but I still say flight model problem, not js problem for me.
Sto...@aol.com
Stocky2
>You guys need to read the threads on here.
>
>I guess you missed this. This is from the Creator of the Flight Models' in
>WW2 Fighters. Search for posts
Not only did I already read those statements but I have corresponded with Brian
on it in addition. He seems like a very nice person, is very helpfull, has a
number of suggestions but even tho he is the expert and did the models I still
believe him to be wrong. I know from my experience with the game that there is
a big problem with the models.
I just flew a night mission with an ME262 (2 of us against 4 P51s) They outran
me at my max throttle, out shot me even headon using all my 200 cannon shells,
- I could not use speed to get any distance on them and they cut me to pieces
if I tried a loop. Of course trying to out turn them was instant suicide
. If I fly a mission against the ME262 the tables are turned again. They can
easily stay with me in turns, out run me quickly if I have to turn to line up
on them, and head on shots are plain murder against them. They only carry ammo
for a few seconds of fire, yet even when you resurrect your pilot, it seems to
rearm them at the same time. There is much more to support the problem and
many more people will have comments on it as they come out of the woodwork to
report on the problems.
I believe it is much more than a simple js calibration. My js doesn't even
have a js calib. routine- it is automatically calibrated when it is installed.
I checked for movement on the ground and all surfaces are moving normally.
I get blackouts easily already. The enemy is flying super planes and capable
of impossible manuvers.
I am sure Brian will read this since he is following all of our comments
closely. My comments alone will not mean too much except that what I am
finding will become apparant to many other people also. At first people will
think they are just not good enough pilots but they will realize eventually it
is the flight models themselves- whichever plane you fly, the enemy will be
GREATLY better.
Sto...@aol.com
Bob Lionel
true....by keeping a light touch on the controls I dont have much trouble
offing the AI one on one. I've seen the enemy AI stall and hang there while
i hammer a couple hundred rounds through him!
Bob
Stocky2 wrote in message <19981128141310...@ng24.aol.com>...
>>
>>problem. It seems that the AI pilots are immune to stalls and black outs
>
>I read your post with great interest and totally agree with your
observations.
>It is no better in the campaign missions. The main point is that as you
say,
>it doesn't matter which side you are on since the same thing is happening
with
>the flight models. The main point of this sim is dogfighting with these
planes
>but if the enemy always has a very unfair advantage (huge) then it greatly
>detracts from the point of playing it. When it comes down to the basic
premise
>it is really our human brain against computer logic from a programmer- but
they
>have greatly factored out the human advantage by giving the enemy superior
>equipment (greatly superior)- even flack and aaa are much too deadly in the
>sim.
>I have found that every point you have made I can confirm as being what I
see
>also.
>Here is what I believe strongly:
>the computer ai is programmed to be perfect at the setting chosen- you will
>find that they use their machines to max. advantage and strategy and only
with
>the luck of your manuvers beating them- when you make a mistake they have
you
>cold with deadly shooting
>
>> P-51 in a dive ... what's more I couldn't
>>dive for the deck vertically like the CCP planes and pull out. Also the
>
>Amazing, isn't it, how they can fly on rails but you will crash if you try
and
>follow them down at their speed. It feels like you are flying a Neuport
>against an F16.
>And like you, in spite of the flight models, I thorougly enjoy the game
anyway
>for all the rest of the features in it.
>Another terrible problem I have is the pauses even with my p2-300a oc to
374
>and 64 mb sdram with CL TnT card. The worst pauses come when I am closing
on
>the tail for a shot and frames are skipped in the pauses causing lost line
ups.
> I am using a huge cdrom cache that shows 99% saved in transfers- that
takes my
>cdrom out of the pause problem.
Stocky2
>Look harder. I've seen the AI depart. Shot him in the engine while he
>is vertical and he ran out of energy
I have it from a good source that it is not programmed to happen. I have not
found it to happen either. They DON"T run out of energy- you will note that at
the top of their Immelmann they have perfect control over the top and into the
dive which is straight down at the ground where they are able to pull up easily
right on the deck. I have found that it is only luck that I am able to
anticipate where they end up to get in position for a shot- they are usually
perfect in their manuvers against you. Yes, I am a good pilot- I am a very
experienced sim pilot- but of course its debatable- the point is that many,
many people are going to have serious problems with it and wonder if they are
really that bad. I get my share of kills but it is very very hard to do it- I
have been shot down far more than my actual kills- from German pilots who by
game admission were poorly trained for that stage of the war. I have played a
lot of campaign missions in the game from both sides and have won 99% of the
missions but only with many resurections.
>
>cause them to depart? In general you won't see planes spining out of
>control unless something is seriously wrong.
Try the hard setting - you will see spins galore.- Something is seriously
wrong.
>
>Wrong again. The only advantage he has is that he flys the plane
>better. The flight models are the same. Maybe you guys should play on
>easy mode?
I would- I have no pride, but whatever setting you use the enemy and you get
the same setting. They already have much to much an advantage- easy would make
it easier for them too. That is my point- regardless of the same flight model
claim, I just do not believe it.
Not only are they programmed to be near perfect in their tactics, but their
planes are also very superior to the player plane.
>Based on what? I think you are dead wrong
In the first place, most people know I am rarely wrong- at least my mother
tells me that anyway.
How many planes were shot down by flack? not many- try flying thru some in the
game- they usually will shoot you down- not sometimes but 80% of the time- fly
over aaa and they will cut you to pieces on the first pass.
Based on my observations in the game and I am sure you will many other people
with the same observations.
>Yes - exactly (except for the luck part). They also use the same
>flight model as you do. What exactly is it that your looking for?
Sorry, I can't believe it based on my playing the game regardless of who tells
it to me.
I believe what I tell myself and see the King has no clothes on the fl. model
discussion.
>Historically sims have been weak in AI, now we have on that can beat
>you and you scream 'unfair'. Turn
Very true. It is unfair only in that it is programmed to be unfair. I can
accept equal or even better by actual accounts and design, but not GROSSLY
superior weapons and tactics along with impossible manuvers from enemy weapons
and effectiveness.
>you and you scream 'unfair'. Turn the difficulty down if you need to.
I would, but there is no way in the game to do that- the diff. settings work
both ways equally.
I could use unltd ammo, or triple ammo, but then we are really talking arcade-
even with that on it wouldn't make up for the problems.
>Once again, just because you can't do it, doesn't mean its not
>possible. I assure you that it is, because I do it all the time. Maybe
It is not possible the way enemy pilots do it- straight down dive at max speed
and pull out just before hitting the deck. G forces? pilot and plane? They
fly on rails without any regard to laws of physics. You can't follow them in a
vertical climb without stalling out quickly, they can out dive you, out turn
you, out gun you- then you can switch sides and the same thing happens.
Take any plane and go up against an ME262 head to head- you will find that they
can turn circles with you all day long in the horizontal or vertical. Now fly
the ME262 against any plane and try to turn- they will cut you to pieces- try
to run for distance, they will be right on your tail for an hour(you of course
will be out of fuel long before you can outdistance them)
>you should throttle down in your dives (chuckle).
I am running at full throttle because I am usually fighting STALL for every
manuv. I am doing. I have no energy for a dogfight, they have instant energy
for every thing they do.
>The flight model in NOT porked, and it doesn't fly on rails. Quite the
>contrary, in fact.
I'll stick by my observations.
Stocky2
>their ability seem inhuman and kind of ruins the suspension of disbelief for
That is what I have been saying also.
>I try to emulate these in the same aircraft I immediately run into
>performance limitations.
I have same observations.
>
>airplane when flying the P-51. I certainly don't feel that way and am
>wondering if I am that bad of a pilot!
>
I said that would happen. I believe it is more a programming problem- the
enemy is near perfect machine and pilot and your plane stinks compared to
them- and the same if you switch sides. There is too much difference to be
even nearly fair and actual perfformance is not modeled into the plane you fly.
Even my wingmen have the same advantage as the enemy- you could be flying
close formation with them, switch off autopilot and go full throttle and they
will still easily pull away from you to engage the enemy- if someone needed
more proof than that I don't know what it would take to make the point. You
will see them chasing an enemy plane up to high alt. but when you try it you
stall out after a few seconds- they zoom straight up and you have to fight
stall for every inch you can gain.
Sto...@aol.com
Sean Tudor
<paulhig...@accessone.com> wrote:
>Anyway, I like challenging AI but cheating seems pretty lame to me. I don't
>notice this when I play CFS or EAW. The CCP planes seem to be limited by
>the same constraints as the player's plane in these sims. Still, this seems
>like a fun sim ... maybe when playing missions the AI cheats just even
>things out.
>What do others think?
>Thanks,
>Paul Higinbotham
I agree with you about how hard the enemy AI is but I don't think the
AI is cheating. It seems to be flying "perfectly" and hence never
gets itself into a situation where it has no energy.
I think Janes needs to add the "human" error factor into the flight
models in WW2F. At the moment we are seeing a perfect AI that makes
no errors and seemingly always hits with cannonfire.
The EAW AI model seems to be far better balanced than that in WW2F's.
------------------------
Sean Tudor
Sydney, Australia
------------------------
This is my cannon, this is my gun
One is for bandits, and one is for fun
------------------------
vicious at magna dot com dot au
Stocky2
>are you SURE your playing the same sim as me? I simply don't find this to be
>true....by keeping a light touch on the controls I dont have much trouble
>offing the AI one on one
. I've seen the enemy AI stall and hang there while
>i hammer a couple hundred rounds through him!
And me too, but that is not more than 1% of the time- they are programmed to
use energy to their advantage and if and when it happens it is usually out of
gun range. Of course it is not all the time or we would never get a kill. I
wouldn't even mind if they were perfect but I just don't want their machines to
do impossible tricks defying laws of physics.
Many people will not find the same problems because we all want the sim to be
perfect- time will bring the problems to the surface as more and more people
find that "me too" in what is brought out.
When you are on the tail of an enemy and he flys nearly straight up while you
stall out the second you try and follow- that is not being a poor pilot- that
is his plane is flying like an F16 compared to yours.
Sto...@aol.com
Jerry Morelock
of graphics. Since WW2 has some of the spiffiest graphics yet seen, perhaps
. . .?
Jerry Morelock
Toa/ed
at every aspect with an open mind.
Before you decide on enemy AI, try this:
First set the overall game options the way you want to play. (Example:
Flight Model to full Hard)
Then go to Quick Mission and set up a 1 v 1 with both sides flying the exact
same equipment/loadout. Fly the first mission against a Rookie, another
against Experienced, then the Veteran and finally the Ace.
Now you have a baseline; you've flown the same plane with the same options
against four levels of AI. Think about what you've seen and try it all
again. Then try in a different airplane.
I, too, have occasionally thought I've seen the AI dance a bit faster than
the music. I keep trying to recreate those instances repeatedly to "prove"
it in my mind. So far, I haven't found a consistently repeatable example.
There's no "proof", but like a popcorn hull in your teeth, suspicion
lingers. Of course, maybe those guys are just "dam good". Can't deny that
possibility, now can we?
I do know this: in a 109 v 109 equal match-up, I can always quickly down a
Rookie. The Experienced guy's Mom gets a short telegram from the War
Department as well. The Veteran makes me work and can nail me if I goof;
this fight can get long. The Ace WILL nail me if I goof, but if I fly
patiently and carefully, I can _usually_ end his career (some days you eat
the bear, some days the bear eats you!). An Ace fight might take 10 minutes
_or more_ though; and rarely is it over until both parties are bent and
bleeding. (In all cases, I try to avoid the head-on shot at the
merges...they ARE good there.)
Try some equal 1 v 1's and see what _you_ think.
So I find the AI very playable and challenging. In the campaign missions, if
you run into a flight of four Aces, your Mom is going to get the telegram
every time. Be careful out there.
Here are some caveats:
If I use the full cockpit art all the time, any of them can kill me. I like
the immersion of full art, but the fact is, I'm hamburger unless I use the
"pipper only" no-cockpit art view. Is this realism? No, but it's necessary.
I've spent some time in WWII cockpits and views vary widely. Experience
tells me, however, it's much easier to keep a guy in view in an airplane
than on a computer monitor. So some concessions to the state of the art (19"
monitor) are required.
I don't use padlock in any sim; I just find it too disorienting at first and
I'm too comfortable with keypad views now to spend much time getting used to
padlock. Besides, for me anyway, padlock is too unrealistic; it detracts
from the immersive aspect, the reason I fly WWII sims.
Your mileage may vary.
Baseline: Both the flight models and enemy AI are better than they first
appear. Check six!
Best Regards,
John
Dan Schulz
>I think Janes needs to add the "human" error factor into the flight
>models in WW2F. At the moment we are seeing a perfect AI that makes
>no errors and seemingly always hits with cannonfire.
Guys - that's what easy mode is for. Think about it - the most
unrealistic thing about EAW is the fact that its MUCH to easy to get
kills. If I'm not getting at least two kills per mission, something
is wrong. Even the top aces of WW2 didn't have records like that.
I want there to be a HARD mode that is an option for people who want
to fly against the greatest AI challenge.
On the other hand, I want him to be limited in visibility, like I am,
and be subject to occasional surprise. Maybe thats what you meant by
'human error'. I like to see the occasional green pilot coming into
the picture, too.
For what its worth, I think I'm a pretty average flyer.
David Luoto
>
> Well, the AI pilots definitely fly better than I do.
> So what I am trying to figure
> out is if other people in this NG can get on the six of these aircraft (when
> in the P-51), stay at the "elbow" and get a shot. If you can I'd like to
> hear about your techniques to do this.
Hi Paul,
It's true that Veteran and Ace AIs fly well. They can monitor their
stick input and speed with computer precision, and we can't. But that
being said, I assure you that it's possible to get on their tails given
more or less equal starting conditions (equivalent starting speeds and
altitude), because the number of routines they can call upon are
limited, and yours aren't.
It's hard to guess how you're flying, and even harder to describe a
solid tactic that will always work (since there aren't any!) But one
thing I noticed in your message was that you said you unload when you're
near stall. My first suggestion would be to never, ever be ANYWHERE near
stall (unless of course it's because you just traded your speed for a
whole lot of altitude). Could it be that you're turning too much with
these guys and throwing away speed in the process? In the Mustang I try
to climb away (Immelmanns or high yo-yos) and then drop down on my
opponent, preferably on his six, rather than try to turn with them.
The other thing I'd ask is what kind of rudder control are you using? If
you aren't using your rudders in your turns (or using them effectively)
you'll find it pretty hard to tighten up your rotation. And you'll know
you're flying at the edge when you're starting to black out. I use a
Sidewinder joystick which I find works well, but I'm guessing that if
you have to use the keyboard for rudder control it might be hard to get
a good coordinated turn.
(Sorry if any or all of the above is old news. File it under "cheap
advice"...)
- David Luoto
-----------------------------------------
Jane's Combat Simulations
"It's not just an adventure, it's a job."
-----------------------------------------
Bob Lionel
differences of aircraft. I've setup dogfights between me, in my mustang,
and an "enemy" mustang and haven't found the enemy doing anything that I
haven't been able to do. I HAVE watched them stall out and just hang at the
top of their climb while my slight less aggressive climb allows me to just
hammer the hell out of their stationary ass. I've even found that sometimes
I can accellerate a stall and then use my rudders to do a sort of "poor
mans" Herbst manuever and get a couple of seconds of well placed fire before
having to dive for energy. I love things the way they are and hope they
don't go changing it with patches. I don't find anything wrong with enemy
AI/Flight modelling.
Bob
Stocky2 wrote in message <19981129045036...@ng17.aol.com>...
Paul Higinbotham
thought this should be possible in a P51! I watch my airspeed carefully,
while switching between padlock and front views to keep SA. But I still
have trouble staying with the AI planes. If I use BnZ tactics ... extending
and turning for a head on attack, I do very well. But again I am frustrated
that I can't turn with these airplanes. I have noticed that the smoother I
am with the controls the better I do, but I still can't stay on their six
for long. I try to coordinate my turns with rudders (I use a MS Sidewinder
Pro joystick), but I have to be careful because at low speeds too much
rudder will throw me into a spin.
Stalls still come on with little warning. So I keep a close eye for the
"Stall Warning" indicator. Is there a better way to detect a stall coming
on?
On thing I thought of recently but haven't tried is to use flaps. I notice
that WWII Fighters has a flap position called "Combat Flaps". Next time I
am turning and am slow I'll set these and see if it makes a difference.
There are other things that have convinced me that AIs are super pilots (I
posted this earlier on a different thread), regarding energy management.
Nevertheless I am really enjoying the sim and would recommend it.
Paul Higinbotham
David Luoto wrote in message <36619A...@ea.com>...
°°° Gunslinger °°°
<vood...@thePentagon.com> wrote:
> I love things the way they are and hope they
>don't go changing it with patches. I don't find anything wrong with enemy
>AI/Flight modelling.
Bob, your whole post is perfect. I was surprised to find folks on here
saying the AI is too tough. Myself I seem to be kicking ass. And yes I
have everything on max.
On JCN I flew against 7 other last night in a free for all. 3 of the
pilots were Warbirds guys. I was getting really good and people
started dropping out and quitting because they claimed I was cheating!
I wasn't even the host so I don't see how I could have been cheating
??
Anyway, I have noticed people make 3 big mistakes.
1) At the verge the set-up the same way every time. They come straight
at you guns blazing. Now granted if we both did that at every merge we
could all get a lot of kills. But when all of a sudden you break that
rule and dive for the weeds and pop up under their six and make a kill
they just don;t understand why I break away at a clean verge.
2) I don't think people are using there flaps enough. Anytime someone
goes into a high low turn fight with me I win. As soon as they go high
I follow with lead pursuit and engage flaps. Almost every single time
I end up getting perfect lead shots on them. Also in turning fights I
have always gotten the advantage using flaps. When my speed gets high
I drop flaps and pull back.. Zooom I get the pull right on there six
and they are sitting there shaking there heads saying "no way"
3) Rudder use doesn't seem to be used by others either. If I get in a
turn fight with a guy and he starts to pull out of my field of view I
use extreme rudder in the direction of the turn.. My plane dips down a
bit, picks up speed I then do a high yo-yo and guess what? Your dead.
The only time I have problems saying my ass is when I get two or more
on me at once, or they get me at the verge. I usually don't waste ammo
at the verge but sometimes it is useful.
Why did I just pound of the real flyers versus the AI? Because I am
trying to show that people don;t seem to be putting the prop airplane
BFM ACM to use. Guess people are too used to flying jets. Personally I
love props now and once you figure out how to make these birds move
the way you want them to they fly great.
Another thing I noticed is that when people start to wallow or depart
from flight they start jerking the aircraft around trying to make it
still (Ahh F-15 Memories). Of course the other attacker who is in
controlled flight now gets a free pot shot at the buckling airman, but
what I always do when I stat getting mushy response is to dive. Get
that airspeed up people. Speed in this sim at least is a very
important factor. Too much and you auger (crash) into the ground.
Too little and your fresh meat.
One more thing and then I'll shut-up and stop acting like an expert,
because I am definitely not and I am sure there are a lot of you on
here that could make me feel very small. (Papadoc, want to go h2h?)
I see a lot of people choose the Me262's.
For the life of me I can't see why. The Me262 is not a good
dogfighter. They were manly used for attacking slow or non-moving
targets that had escort cover. (ie bombers, ground targets).
yes the Me's will outrun all the other aircraft but it don't amount to
a hill of beans when you get in a turning fight with someone and your
turn is a mile wide because your so heavy and fast.
The only good dogfighting tactic I can see with an Me is if you are a
good ways from the enemy and you can do a fast boom and zoom. But as
far as getting down and dirty with someone with one forget it.
Jane's the computer AI is just wonderful in this sim. Yes I do get
shot down very easily when there are more than 1 coming at me, but as
others have said, in real life if you had 2 or more bandits chasing
you then you had better pray. As far as the enemy AI being perfect and
not making mistakes how come I can make them auger in when they are
chasing me?
Please do not dumb down the AI.
--
°°° Gunslinger °°°
Paul Higinbotham
perfectly, for the most part. However I sometimes notice things that seem
clearly impossible from a physics point of view. I posted a little earlier
about an experience where the enemy pilot was able to pull through a
vertical loop and close on me while I was diving for the deck at 400+ mph.
This seems clearly wrong.
Again, I think this is an overall great sim and very enjoyable. Really <g>.
Sean Tudor wrote in message <366214bc...@news.magna.com.au>...
>On Sat, 28 Nov 1998 10:13:22 -0800, "Paul Higinbotham"
><paulhig...@accessone.com> wrote:
>
>>Anyway, I like challenging AI but cheating seems pretty lame to me. I
don't
>>notice this when I play CFS or EAW. The CCP planes seem to be limited by
>>the same constraints as the player's plane in these sims. Still, this
seems
>>like a fun sim ... maybe when playing missions the AI cheats just even
>>things out.
>>What do others think?
>>Thanks,
>>Paul Higinbotham
>
>I agree with you about how hard the enemy AI is but I don't think the
>AI is cheating. It seems to be flying "perfectly" and hence never
>gets itself into a situation where it has no energy.
>
>I think Janes needs to add the "human" error factor into the flight
>models in WW2F. At the moment we are seeing a perfect AI that makes
>no errors and seemingly always hits with cannonfire.
>
David
>
> Thanks for the advice. I am trying to turn with the 109 and 190, but I
> thought this should be possible in a P51!
Your turn rate may be superior in the Mustang, but your turn radius may
be wider which prevents you from getting indside. So I think yo-yos are
still the better option for pulling lead on these slower opponents.
> Stalls still come on with little warning. So I keep a close eye for the
> "Stall Warning" indicator. Is there a better way to detect a stall coming
> on?
>
> On thing I thought of recently but haven't tried is to use flaps. I notice
> that WWII Fighters has a flap position called "Combat Flaps". Next time I
> am turning and am slow I'll set these and see if it makes a difference.
I've seen other posts from people saying that flaps are effective. My
only problem is that in combat I really don't like being at any speed at
which flaps are even an option (I forget what the legal limit is in the
game -- 165 mph or something?) But hey, if it works there's no arguing
with success! As for stall warning, I keep my airspeed gauge in sight
and try to never lose too much speed.
> There are other things that have convinced me that AIs are super pilots (I
> posted this earlier on a different thread), regarding energy management.
> Nevertheless I am really enjoying the sim and would recommend it.
>
PS: I'm definitely not trying to pass myself off as an expert. I
routinely get my clock cleaned by others around here.
- David
----------------------------------------------
Jane's Combat Simulations
"It's not just an adventure, it's a job."
----------------------------------------------
John Kozak
< ...snip... >
: Stalls still come on with little warning. So I keep a close eye for the
: "Stall Warning" indicator. Is there a better way to detect a stall coming
: on?
: On thing I thought of recently but haven't tried is to use flaps. I notice
: that WWII Fighters has a flap position called "Combat Flaps". Next time I
: am turning and am slow I'll set these and see if it makes a difference.
: There are other things that have convinced me that AIs are super pilots (I
: posted this earlier on a different thread), regarding energy management.
: Nevertheless I am really enjoying the sim and would recommend it.
: Paul Higinbotham
Hi Paul,
I haven't messed with this sim enough to tell if flaps make any difference
or not. I have a feeling they do - check out Gunslinger's post regarding
his use of flaps. Also the AI uses combat flaps. If you haven't tried
this yet -
1) Set up a Quick Mission 1v1 with identical planes. Make sure they're
both Aces, even yours.
2) When you start the sim, hit the autopilot. The AI will take over the
fight for you. I tried this a couple of times with 2 Spits and
noticed my AI guy repeatedlly extending and retracting flaps.
I also noticed a couple of stall warnings :).
I've only had the game since yesterday so I still have lots to play with
here.
Have fun,
John Kozak
Dan Schulz
> My focus is not on skill!!!!! We want the best
>enemy ai we can get in a game and they are dull and boring without it- I have
>no problem getting shot down by a better pilot or better equipment or both.
>In spite of all the hotshot pilots claiming one thing and the other that
>everything is normal and how terrific they are-
I am not a 'hot shot' pilot, and I totally disagree with you.
>(there are ALWAYS going to be
>better or worse pilots) I have found unreasonable things going on in the game
>beyond the "how did he manage to do that?" If there was a company admission
>that the game is programmed to have enemy ai just about near perfect we would
>all be screaming foul- how about some reality that not every enemy pilot was a
>Galland?
Wait a minute - In your last breath, you just said you wanted the best
AI. Maybe your definition is different than mine, but I think that
flying an aircraft at its peak performance is part of an AI. By the
way, the hardest mode in this game doesn't even approach what the
average WW2 flyer could do, let alone Galland.
>How about some reality that not every enemy plane was capable of
>flying without regard to laws of physics and g forces?
Okay now, Stocky I know you have read the posts by the guy who wrote
the AI. He says that they DO follow the same laws your aircraft
follow. Just like you I have played the sim. So - who do you expect me
to believe? You or the programmer?
>How can an enemy plane
>fly almost straight up to very high alt. while the spit I am in can barely
>climb at all without a stall, can't get up to his alt. and wallows all over sky
>at stall even trying(all the while the wingmen are doing it easily along with
>the enemy) Because I am a bad pilot? Or because I am carrying 4 -1000 # bombs
>on a spit? (feels that way)
Did you ever think maybe you could be doing something wrong with your
flying? I'm not trying to be a dink here, just a thought. Have you
ever flown any Airwarrier, Warbirds or similar against other skilled
human opponents? Not against your local friends - I mean against some
GOOD human compition.
>>Bob, your whole post is perfect. I was surprised to find folks on here
>>saying the AI is too tough. Myself I
>
>I want the enemy ai to be as tough as they can be- it is the very unfair
>advantage they have that disturbs me- forget pilot skill, better planes- I mean
>"porked" advantage.
What exactly is it that you think is porked? The flight model? The
near perfect flying of the AI? I'm still trying to figure out where
you are coming from.
>We have been asking for "tougher" for a long time, but not unfair tougher. How
>would you feel if the enemy had unltd ammo and you had 15 rounds? How would
>that be for tougher?
You know Stocky, one of my biggest pet peeve is when sim developers
dumb down games. Look what happened to Sabre Ace, a game I was really
looking forward to. Thanks a lot for encouraging the developers here
to continue this practice.
PS - Why don't you just turn the difficulty down?
Stocky2
skill and luck are the determining factors in something like this. For the
most part the machines are equal more or less . Some planes are better or
worse at certain tactics. My focus is not on skill!!!!! We want the best
enemy ai we can get in a game and they are dull and boring without it- I have
no problem getting shot down by a better pilot or better equipment or both.
In spite of all the hotshot pilots claiming one thing and the other that
better or worse pilots) I have found unreasonable things going on in the game
beyond the "how did he manage to do that?" If there was a company admission
that the game is programmed to have enemy ai just about near perfect we would
all be screaming foul- how about some reality that not every enemy pilot was a
flying without regard to laws of physics and g forces? How can an enemy plane
fly almost straight up to very high alt. while the spit I am in can barely
climb at all without a stall, can't get up to his alt. and wallows all over sky
at stall even trying(all the while the wingmen are doing it easily along with
the enemy) Because I am a bad pilot? Or because I am carrying 4 -1000 # bombs
on a spit? (feels that way)
>
>Bob, your whole post is perfect. I was surprised to find folks on here
>saying the AI is too tough. Myself I
I want the enemy ai to be as tough as they can be- it is the very unfair
advantage they have that disturbs me- forget pilot skill, better planes- I mean
"porked" advantage.
>I seem to be kicking ass. And yes I
Yes, me too, but that is not the point of all this. I am talking about the
game programming problems. If I was flying a Hornet F18 with unltd ammo in
this sim I could win the war by myself- to me, it is as tho the computer planes
are just too good for the times and the planes do impossible things.
My opinions based on my observations and also what know about the programming
on it.
We have been asking for "tougher" for a long time, but not unfair tougher. How
would you feel if the enemy had unltd ammo and you had 15 rounds? How would
that be for tougher?
pleg...@earthlink.nospam.net
for instance) and one will eat the others lunch in a pure turning fight.
Both planes perform exactly alike...yet one pilot gets more from his
plane.
Not downing you...as I have been on the recieving end of the better
pilot thingy. Just making you aware so that you can look inside the
cockpit for the answer. You will find your solution there....
PAPA DOC
>Thanks for the advice. I am trying to turn with the 109 and 190, but I
>thought this should be possible in a P51! I watch my airspeed carefully,
>while switching between padlock and front views to keep SA. But I still
>have trouble staying with the AI planes. If I use BnZ tactics ... extending
>and turning for a head on attack, I do very well. But again I am frustrated
>that I can't turn with these airplanes. I have noticed that the smoother I
>am with the controls the better I do, but I still can't stay on their six
>for long. I try to coordinate my turns with rudders (I use a MS Sidewinder
>Pro joystick), but I have to be careful because at low speeds too much
>rudder will throw me into a spin.
>
>Stalls still come on with little warning. So I keep a close eye for the
>"Stall Warning" indicator. Is there a better way to detect a stall coming
>on?
>
>On thing I thought of recently but haven't tried is to use flaps. I notice
>that WWII Fighters has a flap position called "Combat Flaps". Next time I
>am turning and am slow I'll set these and see if it makes a difference.
>
>There are other things that have convinced me that AIs are super pilots (I
>posted this earlier on a different thread), regarding energy management.
>Nevertheless I am really enjoying the sim and would recommend it.
>
>
>Paul Higinbotham
>
>
pleg...@earthlink.nospam.net
for that....was thinking about it the other day and its been a year.
Shit that sucks....
Wierdest thing is that I just love guns only. (missiles are fun too but
I like guns more)...and any, I mean ANY, sim I get I spend the most time
flying Gunzo .....Flanker 1vs many guns, EF 2000 gunzo, Falcon 3.0 had a
mission called cross that I flew ALL the time, F15...shit I hardly know
how to drop a bomb in that sim...but I can fly Gunzo hehehe. But alas
the time for H2H is hard to come by.....see I love bullshitting...by the
time Im thru bullshitting I have to go take care of the little one. But
soon I will be BACK. Then your on.
I was thinking about the above and it occured to me that I really dont
give a shit about wingman commands because WW2 sounds like the perfect
Gunzo Sim.....cant wait to get it.
And yes I join you in the
DONT DUMB DOWN THE AI.....
PAPA DOC
>One more thing and then I'll shut-up and stop acting like an expert,
>because I am definitely not and I am sure there are a lot of you on
>here that could make me feel very small. (Papadoc, want to go h2h?)
>
pleg...@earthlink.nospam.net
They want to play at expert level....and the developers are caving in
from time to time by making expert not really expert.
I advocate having another category. Stupid fool setting....on this
setting the AI fly like the best human pilots...they do some of these
things.....
1. They vary their first turns at the merge
2. They like out turning opponents, this is reality some pilots are
better at making the same plane turn faster than you....<VBG>
3. They NEVER reverse unless you are 200 yards behind them and have hit
them with gunfire, then when they reverse they act like they are
attempting to save their sorry asses...by actually attempting to force
an overshoot.
4. They disengage if wounded.....
5. If two of them are up they will work on you in tandem.
Actually there is a bunch more...I once sat down and reviewed the
Flanker AI with stuff I wanted to see in Flanker 2.0. So I have thought
about this. AI is something of a interest to me since Im a dedicated
single player.
PAPA DOC
Stocky2
>I am not a 'hot shot' pilot, and I totally disagree with you.
Fine- everyone is entitled to their opinion.>
>
>Wait a minute - In your last breath, you just said you wanted the best
>AI. Maybe your definition is different than mine, but I think that
>flying an aircraft at its peak performance is part of an AI. By
There is a distinct difference between enemy pilots flying at peak effort and
the planes they fly doing impossible tricks. Even peak performance does not
equal perfect performance- even the best ace of aces can make a mistake once in
a while- but I am not complaining about excellent ai- my gripe is with planes
on rails and against the phyics laws.
>
>way, the hardest mode in this game doesn't even approach what the
>average WW2 flyer could do, let alone Galland.
Why not if the sims are so realistic? The enemy targeting ability is already
near perfect in accuracy- they never fire unless they have an almost perfect
firing solution and range because once they open up the bullets pattern has you
bracketed. Their ai is programmed to be as perfect as they can get it and I
have no problem with that part of it at all- it just means we have to be just
as good a pilot to have a chance.
>
>Okay now, Stocky I know you have read the posts by the guy who wrote
>the AI. He says that they DO follow the same laws your aircraft
>follow. Just like you I have playe
And I said, regardless, I don't believe it. If I am wrong, so be it, but
regardless of him saying it, I find different in the game.
> the sim. So - who do you expect me
>to believe? You or the programmer?
You can believe whomever you want to and if you think differently that is your
opinion. You can make your decision of belief on your own observations. Note,
however that other people also believe as I do about it along with some private
exchanges confirming some of my observations (not all, and private) Whether
any of our observations have any merit is up to the company to decide along
with any fixes for it- they won't shoot themselves in their foot announcing any
problems themselves- it is up to us to make any issues known for them to act
on.
>
>Did you ever think maybe you could be doing something wrong with your
>flying? I'm not trying to be a dink
Of course- that is the first and prominant thought, but I am astounded at
their feats of magic. When I take the opposite role with the same planes there
is still no contest with the reverse role. In the interview section one of the
British aces said the spit could out turn any German plane- yet you can't in
the sim. If you haven't seen the video on ace interviews you will see what I
mean about performance differences of the planes- yet I find in the sim that
those diff. don't exist for the plane I fly.
I found something again to be out of place flying tonight. A 109 flying
against my p51 out runing me then doing a loop coming back at me- I try to come
up to firing position as he closes and watch the target window of him as I am
shooting- I miss completely even though I am pumping tons of lead at him and
see the tracers engulfing his plane and doing no damage and when he whizes past
me I suddenly see him 2500 yards behind me- coming at me. Yes, I said coming
at me, not going away, not turning, not looping- just suddently reversed
direction right on my tail. Not any other plane, it was the guy who just went
over my plane magically flipped 180 .
>
>human opponents? Not against your local friends - I mean against some
>GOOD human compition.
>
No, but it doesn't explain the magic tricks- unless you count warping as a fair
advantage.
>
>What exactly is it that you think is porked? The flight model? The
>near perfect flying of the AI? I'm still trying to figure out where
I have been saying it every which way but loose.
The flight models
The laws of physics
The flight models of the plane I fly- other planes on my side also do magic
tricks.
The damage models of other planes.
> still trying to figure out where
>you are coming from.
A flight simmer who is sharing his observations on a game I like for the
benefit of other flight simmers, future customers, and the company that sells
it, hoping that some or all the problems brought up can be corrected to make
the game even more enjoyable for everyone.
>You know Stocky, one of my biggest pet peeve is when sim developers
>dumb down games. Look what happened to Sabre Ace, a game I was really
>looking forward to. Thanks a lot for encouraging the developers
I agree and feel the same way- I try to avoid those type of games myself.
>looking forward to. Thanks a lot for encouraging the developers here
>to continue this practice.
No need to thank me for that- I am asking the developers to make more bug free
products, not "dumb them down" and fix what is broken for the ones already
sold.
>PS - Why don't you just turn the difficulty down?
Excellent question. I did tonight- and to my surprise it didn't change a
thing- on reflection it probably should not have because I tried it only in the
fly now mission where there is an assortment of flight difficulties already
built into the mission. I will try it in the campaign flying tomorrow. The
funny thing is that even once into a mission there is an option menu on the map
that allows the settings to be changed- most other games I know won't let you
do that once a mission starts.
I am not complaining about the difficulty settings tho- as I have said many
times now it is the other things I mentioned that bother me.
Brian Morgan
>
>First set the overall game options the way you want to play. (Example:
>Flight Model to full Hard)
>
>Then go to Quick Mission and set up a 1 v 1 with both sides flying the exact
>same equipment/loadout. Fly the first mission against a Rookie, another
>against Experienced, then the Veteran and finally the Ace.
>
>I do know this: in a 109 v 109 equal match-up, I can always quickly down a
>Rookie. The Experienced guy's Mom gets a short telegram from the War
>Department as well. The Veteran makes me work and can nail me if I goof;
>this fight can get long. The Ace WILL nail me if I goof, but if I fly
>patiently and carefully, I can _usually_ end his career (some days you eat
>the bear, some days the bear eats you!). An Ace fight might take 10 minutes
>_or more_ though; and rarely is it over until both parties are bent and
>bleeding. (In all cases, I try to avoid the head-on shot at the
>merges...they ARE good there.)
>
>Try some equal 1 v 1's and see what _you_ think.
>
this is exactly the mark i was trying to hit with the AI.
kill the rookies, fear the aces. anyway, with regard to
your comment about a nagging feeling that the "AI dances
a bit faster than you do sometimes" i'll say that i get
a similar feeling every now and then, mostly when i think
i have the position on someone and it turns out that they
actually were moving in a more "oblique" plane than i thought
they were. (thats hard to explain in words!) its visually
represented by seeing your victim at a certain distance from
what you think is mostly a rear view, but he quickly zooms
towards you showing a lot more top planform than you
expected. since i know for a fact that the AI doesnt cheat
i just end up yelling "arrgh!" at the screen and setting
myself up for the next pass.
i forget whether i've mentioned this on the NG, but rookies
and aces both pull the same amount of G, their only differences
are in whether they tend to use the "correct" tactics for
their plane, how aware they are of their surroundings and
whether they know certain "advanced" manuevers like lead
turns. so if you're beating the rookies, then your rig
is probably good.
>If I use the full cockpit art all the time, any of them can kill me. I like
>the immersion of full art, but the fact is, I'm hamburger unless I use the
>"pipper only" no-cockpit art view. Is this realism? No, but it's necessary.
>I've spent some time in WWII cockpits and views vary widely. Experience
>tells me, however, it's much easier to keep a guy in view in an airplane
>than on a computer monitor. So some concessions to the state of the art (19"
>monitor) are required.
>
this is bud anderson's (16 kills ETO, P51) favorite view. he
said something (in his typical understated way) like "well, yeah,
the cockpits nice, but in a real plane you can tilt your head
or roll a bit to keep your eyes on the guy." BTW, he also
likes the red help-arrow. :)
scha...@hotmail.com
gun-s...@mindspring.com (°°° Gunslinger °°°) wrote:
>
> Bob, your whole post is perfect. I was surprised to find folks on here
> have everything on max.
Hey! I thought I was the only guy with an 11" penis!
> On JCN I flew against 7 other last night in a free for all. 3 of the
> pilots were Warbirds guys. I was getting really good and people
> started dropping out and quitting because they claimed I was cheating!
Wow--a *12"* penis? I'm impressed. ;)
> Anyway, I have noticed people make 3 big mistakes.
[caveat--my comments below.]
> 1) At the verge the set-up the same way every time. They come straight
> at you guns blazing
Once when I was young, and full of piss (as opposed to old and full of
piss), I thought I was pretty hot shit in my AW Spitfire. That was until a
more experienced pilot waxed my ass in a 1v1 duel...in a P51. He went back
to the main arena saying "Lead turn? What's that?" with everybody laughing.
This big question mark went over my head. Sooner or later, every smart
newbie goes, "You know, that head-on stuff is for shit. Those FW fairies
keep drilling me with those big cannon, turning my tender Spitfire into so
much smegma. I wonder what happens if I time a turn BEFORE the merge?" Then
they discover the *1ST TENET OF TURN-FIGHTING* -- lead turns.
> 2) I don't think people are using there flaps enough. Anytime someone
> goes into a high low turn fight with me I win.
Ah...the stall-fite. Again, being an AW Spitfire puke (and, later, a WB
Zeke puke), you learn real quick about tight turns and flaps. It's amazing
how slow you can go in a WB Zeke with the flaps down and still remain
airborne (of course, you rate of turn is for the birds, but when your
opponent is stalling out in front of you, it don't matter). Hence, the *2ND
TENET OF TURN-FIGHTING* -- flaps. Know when to pull 'em, know when to drop
'em.
> 3) Rudder use doesn't seem to be used by others either. If I get in a
> turn fight with a guy and he starts to pull out of my field of view I
> use extreme rudder in the direction of the turn.. My plane dips down a
> bit, picks up speed I then do a high yo-yo and guess what? Your dead.
Finally, the *3RD TENET OF STALL (OR ANY KIND OF!!) FIGHTING* -- you meet a
better class of pilot in the vertical. Say vertical to most people, and they
think big zooms and immelmanns and split-ses...but a simple nose-high slice
from a horizontal stall-fite is using the vertical, too.
> I see a lot of people choose the Me262's.
> For the life of me I can't see why.
Ah, but it is a wonderful platform for the despised boom and zoom pukes. 100
mph faster than anything. 4 (count 'em) big cannon. A FW fairy's dream
machine. Discipline required, of course--unlikely to be seen much in public
servers (*I* certainly won't do B&Z--boring).
> Jane's the computer AI is just wonderful in this sim.
I've heard it both ways--including AI pilots who are wonderful because they
don't piss E when they should. Non-E-Pissing Aircraft <> wonderful AI.
At any rate, I'm happy with EAW. It brought everything I wanted in a WWII
sim to my computer--something I don't think WW2F would do. Shrug.
--scharmers
"This is white three. Hey, could you boys quit smoking so much? Yer killin'
my frame rate!"
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Brian Morgan
Sean Tudor <o...@two.com> wrote:
>
>I agree with you about how hard the enemy AI is but I don't think the
>AI is cheating. It seems to be flying "perfectly" and hence never
>gets itself into a situation where it has no energy.
>
>I think Janes needs to add the "human" error factor into the flight
>models in WW2F. At the moment we are seeing a perfect AI that makes
>no errors and seemingly always hits with cannonfire.
>
fly long enough and you'll see even aces stall out or
misjudge the ground. and rookies are even more prone to
these sorts of errors. (i think plenty of people on
the NG will back me up on this ;) )
one thing that it is very good at is calculating
how to hold the controls to get max performance at
a given airspeed etc etc. it also makes perfect
judgements of its enemies energy state. but these
advantages are not enough to make up for the human
advantage of having a flexible brain. reminds me
of a chess computer, technically perfect but unable
to form a long range plan.
as for the cannons, the AIs dont always hit. just most
of the time. the fact that they are pretty sure of hits
when they fire might also contribute to the impression
that some people that the AI has more ammo than you do.
Brian Morgan
Stocky2 <sto...@aol.com> wrote:
>I just flew a night mission with an ME262 (2 of us against 4 P51s) They outran
>me at my max throttle, out shot me even headon using all my 200 cannon shells,
>- I could not use speed to get any distance on them and they cut me to pieces
>if I tried a loop. Of course trying to out turn them was instant suicide
the 262 is IMHO a very difficult plane to fly, partly because
it has some very distinct strengths and some grevious weaknesses.
one fatal mistake people make is confusing high top speed with
quick acceleration or good climb rate. because of the nature
of jet engines the 262 has pathetic low speed performance. being
primitive jets, they also have a long spool up time. that said,
though, the plane is heavy and so if you have room to dive
away from your opponents and pick up speed you are in good shape.
if not, and you are below 400 KPH, you can be in trouble.
>I am sure Brian will read this since he is following all of our comments
>closely. My comments alone will not mean too much except that what I am
>finding will become apparant to many other people also. At first people will
>think they are just not good enough pilots but they will realize eventually it
>is the flight models themselves- whichever plane you fly, the enemy will be
>GREATLY better.
hrm. well, i'm seeing a lot of mixed opinions. i'm thinking
over the possibilities, and while i could imagine making
a bug which allowed the AI to maybe turn too fast (and it
would have to be a grevious, horrifying bug) or accelerate
to fast (or any bug in a *single* area of performance), i
cannot imagine a bug which would turn the AI
planes into the super-uber-turning-climbing-diving monsters
that people are sometimes claiming. the potential bug
in DX6 joysticks is another matter, if so it would
warp all joystick input into the FM which would be,
well, really bad.
°°° Gunslinger °°°
> Hey! I thought I was the only guy with an 11" penis!
> Wow--a *12"* penis? I'm impressed. ;)
Scharmers.... Don't to make of your response..
I wasn't trying to say "I am mighty big ass" or "I can wipe any ones
ass in WW2" I was trying help some of you guys that OWN the sim (Which
excludes you..) that was saying the AI is too tough. It isn't too
rough.
Besides, My penis has always been big enough to where I didn't have
worry what the exact measurement was. Need I say more *little* friend?
> Once when I was young, and full of piss (as opposed to old and full of
>piss), I thought I was pretty hot shit in my AW Spitfire.
I never said I was hot shit. I stated in my damn email that I was sure
others could kick my ass. But I state this; send me someone that has
ONLY flown jet sims, and I bet you I could take them out. My point was
a lot of the folks buying WW2 Fighters had never flown a prop sim
before and therefor was expecting the *wrong* flight model.
> I've heard it both ways--including AI pilots who are wonderful because they
>don't piss E when they should. Non-E-Pissing Aircraft <> wonderful AI.
The AI kick ass. Plain and simple. This is the first computer sim
(flight) that seem to have a human touch to the realism. Start blazing
at an AI aircraft then break away. If he knows your kicking his ass he
will run.. .. .. then just when you start watching another aircraft..
he'll sneak back up on your sorry ass and take you down.
If they kick your ass every time and max realism, turn it down a
notch.. and practice. then practice some more.
> At any rate, I'm happy with EAW. It brought everything I wanted in a WWII
>sim to my computer--something I don't think WW2F would do. Shrug.
This is the biggest thing right here. Why are you even arguing this
with me> You don;t even own the sim?
--
°°° Gunslinger °°°
Brian Morgan
>
>On thing I thought of recently but haven't tried is to use flaps. I notice
>that WWII Fighters has a flap position called "Combat Flaps". Next time I
>am turning and am slow I'll set these and see if it makes a difference.
>
veteran or ace levels. dont leave them on all the time,
obviously, but when you need that one last bit of turn
to make the kill (or to keep from being killed) drop
combat flaps. if you are slow enough you can even
drop takeoff flaps (20 degrees) for an even more extreme
lift/drag trade. dont forget to retract them though as your
speed increases or you may jam them open.
Peter O'Boyle
>hehehe...H2H...sheesh.....been a long long time since I had enough time
>for that....was thinking about it the other day and its been a year.
>Shit that sucks....
That was a waffle if ever I heard one... :-)
A definite maybe there...
Peter
Brian Morgan
>>better. The flight models are the same. Maybe you guys should play on
>>easy mode?
>
>I would- I have no pride, but whatever setting you use the enemy and you get
>the same setting. They already have much to much an advantage- easy would make
>it easier for them too. That is my point- regardless of the same flight model
>claim, I just do not believe it.
ok, when i said before "the AI flies the same flight model you
do" we were talking about "average","veteran" and "wicked". if
you try either "rookie" or "cadet", the enemy is still flying
the "average" model. so the player has an advantage in these
two modes. you should deliver the severe whuppin in these modes
(assuming all joysticks OK, etc).
tell me how it goes, i'm getting curious about this.
Brian Morgan
>
very good. required reading if you are having trouble
beating the AI or your fellow humans on JCN.
>I see a lot of people choose the Me262's.
>For the life of me I can't see why. The Me262 is not a good
>dogfighter. They were manly used for attacking slow or non-moving
>targets that had escort cover. (ie bombers, ground targets).
>yes the Me's will outrun all the other aircraft but it don't amount to
>a hill of beans when you get in a turning fight with someone and your
>turn is a mile wide because your so heavy and fast.
>The only good dogfighting tactic I can see with an Me is if you are a
>good ways from the enemy and you can do a fast boom and zoom. But as
>far as getting down and dirty with someone with one forget it.
understanding your plane and its matchup is key. you
can win with little risk in the 262 by extending, returning
to the fight (hopefully to find a victim who is distracted),
making the kill and extending away. do not make more than
half a turn with anyone in this plane, no matter how temptingly
close your potential victim seems to be. that said, i dont
think the 262 is as "fun" as, say, a 51 or a 190 where you have
a lot of options. but, the 262 wasnt designed to be
"fun", in 1944 it was a still mostly experimental fighter equipped
to destroy heavy bombers while eluding their escorts.
its mystique comes from being very effective at this
job, not because it could TnB with the prop fighters.
John Kozak
Gunslinger wrote:
:> Bob, your whole post is perfect. I was surprised to find folks on here
:> have everything on max.
: Hey! I thought I was the only guy with an 11" penis!
Yeah, but you unbuckle yours and put it back in the closet when you're
done. :)
< ...tips snipped... >
: --scharmers
: "This is white three. Hey, could you boys quit smoking so much? Yer killin'
: my frame rate!"
Hehe. Hard to protect the big guys then they insist on choking my PC.
John Kozak
Bob Lionel
>
>Why not if the sims are so realistic? The enemy targeting ability is
already
>near perfect in accuracy- they never fire unless they have an almost
perfect
>firing solution and range because once they open up the bullets pattern has
you
>bracketed. Their ai is programmed to be as perfect as they can get it and
I
>have no problem with that part of it at all- it just means we have to be
just
>as good a pilot to have a chance.
>
through the weeds. I was trying to open some distance up between me and at
1000 yards one of the FW's was firing at me in a vain effort to hit me. He
wasn't even coming close. In fact I pulled back on the throttle to keep us
at the same distance until he quit firing. After opening the distance back
up so that I could bring her around I merged with the FW to the rear, and
danced around trying to line up a shot. In the meantime, the other FW was on
my six, but surprise, surprise, he wasn't shooting at me. I started to
wonder why then I realized he was out of ammo. When I didnt' have to worry
about him I got a little more aggressive and managed to smoke his partner.
Once his partner was in flames he tried to beat it the hell out of there. I
dont' KNOW that he did that because he was out of ammo but I was fairly
convinced.
If you really think that the AI is cheating with "porked" planes then I
really have to find myself wondering if you really know what you are talking
about. I would agree with you if i'd seen ANY evidence of such things but I
haven't.
>>
>>Okay now, Stocky I know you have read the posts by the guy who wrote
>>the AI. He says that they DO follow the same laws your aircraft
>>follow. Just like you I have playe
>
>And I said, regardless, I don't believe it. If I am wrong, so be it, but
>regardless of him saying it, I find different in the game.
You are wrong then. I've worked for Origin/Janes and the EA policy was that
you don't post ANYTHING to a newsgroup unless you are absolutely sure of
your statement. I seriously doubt that has changed in 2 years. I know of
guys who lost their jobs for doing such things. Brian programmed the thing
and if he says it ain't so, then my guess would be it really ain't so. Paul
Grace's group has NEVER been shy about stating the truth about their games
and I don't think they would make a statement they couldnt back up.
OK NOW PUT THE CRACK PIPE DOWN AND STEP AWAAAAY FROM THE COMPUTER!!!
Sorry but I don't know of anyting else to say to that story. No offense
Stocky, I don't even know you but that doesn't wash with any of my
experiences with this sim. My one bitch I have reconsidered about WW2
fighters is that there are more mid-airs than I would have thought, but
given the chaotic circumstances of combat it may be accurate.
Bob Lionel
Bob Lionel
the fight here but if you rush into it without a plan you are toast. The AI
isn't as good at setting you up, but if you set yourself up with him on your
ass, you are a goner. I like parts of EAW but if you saw my previous posts
on EAW, then you know I stated that I didn't even take damage for a long
time in the campaign and had quite a few kills. I just played scavenger,
making a pass on someone then just engaging someone else. When a gerrie got
on my tail it wasn't hard to lose them. It seems like they easily lost
interest in me once I dove and put some distance between us. WW2F isn't like
that. If the AI tastes blood he's like a pitbull that just won't let go.
When I get into a scrap in WW2F I feel like I can have my ticket punched at
anytime. I don't have that feeling in EAW. I never feel rushed there, while
WW2F makes me panic sometimes in a furrball and I like that feeling. When I
lose a fight I usually had a lot invested in that fight and I feel the loss.
For me anyway, THAT is immersion.
Bob Lionel
Brian Morgan wrote in message ...
Stocky2
> do" we were talking about "average","veteran" and "wicked". if
Are we still discussing ww2? In my options for flight difficutly it isn't
labeled with those names. It is a dial that has position clicks with just tick
markers and names like difficult, hard.
On the far right (the most difficult) I get spins easily whenever there is a
hard bank, on the rest of the settings I don't see any difference with anything
changing between the choices. I haven't tried the far left setting at all
tho.
Is that where I am missing something? Is there some place else I haven't seen
yet that has those settings? I am talking about the "game play" in the options
listings. I have not seen anything with the names of average, vet. and wicked-
or are you just using those names in a generic sense?
>
> you try either "rookie" or "cadet", the enemy is still flying
Same question- rookie? cadet? where are those choices taken from?
>
> two modes. you should deliver the severe whuppin in these modes
After flying some missions where everyone on my side dies over and over again,
I could use a diversion to get some confidence back by trying that option for a
while- if I could find that option, that is.
What I am about to say is not to be considered a complaint and I understand
life is not fair but damn, some of the missions are set up where you have to
destroy ground targets (actually, a lot of them are) and it is timed that just
as you are about over them to drop ordnance you have a bandit on your tail
shooting you down.
If you drop ordnance to engage them you have nothing left for the objectives-
if you don't they kill you. One time I left autopilot on too long and killed 3
bandits then went to bomb and found auto had dropped ordnance at first sign of
engagement- all wingmen had been shot down.
Back to our discussion- I am worn out on the ai point- I never meant it to
center on the ai- I was always discussing the flight models of the planes
themselves on ALL other planes compared to the one I fly at the time, my
joystick is autocalibrating and working fine- I get blackouts, and only the
magic tricks other planes do. If I am just plain nuts on this, ok- but other
people are also noticing exactly what I am noticing along with you and other
people saying everything is normal. Check the tally and act accordingly. I
brought it up for what I considered it was worth.
Sto...@aol.com
Brian Morgan
Stocky2 <sto...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> do" we were talking about "average","veteran" and "wicked". if
>
>Are we still discussing ww2? In my options for flight difficutly it isn't
>labeled with those names. It is a dial that has position clicks with just tick
>markers and names like difficult, hard.
ack, these are my names for these models. if you press <shift>-D
to change models you will see these names in yellow text at
the bottom of the screen. during development i seldom used
the user interface actually (hence i keep striking out, first
the "realistic AAA", now this.) basically, though the dial
should have 5 settings. the top one corresponds to my "wicked",
the bottom to "rookie". i suppose i could call them "5 of 5"
or something, but that is rather borg-like.
>On the far right (the most difficult) I get spins easily whenever there is a
>hard bank, on the rest of the settings I don't see any difference with anything
>changing between the choices. I haven't tried the far left setting at all
>tho.
ok, "3 of 5" is "average", there is no torque and weight does
not count against you (fuel, bombs etc). on "4 of 5"
you do have a torque effect and various weight and drag
effects from stores (anyone try dropping just one bomb yet?).
"5 of 5" is like "4 of 5" except it includes spins. "1 of 5"
and "2 of 5" have stability control on (more positive handling
characteristics) and have increased power. in these two models
you should have a noticeable power advantage over the AI
planes (which are playing on "3 of 5" in this case.)
i hope thats clear, despite the borg-notation.
>magic tricks other planes do. If I am just plain nuts on this, ok- but other
>people are also noticing exactly what I am noticing along with you and other
>people saying everything is normal. Check the tally and act accordingly. I
>brought it up for what I considered it was worth.
sure, i always value feedback.
dan...@my-dejanews.com
I've been following this thread and from experimenting with WW2F I really
think you should look at the way the "pilot skill" settings interact with
each other in the "quick mission" module. There is something fishy there,
which would explain why Stocky2 is so adamant that something is wrong while
others are convinced that everything is just fine. Specifically, when the
opposing forces have dissimilar pilot skills (rookie vs. veteran, for
example) the AI does not operate in a predictable manner. "Rookie" pilots
can defeat "veterans" with ease. On the other hand, when both sides have the
same skill level, a kind of parity exists and the fight is relatively even
(just as one would predict). In dissimilar skill matchups, however, results
vary widely, and in some cases the AI appears to "cheat." In same-skill
matchups, the AI is noticeably "weaker" even at a stronger setting. Of
course, it is extremely hard to gain any objective data (if not impossible)
so there is still plenty of room for debate. But, I really think this is
worth looking at as the source of the different observations by different
observers when playing the same game.
dancho
dan...@my-dejanews.com
confusion here may the result of a mis-understanding as to what the "levels"
actually mean in this game. If the AI is set to "rookie" does that mean the
SAME skill level with the ROOKIE (easy) flight model? That would mean that
the AI is *better* when set to ROOKIE and *worst* when set to ACE. I know it
sounds goofy but that is what I am beginning to believe from Brian's posts.
So, Brian, tell us, is this true?
dancho
In article <FkK82.888$Pq4.3...@news.rdc1.tx.home.com>,
"Bob Lionel" <vood...@thePentagon.com> wrote:
> I think Brian has hit it on the head here.
(snip)
dan...@my-dejanews.com
confusion here may the result of a mis-understanding as to what the "levels"
actually mean in this game. If the AI is set to "rookie" does that mean the
SAME skill level with the ROOKIE (easy) flight model? That would mean that
the AI is *better* when set to ROOKIE and *worst* when set to ACE. I know it
sounds goofy but that is what I am beginning to believe from Brian's posts.
So, Brian, tell us, is this true?
dancho
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Joe
>It seems that the AI pilots are immune to stalls and black outs.
I have noticed this as well. The game has many great elements but the
core of a WW2 sim is dogfighting. And right now it's an exercise in
frustration.
Joe
Joe
>the easiest way to see this is to jump
>into a multiplayer game and go head-to-head with someone in a
>different plane.
That's not what we're talking about here. The cheats only apply to
computer opponents, that's the points. That's an entirely different
thing than the joystick problems.
Joe
Tim Beltfed Harrison 718th TFW
Me262s! It was in a quick mission but with all settings set to full
realism. Went too far south and went off the map. Did a loop zoomed
back by them going the other way and with 100% throttle gradually
increased the separation and they fell back. Did this consistently. Go
figure. <shrug> This coupled with the strange Jstick vs Keyboard has
led to some weird flying! :)
>. If I fly a mission against the ME262 the tables are turned again. They can
>easily stay with me in turns, out run me quickly if I have to turn to line up
>on them, and head on shots are plain murder against them.
Tim "Beltfed" Harrison
NCOIC,
718th TFW, Skyscrapers
www.718tfw.com
°°° Gunslinger °°°
>"Paul Higinbotham" <paulhig...@accessone.com> wrote:
>
>>It seems that the AI pilots are immune to stalls and black outs.
Blackouts yes, Stalls no.
You can make them Germans stall...
--
°°° Gunslinger °°°
Nighthawk
I curious as to why Janes didn't make the AI planes have blackouts, too.
°°° Gunslinger °°°
wrote:
>I curious as to why Janes didn't make the AI planes have blackouts, too.
I guess because blackouts are just a visual problem for use and making
the AI have a visual problem would probably be very difficult.
--
°°° Gunslinger °°°
Dan Schulz
>That's not what we're talking about here. The cheats only apply to
>computer opponents, that's the points. That's an entirely different
>thing than the joystick problems.
What cheats?
Stocky2
>Strangely I was in a clean P51 and was consistently able to outrun
>Me262s! It was in a quick mission
So you are the one that got the copy of the game where you fly the better
planes for a change- my copy is the other end of the spectrum- I always come in
last in a sprint race or turning contest or head to head gun battle.
In a dive they blow me apart on my tail as they close the distance after their
stall-- or chasing them, they dive straight to the deck straight down and
neatly pull up 50 feet short of hiting in a flat path ignoring all g forces
while I am breaking my stick in half trying to level out.
Funny how two people can see the see the same thing and come to opposite
conclusions.
Sto...@aol.com
Brian Morgan
>Wait a minute..... hold the phone. It just occured to me that much of the
>confusion here may the result of a mis-understanding as to what the "levels"
>actually mean in this game. If the AI is set to "rookie" does that mean the
>SAME skill level with the ROOKIE (easy) flight model? That would mean that
>the AI is *better* when set to ROOKIE and *worst* when set to ACE. I know it
>sounds goofy but that is what I am beginning to believe from Brian's posts.
>So, Brian, tell us, is this true?
>
names for the flight model settings while talking about
the ways that the FM affects the AI. let me try again
from the beginning:
the AI and FM settings generally do what you would
expect them to do. aces are good, rookies are bad.
easy FM is the easiest to fly, hard is the hardest.
with that clear i will mention 2 things that
have caused confusion:
1) early on i said that the AI flys the same FM that
you do. i was talking about the harder levels, on players
"easy" FM the AI is punished by having to fly "average" FM.
2) since the AI has to fly the same FM you do on the
harder levels, there is some strangeness here.
moving the player to "veteran" FM, causes the
AI to fly this model too. "veteran" includes
weight and drag from stores and fuel, so in
an odd way, the AI becomes "worse" here *because
he is flying a "worse" (heavier) plane*. my efforts to
explain this have been pretty unsuccessful so far. :(
hopefully this all helps.
Brian Morgan
>think you should look at the way the "pilot skill" settings interact with
>each other in the "quick mission" module. There is something fishy there,
>which would explain why Stocky2 is so adamant that something is wrong while
>others are convinced that everything is just fine. Specifically, when the
>opposing forces have dissimilar pilot skills (rookie vs. veteran, for
>example) the AI does not operate in a predictable manner. "Rookie" pilots
>can defeat "veterans" with ease. On the other hand, when both sides have the
>same skill level, a kind of parity exists and the fight is relatively even
>(just as one would predict). In dissimilar skill matchups, however, results
>vary widely, and in some cases the AI appears to "cheat." In same-skill
>matchups, the AI is noticeably "weaker" even at a stronger setting. Of
>course, it is extremely hard to gain any objective data (if not impossible)
>so there is still plenty of room for debate. But, I really think this is
>worth looking at as the source of the different observations by different
>observers when playing the same game.
>
saw that looked like a "cheat", but i will point out that
if the Rookies are winning and the Aces are losing, then
i've accidentally reversed any "cheating" - Aces should
"cheat" more than Rookies, right? :)
( actually, i would encourage anyone who thinks that the AI
cheats to watch some quick missions from the outside cam
to try and catch it doing something that defies physics
or whatever.)
anyway, as for the issue of whether the rookies are better
than the veterans, i'll mention a few things:
1) like you noticed, its pretty hard to get any
really good data on who is winning an AI v. AI
matchup. i ran a bunch of tests here and thought
that the results were pretty sensible.
2) the AI is really designed to play against humans,
so it may have some oddities when it plays against
itself. tricks that fool carbon-based-life might
just bomb out against another silicon-brain.
particually, i dont think energy tactics are all
that great in AI v. AI.
Tim Beltfed Harrison 718th TFW
What can I say? I'm not saying yer wrong. It was not meant as a slam
at you just a remark about another quirk of WW2 Fighters. What I meant
was that I think it's strange that I can outrun an aircraft that's 100
mph faster than my 'stang. And this is over a long chase, not just me
extending outta range. I was actually putting MILES between us in a
long chase. (OK I'm not proud. I was running away! There was lots of
them! :) So why I can do that is what is weird to me. And I don't know
if that makes my AC better. I think it's wrong that I can outrun an
undamaged 262. BTW I have the version of WW2 fighters where the
joystick inputs is hosed! :) The keyboard is definitely better for
moving the control surfaces.
Later,
°°° Gunslinger °°°
"Beltfed" Harrison 718th TFW) wrote:
> I think it's strange that I can outrun an aircraft that's 100
>mph faster than my 'stang. And this is over a long chase, not just me
>extending outta range. I was actually putting MILES between us in a
>long chase. (OK I'm not proud. I was running away! There was lots of
>them! :) So why I can do that is what is weird to me. And I don't know
>if that makes my AC better. I think it's wrong that I can outrun an
>undamaged 262.
Ever stop to think maybe he wasn't *chasing* you?
LOS (line of sight) does seem to be modeled in the sim. Perhaps since
you were miles away from him, he could no longer see you, and
therefor was not flying at max throttle. You do know running at max
throttle all the time can cause the engine to burn up?
--
°°° Gunslinger °°°
dan...@my-dejanews.com
it's easier to defeat the AI when you set the flight model at "easiest" and
the the enemy AI at rookie, right? The question that comes to mind is this--
how is the rookie AI penalized by the tougher flight models, in general?
Does the rookie AI fly conservatively-- while the ace AI is more aggressive?
If so, then the ace AI would be MORE affected by the tougher flight model,
because it's only when you really wring out the airplaine that more realistic
flight model penalizes you. I think you can see where my question is coming
from, and where I am headed. Isn't it very hard to match AI to flight model
and get a predictable result?
dancho
In article <brianmF3...@netcom.com>,
bri...@netcom.com (Brian Morgan) wrote:
(snipped my original message)
> well, first the issue of "cheating AI". i dont know what you
> saw that looked like a "cheat", but i will point out that
> if the Rookies are winning and the Aces are losing, then
> i've accidentally reversed any "cheating" - Aces should
> "cheat" more than Rookies, right? :)
>
> ( actually, i would encourage anyone who thinks that the AI
> cheats to watch some quick missions from the outside cam
> to try and catch it doing something that defies physics
> or whatever.)
>
> anyway, as for the issue of whether the rookies are better
> than the veterans, i'll mention a few things:
>
> 1) like you noticed, its pretty hard to get any
> really good data on who is winning an AI v. AI
> matchup. i ran a bunch of tests here and thought
> that the results were pretty sensible.
>
> 2) the AI is really designed to play against humans,
> so it may have some oddities when it plays against
> itself. tricks that fool carbon-based-life might
> just bomb out against another silicon-brain.
> particually, i dont think energy tactics are all
> that great in AI v. AI.
>
> -b
> WW2 Fighters
> Janes EA
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
David Luoto
That's a pretty good theory, Gunslinger -- the AIs are pretty dumb once
you're out of their detection range (the targeting window is a cheat only
humans enjoy!). Also, the 262 sucks vis a vis acceleration, so if he just
finished maneuvering a bit he had probably lost a good deal of speed and
couldn't crank up to maximum. So yes, out-running him in a Mustang is a
definite possibility given certain scenarios.
Something that would be helpful in all these accounts are details on speed
and altitude, ie, "I did x and he did y, and now I was flying away at
such-and-such speed at blah blah altitude and I managed to separate this
many miles".
-- David
-----------------------------------------------------------
Jane's Combat Simulations
"It's not just an adventure, it's a job."
-----------------------------------------------------------
°°° Gunslinger °°° <gun-s...@mindspring.com> wrote in article
<36663e1c...@news.mindspring.com>...
(snip)
Ron Hunt
I flew a Quick Mission 5 times with the same result. I was in a Spit @ 1000
ft vs a Fw190 set to Ace. I was able to sustain 6 to 8 level turns at 140kts
and never gain an advantage on the 190..... read any performance data or
history book you can find...... that's just not right! The 190 also seems to
be able to make totally unrealistic vertical pitch changes to get a shot off
at extremely low airspeeds. I have so far been unable to duplicate some of
these moves regardless of whether I use the keyboard or a joystick to fly.
The 190 was not a low altitude turn fighter..... it needed altitude and
speed to keep it's advantage.
Too bad Janes couldn't have gotten this right... acurate, instead of souped
up AI flight models, better joystick support, wingman that don't run over
each other, wingman commands and a dynamic campaine could have made this an
outstanding F-15 / LongBow II class simulation. Oh well .... at least it's
not the total let down that IAF was. IAF taught me to NEVER again buy a
product with the Janes label that cannot be returned to the store for a full
refund!
Ron
David Luoto wrote in message
<01be1e22$99496d00$693d...@dluoto---nca.ea.com>...
Dan Schulz
>Well the Ace AI flight models are porked no matter how you look at it.......
Not true.
>I flew a Quick Mission 5 times with the same result. I was in a Spit @ 1000
>ft vs a Fw190 set to Ace. I was able to sustain 6 to 8 level turns at 140kts
>and never gain an advantage on the 190..... read any performance data or
>history book you can find...... that's just not right!
I'll bet he's using flaps and you aren't. Even if you are, you must
use effcient use of your energy. I have no problems gaining angles in
the spit vs. 190 fight. Keep practicing - its not the flight model -
its your flying. Also - make sure you are getting full deflection on
with your stick (see other threads).
>The 190 also seems to
>be able to make totally unrealistic vertical pitch changes to get a shot off
>at extremely low airspeeds. I have so far been unable to duplicate some of
>these moves regardless of whether I use the keyboard or a joystick to fly.
>The 190 was not a low altitude turn fighter..... it needed altitude and
>speed to keep it's advantage.
Against an experianced flyer, yes.
>Too bad Janes couldn't have gotten this right... acurate, instead of souped
>up AI flight models, better joystick support, wingman that don't run over
>each other, wingman commands and a dynamic campaine could have made this an
>outstanding F-15 / LongBow II class simulation.
Too bad you read so much. Maybe you should practice more?
You guys are funny - let the AI ass wuppin' continue!
Brian Morgan
Tim "Beltfed" Harrison 718th TFW <stag...@NOSPAMibm.net> wrote:
>Hmm could be! :)
>
>What can I say? I'm not saying yer wrong. It was not meant as a slam
>at you just a remark about another quirk of WW2 Fighters. What I meant
>mph faster than my 'stang. And this is over a long chase, not just me
which flight model were you flying? on "easy" you have
a really hefty power advantage over the AIs.
Brian Morgan
Ron Hunt <ronnht@NO SPAMcris.com> wrote:
>Well the Ace AI flight models are porked no matter how you look at it.......
>ft vs a Fw190 set to Ace. I was able to sustain 6 to 8 level turns at 140kts
>and never gain an advantage on the 190..... read any performance data or
>be able to make totally unrealistic vertical pitch changes to get a shot off
>at extremely low airspeeds. I have so far been unable to duplicate some of
>these moves regardless of whether I use the keyboard or a joystick to fly.
>The 190 was not a low altitude turn fighter..... it needed altitude and
>speed to keep it's advantage.
>
turning advantage in the SPit, but the 190 has a much
better roll rate and a bit better power. try
playing the same combat from the outside view to
make sure you are gaining angles on every turn,
i think you'll see that you are. if not, check
out my post called "WW2 Joystick News" for info
on joystick calibration.
i have no idea what you mean by "unrealistic vertical
pitch changes". the AIs cant do anything that you
cant do.
as for the historical 190, it wasnt a Spitfire-class
turn fighter, but what is? on the other hand, it
definitely was a low altitude fighter. you might
be confusing it with the 109.
Brian Morgan
>Thanks for the reply. This is all getting extremely complex. You're saying
>it's easier to defeat the AI when you set the flight model at "easiest" and
>the the enemy AI at rookie, right? The question that comes to mind is this--
>how is the rookie AI penalized by the tougher flight models, in general?
it *is* a pretty complex issue.
the "penalty" for the AI from tougher FMs is that
the tougher FMs are simply harder to fly, both for
humans and AIs. the most important factor is that
the planes are all much less manueverable on harder FMs
because of the extra fuel weight. this makes the AI
seem "worse", but really it is the same AI flying
a "worse" plane.
so, there isnt any specific penalty in WW2F for rookies.
a common hack in a lot of games is to limit the
amount of Gs rookies can pull (or fudge up the
amount aces can pull). i tried to avoid doing
this, and instead tried to make aces better
by making them fly better BFM. and use flaps
and otherwise make better use of their planes.
i'm not sure i'm 100% happy with the result -
i think the ace AI came out to be a good
challenge, but i'm not sure that there is
a wide enough skill range, that rookies are
enough worse than aces. of course, the flip side is
that if the rookies are too sucky then you have
a situation where rookies never win, and
i dont like that either. every dog should
be able to have his day.
>from, and where I am headed. Isn't it very hard to match AI to flight model
>and get a predictable result?
yes. once a combat starts there are so many
variables going that it becomes impossible to
sort out the cause and effect. what i did
to test the AI skill levels was run sets of
4 v. 4 in a couple of different matchups
and compile the results. if you want to
talk about the results of specific tests
and so on, feel free to e-mail me.
Michael Oberly
> Spit v. FW190 is a pretty even matchup. you have a big
> turning advantage in the SPit, but the 190 has a much
> better roll rate and a bit better power. try
> playing the same combat from the outside view to
> make sure you are gaining angles on every turn,
> i think you'll see that you are. if not, check
> out my post called "WW2 Joystick News" for info
> on joystick calibration.
>
> i have no idea what you mean by "unrealistic vertical
> pitch changes". the AIs cant do anything that you
> cant do.
>
> as for the historical 190, it wasnt a Spitfire-class
> turn fighter, but what is? on the other hand, it
> definitely was a low altitude fighter. you might
> be confusing it with the 109.
Brian-
I don't have the game,but only because I don't have the computer to
run it yet.The usual criticism by the masses of any flight sim is that
the AI sucks-it's amusing that it's the opposite here.Assuming that,as
you say,the AI doesn't cheat,it seems that you guys did quite a job.
Mike
--
Mike Oberly * Rain can't wet me,
when I have my poui in my hand. *
* Rain can't wet me,
I advancing on the foe like a roaring lion!*
Soca/Calypso fan?Check out http://www.iere.com/thebarn
Tim Beltfed Harrison 718th TFW
Hell yeah I know about burning up yer engine! But thanks fer the idea.
:) As to the 262 He was chasing me as every now and then I'd get bored
and loop back into him. We'd have a nice head on Kodak moment and I
would extend on past him. Whereupon the 262 would turn and follow me
again. By this time I was just flying straight and level to see what
would happen. Amazingly I was able to extend away. I did no turns or
fancy aerobatics just straight ahead full throttle, pedal to the
metal, air muscling! He was bird dogging me and I had him in the small
window to watch him. I just simply pulled away. Dunno why just did.
BTW I just read a warbirds post on WEP settings in P38s and 51s in
real life (whatever that is! :) and the pilot indicated that he would
throw the buggers into WEP as soon as the enemy was near and keep it
on until he remebered to turn it off at the end of the engagement. WW2
seems to model this as it is quite awhile before I get the over heat
notice. Now I know that the 262s were very sensitive with throttle
settings and that the pilots would baby the engines to a good setting
and then leave them alone as much as possible. So maybe he was having
a bad day with his powerplants. But this is unfortunately repeatable
so I don't think so. BTW yer not going to get an Ordway bio here but
I've been flying sims awhile and even was lucky enough to beta EAW
with the rest of the 718th for LAN stuff and incidental remarks on FM
and whatever we found. So while not an ace I'm not a complete flight
yutz! :) OK so those 'wing' things confuse me but I'm working on that!
If yer really into self abuse drop by our web page and peek at some of
our EAW shots and stuff. (OK that is asking a lot :)
Later
>On Wed, 02 Dec 1998 06:14:59 GMT, stag...@NOSPAMibm.net (Tim
>"Beltfed" Harrison 718th TFW) wrote:
>
>> I think it's strange that I can outrun an aircraft that's 100
>>mph faster than my 'stang. And this is over a long chase, not just me
>>extending outta range. I was actually putting MILES between us in a
>>long chase. (OK I'm not proud. I was running away! There was lots of
>>them! :) So why I can do that is what is weird to me. And I don't know
>>if that makes my AC better. I think it's wrong that I can outrun an
>>undamaged 262.
>
>Ever stop to think maybe he wasn't *chasing* you?
>LOS (line of sight) does seem to be modeled in the sim. Perhaps since
>you were miles away from him, he could no longer see you, and
>therefor was not flying at max throttle. You do know running at max
>throttle all the time can cause the engine to burn up?
>
>--
> °°° Gunslinger °°°
>
Tim Beltfed Harrison 718th TFW
I have everything set to max as to realism. Flight modeling, AI, and
as much graphics as my poor old Dell 400 can handle! I dunno what it
is. <shrug>
>>
>>What can I say? I'm not saying yer wrong. It was not meant as a slam
>>at you just a remark about another quirk of WW2 Fighters. What I meant
>>was that I think it's strange that I can outrun an aircraft that's 100
>>mph faster than my 'stang. And this is over a long chase, not just me
>
> which flight model were you flying? on "easy" you have
> a really hefty power advantage over the AIs.
>
> -b
> WW2 Fighters
> Janes EA
>
Tim Beltfed Harrison 718th TFW
am not commenting on FM to criticize it just sharing an oddity with
the group. As to more data I was straight and level at around 2k with
throttle wide open clean airframe and no piddle pack! :) The 262 and I
were undamaged (maybe slightly unhinged though! :) and the weather was
clear with some clouds (3d of course!) The chase went on fer quite
awhile but I did see the lack of interest or LOS loss a few times
also. But not in the times I've mentioned. I gave him plenty of time
to catch up with me. AI? FM? No Wheaties? I dunno, just call 'em as I
see 'em
Out
On 2 Dec 1998 18:11:12 GMT, "David Luoto" <dlu...@ea.com> wrote:
>
>That's a pretty good theory, Gunslinger -- the AIs are pretty dumb once
>you're out of their detection range (the targeting window is a cheat only
>humans enjoy!). Also, the 262 sucks vis a vis acceleration, so if he just
>finished maneuvering a bit he had probably lost a good deal of speed and
>couldn't crank up to maximum. So yes, out-running him in a Mustang is a
>definite possibility given certain scenarios.
>
>Something that would be helpful in all these accounts are details on speed
>and altitude, ie, "I did x and he did y, and now I was flying away at
>such-and-such speed at blah blah altitude and I managed to separate this
>many miles".
>
>-- David
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>Jane's Combat Simulations
>"It's not just an adventure, it's a job."
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>
>°°° Gunslinger °°° <gun-s...@mindspring.com> wrote in article
><36663e1c...@news.mindspring.com>...
>(snip)
>I think it's wrong that I can outrun an
>> >undamaged 262.
>>
>> Ever stop to think maybe he wasn't *chasing* you?
>> LOS (line of sight) does seem to be modeled in the sim. Perhaps since
>> you were miles away from him, he could no longer see you, and
>> therefor was not flying at max throttle. You do know running at max
>> throttle all the time can cause the engine to burn up?
>>
>> --
>> °°° Gunslinger °°°
>>
>>
Brian Morgan
Tim "Beltfed" Harrison 718th TFW <stag...@NOSPAMibm.net> wrote:
>
>I have everything set to max as to realism. Flight modeling, AI, and
>as much graphics as my poor old Dell 400 can handle! I dunno what it
>is. <shrug>
>
said that you would get bored every now and then
so you'd turn and head-on the 262 and then zip away.
i'd have to watch exactly what you did, but i have
this picture in my head of the poor fat 262
turning as hard as he can to catch you after the
pass only to find you scooting away and mocking
him for bleeding too much speed in the turn.
"now you are slow and i am fast, you cannot
catch up to me..."
fly the 262 for a while, it is really poor at speeds
less than 400KPH. but over that, he really begins
to rock.
Skeksis
>
>"Paul Higinbotham" <paulhig...@accessone.com> wrote:
>
>>It seems that the AI pilots are immune to stalls and black outs.
>
>core of a WW2 sim is dogfighting. And right now it's an exercise in
>frustration.
Thank you. I am glad that I am not the only one who seems to becoming
frustrated with this title. I admit freely that I am not great shakes as a
pilot but I expected to do somewhat better here. I am also irked by the
computer constantly starting me (when I fly Quick Flight hoping for a easy vent
to my bad day) at a low altituted right in front of the same plane that ook me
out because it makes these amazing maneuvers constantly. I am surprised that
slipped through the testing. If this is aimed at the begining flight-sim
market, which I think it is, then that should have been red flaged right away.
The average armchair pilot is not going to like this being set up for an easy
AI kill like that at all.
Another thing I have noticed is that who ever it it is who is giving me all of
these radio update seems to be way off most of the time. Anyone else noticed
this?
Skeksis
says...
>BTW I have the version of WW2 fighters where the
>joystick inputs is hosed! :)
I had a problem with my joystick inputs at first, all planes would roll to the
left unless I had the stick almost full to the right but rinstalling DirectX5
then DuirectX6 (don't ask...long story) seemed to have cleared that up...I
think. I ran into something last night where I revived ap lane and it had a
bizarre roll to the right which seemed to be a hold over form the last thing
that last plane was doing.
Ya know, I really want to like this one but I figure if I am going to get shoit
down most of the time I might as well play WB because I get someone to talk to
there. ;)
Skeksis
Skeksis
>Too bad Janes couldn't have gotten this right... acurate, instead of souped
>up AI flight models, better joystick support, wingman that don't run over
>each other, wingman commands and a dynamic campaine could have made this an
>outstanding F-15 / LongBow II class simulation.
Wouldn't it be nice if some one could take the best of EAW, WW2F, and WB and
put them all together in a box...in time for (insert name of favourite holiday
here). ;) Otherwise I have to agree with you. I was really doing my best ot
make maneuvers and get those bastiges off my tail and there they were just
hanging on there despite everything I could do and it started to look mighty
odd. My only satisfaction came when I maneuver killed a 262 and was very
surprised to do so but gratified. :)
How is the Multiplayer on this one...is it worth keeping for that?
Skeksis
Dan Schulz
>>>It seems that the AI pilots are immune to stalls and black outs.
>>
>>I have noticed this as well. The game has many great elements but the
>>core of a WW2 sim is dogfighting. And right now it's an exercise in
>>frustration.
>
>Thank you. I am glad that I am not the only one who seems to becoming
>frustrated with this title.
Although it is true that the AI will not black out, he NEVER pulls
enough Gs to black out (at least he didn't while I watched for 45
minute plus last night). The AI will come close, with tunnel vision
forming occasionally, but he will not go over the edge.
And he IS susceptible to stalls.
He uses the SAME FLIGHT MODEL.
And apertently,he flies the aircraft much better than many of you.
Nighthawk
>
> >>>It seems that the AI pilots are immune to stalls and black outs.
> >>
> >>I have noticed this as well. The game has many great elements but the
> >>core of a WW2 sim is dogfighting. And right now it's an exercise in
> >>frustration.
> >
> >Thank you. I am glad that I am not the only one who seems to becoming
> >frustrated with this title.
>
> Although it is true that the AI will not black out, he NEVER pulls
> enough Gs to black out (at least he didn't while I watched for 45
> minute plus last night).
Then how do we know that the AI can even blackout?
David Luoto
of those in the box?)
I'm don't doubt your observations at all, I'm just trying to figure out
what's going on.
Just for yucks, here's a story about an experiment I tried yesterday. I set
up a Quick Mission where I was in a Bf 109 and the AI was in a P-51, coming
at each other at 10K ft. I jinked slightly to avoid his inevitable head-on
shots, but aside from that minor deviation I simply continued straight
ahead, methanol-boost on, doing something like 500 km/h straight and level.
I watch as he turns, bleeding off a lot of speed in the process, and tries
to follow. I'm moving a lot faster than he is now, and I watch his range
increase: 1.53 km, 1.54 km, etc., all the up to around 2 km. (This is
pretty boring, by the way.) Eventually, though, around 2 km he's back up to
his max speed and now the range is decreasing. (It probably doesn't help
that my methanol has run out by this time!)
Now I'm thinking maybe something similar happened in your story -- he
bleeds off speed, you're bolting away, he follows, etc. Only in your case
(since you have a fast airplane rather than my sucky 109), before he can
accelerate beyond your velocity you've moved outside of his detection
range. I guess the critical question would be, was he more than, say, 10
miles away? (I don't remember what the exact max. visual limit for AIs is
-- it's probably even less than that.)
Or another interpretation: He just realized the futility of fighting you.
"Ach! The quality of these Ami pilots, we cannot possibly win! I admit
defeat and slow down as a sign of my despair!"
Anyway, hope you're still having fun with the game.
-- David
-----------------------------------------------------------
Jane's Combat Simulations
"It's not just an adventure, it's a job."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Tim "Beltfed" Harrison 718th TFW <stag...@NOSPAMibm.net> wrote in article
<3665f806....@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>...
Dan Schulz
>> Although it is true that the AI will not black out, he NEVER pulls
>> enough Gs to black out (at least he didn't while I watched for 45
>> minute plus last night).
>
>Then how do we know that the AI can even blackout?
I made an assumption here - let me rephrase. When I use the autopilot,
I never see any black outs. I assumed that the autopilot AI is the
same as the enemy AI. On second thought, this assumption may be wrong.
On a thread in this group, the AI programmer stated that the AI was
not subject to black outs. He didn't say that they took advantage of
it often.
Stocky2
>to my bad day) at a low altituted right in front of the same plane that ook
>me
>out because it makes these amazing maneuvers constantly. I am
I understand what you are talking about and have run into the same thing.
The problem is our haste to use alt r to get back in the saddle for payback.
After bailout or crash, wait a minute or so and let them fly off a ways, then
you at least have a neutral position again.
Sto...@aol.com
Stocky2
>On a thread in this group, the AI programmer stated that the AI was
>not subject to black outs. He didn't say that they took advantage of
>it often.
The wording was the enemy ai was not programmed to black out. They only take
advantage of it once- when they blow you away. (humor- for those having a hard
time seeing it)
Sto...@aol.com
Tim Beltfed Harrison 718th TFW
Hmmm well I dunno. Unfortunately it's not jibing with what I've seen.
I flew with the 262 behind me for quite awhile. Straight and level. No
turns or weird maneuvers. BTW Where I got bored was waiting for him to
catch up to me! :) A few times I have noted the turn away as he lost
me or lost interest. But the times I'm commenting on the 262 followed
me until I quit or just plain outran him and landed. Then again I have
been paying my mechanic to 'hot' up my Mustang! :) JATO is my friend!
Anyway I do like this sim. It is a great piece of work. So please
don't feel I'm here to bust yer chops. Just wanted to share my
observations. And WW2 and EAW will be mainstays at our next few
LANmeets for the coop alone. On a 10 PC LAN I think WW2 will rock.
BTW thanks for the feedback though. It's good to see your presence on
this group. It does count.
later
Tim Beltfed Harrison 718th TFW
Well I think he saw me as he flew right at me, ie his nose was pointed
right at me, when chasing me. In addition he chased me for quite
awhile. And when I looped back at him I too was low on energy after
the loop so I was not going at top speed either. Anyway I am enjoying
the sim but was just struck by the weird behavior and figured I'd post
it here.
And yer right about the Amis reputation but i think he just ended up
as confused as I was! :)
Later,
Tim
Brian Morgan
Dan Schulz <dan...@luminet.net> wrote:
>
>>> Although it is true that the AI will not black out, he NEVER pulls
>>> enough Gs to black out (at least he didn't while I watched for 45
>>> minute plus last night).
>>
>>Then how do we know that the AI can even blackout?
>
>I made an assumption here - let me rephrase. When I use the autopilot,
>I never see any black outs. I assumed that the autopilot AI is the
>same as the enemy AI. On second thought, this assumption may be wrong.
>
>not subject to black outs. He didn't say that they took advantage of
>it often.
>
be going pretty fast to pull enough G to black out,
most of your dogfighting takes place below this
speed. when some people black out, they just let go
of the stick a little, others make continue whatever move
they were making (like avoiding the ground) and
figure they are going to recover vision as their
speed bleeds and they pull less G. the AI is
much like the second group, he wont spend hours
and hours in blackout turning with you, the
planes characteristics guarantee that. i think
any advantage he gains here is pretty minimal,
its certainly not an issue after the first turn
of the fight.
Brian Morgan
>make maneuvers and get those bastiges off my tail and there they were just
>hanging on there despite everything I could do and it started to look mighty
>odd. My only satisfaction came when I maneuver killed a 262 and was very
>surprised to do so but gratified. :)
>
getting kills. the first one is that if you have an analog
joystick download a good joystick calibration utility
like JCWin (www.chproducts.com) and make sure your stick
is getting max deflection. WW2F is very particular about
this issue. it may seem like your stick is OK in
other games, but try the calibration anyway, it is
quite possible to have significant mis-calibration
using just the standard windows config stuff.
second, take a good plane like a 51, a 190 or the Spit.
try watching your turn fight from the outside view to
get a better perspective. you should see the 51 gaining
maybe 20 or 30 degrees per turn against the 262. keep
your nose high to keep your turn radius tight. (not
so high you stall out!) dip your nose low to pick up speed
if you start to stall.
hopefully, these tips will help you start getting
more kills. it can be done, plenty of the people
on the NG are reporting success and we see the
same results here at EA. (of course we've been
practicing for a couple years now. :) )
Pierre Legrand
crushed. <VBG>
Damn good AI is so fine...thanks Janes.
PAPA DOC
>He uses the SAME FLIGHT MODEL.
>And apertently,he flies the aircraft much better than many of you.
>
Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
Pink Flamingo Pilot...
pleg...@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~plegrand/PINKFLAMINGO.htm
Stocky2
>Ohhh...shhh...dont do that...ego's all over the world are being
>crushed. <VBG>
>
>Damn good AI is so fine...thanks Janes.
And I bet you believe that magicians tricks are real too? Great AI I
appreciate also, but other plane magic (friendly and enemy alike) along with no
blackouts for them modeled, visual damage not corresponding to actual damage,
great power advantage for other planes are not game loving attributes.
With no disrespect intended, I don't believe the magician who says there are no
camera tricks used and no visual tricks- it is straight magic using a special
wand. I remain unconvinced personally that ww2f does not use magic.
I played EAW last night and do not have the same complaint to make about
dogfights. My only notation on EAW is that spins are over modeled on the
hardest setting- I find even the slightest stick movement causes a nearly
unrecoverable spin even at max throttle.
I do greatly like both games and will play them both- each one does have its
strong points.
Sto...@aol.com
Eric J. Joiner, Jr.
>Ohhh...shhh...dont do that...ego's all over the world are being
>crushed. <VBG>
>Damn good AI is so fine...thanks Janes.
>PAPA DOC
>>He uses the SAME FLIGHT MODEL.
>>And apertently,he flies the aircraft much better than many of you.
>>
>Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
>Pink Flamingo Pilot...
>pleg...@earthlink.net
>http://home.earthlink.net/~plegrand/PINKFLAMINGO.htm
Always gotta be a smart ass huh papa... ;)
eric
Michael Oberly
>>
>>Ohhh...shhh...dont do that...ego's all over the world are being
>>crushed. <VBG>
>>
>>Damn good AI is so fine...thanks Janes.
>
>And I bet you believe that magicians tricks are real too? Great AI I
>appreciate also, but other plane magic (friendly and enemy alike) along with no
>blackouts for them modeled, visual damage not corresponding to actual damage,
>great power advantage for other planes are not game loving attributes.
>With no disrespect intended, I don't believe the magician who says there are no
>camera tricks used and no visual tricks- it is straight magic using a special
>wand. I remain unconvinced personally that ww2f does not use magic.
> I played EAW last night and do not have the same complaint to make about
>dogfights. My only notation on EAW is that spins are over modeled on the
>hardest setting- I find even the slightest stick movement causes a nearly
>unrecoverable spin even at max throttle.
>I do greatly like both games and will play them both- each one does have its
>strong points.
>Sto...@aol.com
That sounds like a stick problem,as I have all the settings maxed and
can maneuver hard without spinning-The only spins I have gotten into
were when I was performing verticle maneuvers when very low on speed.
Stocky2
>That sounds like a stick problem,as I have all the settings maxed and
>can maneuver hard without spinning-The only spins I have gotten into
>were when I was performing verticle maneuvers when very low on speed.
As it , of course should be. I am using a MS sidewinder 3dpro- digital, auto
calibrating. It even works fine with ww2f which has a known calib. problem for
many other js.
When I set EAW up I used the hardest settings for everything and as soon as
game opened up and I touched the jst it went into a spin (I was in air mission
at time)- barely recovered and right back into another one- fought the spins
and recovered all the way until crash time. Was resurrected and same thing
happened. I will have to go back and try again now that I have played some
more.
A few for the wish list: a temperature gauge!!!!
Get note that engine is overheating but don't know by how much and don't know
how close to overheating engine is Only messages show up for all items- no
guages visible for anything. So far, the different engine noises are a good
feature, but I don't know what they mean yet.
Sto...@aol.com
Jerry Morelock
other night I finally got a 109 lined up that had been giving me what for,
only to find as I drew closer that he was missing at least a third of BOTH
wings. Quite comical, and while I was laughing, yep, I got pasted by his
wingie. WW2F is such a mixed bag--so great in some ways and so, mmmm
*hokey?* in others.
Jerry Morelock
pleg...@earthlink.net
reaction to what is just AI outflying the general public. When I was
doing some work on improving Gunzo AI I was continually demanding better
and better manuevers. Ones that actually took advantage of the planes
that the AI was flying. Over and Over playability was brought up....I,
in my ignorance never believed that humans wouldnt just love an AI that
beat them. After all whats the fun in winning all the time.....
Truly I was under the mistaken (apparently) impression that Great AI
would be appreciated. Instead we find people who are not flying their
aircraft to its fullest...and getting shot down....and instead of
practicing they are crying. Damn shame....it's certain now that better
fliers will continue to get AI thats been artificially crippled for the
average player who doesnt know how to turn down the volume on the AI.
You dont have to fly it at expert level you know....
>
> I played EAW last night and do not have the same complaint to make about
>dogfights.
I have many complaints about the AI in EAW and I love the game...but
notice Im not crying about them. The reverse is NOT a valid
tactic....all the time. Yet its one thats used a great deal (for AI)
but its truly annoying...especially for online pilots who fly single
player alot....(like me). Doing a reverse online is a surefire way to
die...each and everytime. And yet one after another I find single player
AI doing that manuever. They die each and everytime and its annoying to
find such a rookie mistake being perpetuated.
And the worst thing is that with the wailing and knashing of teeth about
this AI Im certain that I will continue to see hobbled AI.
>My only notation on EAW is that spins are over modeled on the
>hardest setting- I find even the slightest stick movement causes a nearly
>unrecoverable spin even at max throttle.
Wha.....???? The spins are terrific...(big weakness in WW2 for me is
lack of vicious spins)...but in that statement there is the hint about
your problems with the AI. Your pulling too hard and you wont ever be
successful until you learn not to pull that hard. Stocky its your flying
that has to improve...sorry to be so blunt but if you dont get upset and
attempt to improve you will see a whole new side to flight sims. Pushing
the plane right up to the limit.....keeping it there nibbling along the
edges of a stall....relaxing when your able to...pulling when required.
Flying is all about finesse....flying realistic sims is the same
way....finesse it. You wont EVER be able to force the plane to where you
want it.
PAPA DOC
PS Like you I love them both...
Dan Schulz
>I have to tell you that its disheartening in the extreme to see this
>reaction to what is just AI outflying the general public.
I'm very disappointed with the reactions, as well.
>When I was
>doing some work on improving Gunzo AI I was continually demanding better
>and better manuevers. Ones that actually took advantage of the planes
>that the AI was flying.
It hasn't gone over everyone's head. I'm enjoying the hell out of it.
>Over and Over playability was brought up....I,
>in my ignorance never believed that humans wouldnt just love an AI that
>beat them. After all whats the fun in winning all the time.....
100% Agreed.
>Truly I was under the mistaken (apparently) impression that Great AI
>would be appreciated. Instead we find people who are not flying their
>aircraft to its fullest...and getting shot down....and instead of
>practicing they are crying.
Its a blow to one's self image if the realization sets in that "Hey,
I'm may not be the ace pilot I thought I was". Funny thing is, I'm
sure many of them ARE pretty good. They just have never been
challenged by a skilled opponent. In EAW, once I'm on his six, if the
opponent isn't dead in 30 seconds, I probably spilled my beer in my
lap - in ANY PLANE vs ANY PLANE (excluding the dog 110) . How
realistic is that? In the real deal, most dogfights lasted many
minutes. And guys, I'm not an ace pilot. 95% of regular multi player
opponents fly rings around me.
I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of the complaints come from
folks who have not played 1v1s with human opponents. Now that's a
pretty ballsying thing to say on Usenet, no? The reason I say this is,
I played flight sims solitaire vs. the computer for many years before
I had my first human opponent. I talked a friend at work into flying
AirWarrier in some 1v1s via modem. He was a relitive rookie to flight
sims. I was in for quite a surprise as to how difficult it would be to
get kills. I though with my years of sim experience, my book knowledge
of BFM, and my radio control experience that I would hand him his ass.
Nope - didn't happen. Initially I usually won all fights, but each
battle was a long and drawn out affair. This against a guy who had
maybe 5% of the sim experience I had.
One of my first impressions with WW2F was, "Hey, these guys fly like
humans". Even if there is something fishy going on with the FM, I
really don't care, because the realism of the difficulty of a dogfight
is there.
> Damn shame....it's certain now that better
>fliers will continue to get AI thats been artificially crippled for the
>average player who doesnt know how to turn down the volume on the AI.
>You dont have to fly it at expert level you know....
I'm sure we'll see the oddball surprise, but most will be dumbed
down. People, we all know there are developers who monitor this list.
They consider us hard core (which we are). What message do you think
they're taking home?
>> I played EAW last night and do not have the same complaint to make about
>>dogfights.
>
>I have many complaints about the AI in EAW and I love the game...but
>notice Im not crying about them. The reverse is NOT a valid
>tactic....all the time. Yet its one thats used a great deal (for AI)
>but its truly annoying...especially for online pilots who fly single
>player alot....(like me). Doing a reverse online is a surefire way to
>die...each and everytime. And yet one after another I find single player
>AI doing that manuever. They die each and everytime and its annoying to
>find such a rookie mistake being perpetuated.
Yes, agreed. WW2F seems much better in this regard. I distinctly
remember the change in AI tactics when I discovered the use of combat
flaps. Suddenly I was out turning him. The AI switched from a turning
fight, to a B&Z type tactic, which is VERY effective when I am out
numbered.
dave bottom
pilot. The AI in WW2 is pretty darn expert even at the lowest levels, making
flying this game an intimidating experience for many players.
Now I do not claim to be expert, but I'm pretty good at MOST sims. Online I
can hold my own, if not dominate, with any of the sims I currently fly (Red
Baron2, Fighters Anthology, IAF, F15, Warbirds, DOA).
I have the enemy AI set to the lowest level and get creamed more times than
not in WW2. Am I practicing, yes, am I somewhat frustrated, yes I am. Why?
Because I lose almost all the time. Maybe when the joystick fix is in I'll
do better.
dave
--
dave's homepage madness - flyfishing in Maine and more
http://www.midmaine.com/~dbottom
reply to dbo...@midmaine.com or fall in my spam trap
pleg...@earthlink.net wrote in message
<3669fa81...@news.earthlink.net>...
>I have to tell you that its disheartening in the extreme to see this
>reaction to what is just AI outflying the general public. When I was
>doing some work on improving Gunzo AI I was continually demanding better
>and better manuevers. Ones that actually took advantage of the planes
>that the AI was flying. Over and Over playability was brought up....I,
°°° Gunslinger °°°
<dbo...@midmaineNOSPAM.com> wrote:
>Now I do not claim to be expert, but I'm pretty good at MOST sims.
>I have the enemy AI set to the lowest level and get creamed more times than
>not in WW2.
>Because I lose almost all the time. Maybe when the joystick fix is in I'll
>do better.
Dave if your getting killed by the AI on the easy settings then you
are not "pretty good" I know that is mean and cold but it is the
truth. Before EAW and WW2 fighters came along the only other prop sim
I have EVER flown was Fighter Ace when it was in beta for a few weeks.
I can clean-up the floor with the AI set at the full setting 75% of
the time. I can win 7 out of 10 engagement when going mano- a -mano
with the computer. This is no bullshits, no cheats, just highest
difficulty possible. I am not very experienced with prop sims at all.
All of mine has been in fast jet sims. So if your loosing that easily
on the easy settings then you need MORE practice.
2 vs 1 yes I loose, as in real life most pilots would loose if two or
more enemies came at them at once. 1 vs 1 I can hold my own.
Please practice some more or buy a better stick. I have a TM topgun
($25) and CH Pedals ($60 2 years ago) and I haven't had to use any
special calibration routines nor use JCWin to properly calibrate. WW2
Fighter jets of that era are not fly-by-wire and I think most jet
jocks are used to the more responsive and faster performance of modern
day jet sims so they feel that the joystick is not working correctly.
Case in point. Fire up Ef2000.. GO to about 30,000 feet.. GO into a 90
degree pure dive.
Wait until about 1500 feet and pull out. Not too hard right?
Try the same thing with an aircraft made in 1942.. Its not going to
happen. Centrifugal force will keep that aircraft in that dive. A lot
of the bomber crew/pilots that died in WW2 dies not because of the
aircraft being shredded nor from bullet wounds. They died because when
the bomber would get into a dive from being hit the centrifugal force
would plaster them against the interior walls of the bomber keeping
them from jumping out the door and using the parachute.
--
°°° Gunslinger °°°
Pierre Legrand
PAPA DOC
pleg...@earthlink.net
who arent able to dedicate 20 hours a day to flying. After all for a
really long time I absolutely had to fly H2H at least 2 hours a
day....on top of the single player 1vs many gunfights...on top of
general fun of missions on top of Multi Play Co-Op. So whats great for
me is not gonna be wonderful for everyone....the sim should scale to
both ends. Unfortunately Im not able to judge the other end very well.
I will say this...online play will improve a pilot faster and more
effectively than any other method. Losing to a human sucks. Thats a big
motivational factor. Also and more importantly is having someone take
you and debrief you about what you have done wrong.
I encourage all online pilots to always be availible for debriefs. Both
sides will learn....cause nothing teaches as well as teaching. I know I
learned alot by debriefing pilots...and I have always been thankful for
those few that helped me so much in Falcon. Thanks again...Acidman,
Archer, Mazman, Kaiser, and others who put holes in my jet so gleefully.
PAPA DOC
>Actually I think you miss the point, not eveyone who buys a sim is a "good"
>pilot. The AI in WW2 is pretty darn expert even at the lowest levels, making
>flying this game an intimidating experience for many players.
>I have the enemy AI set to the lowest level and get creamed more times than
>not in WW2. Am I practicing, yes, am I somewhat frustrated, yes I am. Why?
>Because I lose almost all the time. Maybe when the joystick fix is in I'll
>do better.
>
>dave
>
Brian Morgan
>>I have to tell you that its disheartening in the extreme to see this
>>reaction to what is just AI outflying the general public.
>
ever find myself defending my AI for being too *good*.
a rueful LOL. its been quite an experience.
an unrelated note, if any of you follow the world of
chess you'll remember the Kasparov v. Deep Blue match.
when K lost to the computer, he stormed that the
machine or the programmers had cheated, that they
had programmed it especially to beat him. K's fire
to win was so great, his certainty that the machine
was inferior so solid that he could not deal with
the fact that he had lost. perhaps the strongest
chess player of all time throwing a temper-tantrum
on stage! the fact is that people want to win.
in some cases very badly. (i know i've tossed a
few joysticks across the room in my time, No.19
can verify that i once grabbed a Goblin Soothsayer
card and ate it rather than let it attack and
kill me. :) ) but, most competitors get back
in the game and play until they win. K will
be ready for Deep Blue next time and i'll bet
that even if he loses he'll do it more gracefully,
with more respect for the abilities of the
machine. my point is just that this sort of
outcry is natural, its just, well, human nature.