1C Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official 1C Company forum > 1C Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik > Daidalos Team discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 08-27-2015, 11:54 AM
Furio's Avatar
Furio Furio is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 299
Default

I don’t know if Daidalos Team guys read all of our discussion. Sometimes I hope they do, because they would read interesting things to ponder about. Sometimes I hope they don’t, because they have limited time and surely more useful things to do.

However, in this case I have a simple question that – perhaps – could have a simple reply. Have they ever tried to limit AI field of vision? If yes, have they obtained any meaningful result?

Last edited by Furio; 08-27-2015 at 11:56 AM. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-28-2015, 10:32 PM
Pursuivant Pursuivant is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,439
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Furio View Post
However, in this case I have a simple question that – perhaps – could have a simple reply. Have they ever tried to limit AI field of vision? If yes, have they obtained any meaningful result?
Were you around when DT released the 4.10 patch? Huge improvements in limiting AI visibility:





So, yes, it is possible to limit AI visibility in the game, and most of the work is already done. It was a massive amount of work, and one of DT's triumphs for which I am eternally grateful.

The only problems we've got left with regard to AI visibility is that they still seem to be a bit too good at detecting distant aircraft, correctly ranging distance, and keeping track of aircraft when they lose sight of them.

We might complain about current AI abilities, but DT has actually made MASSIVE improvement compared to what AI used to be like.

Last edited by KG26_Alpha; 08-28-2015 at 10:48 PM. Reason: Please remove the HTTPS:// from you tube links to ensure the forum displays them correctly.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-29-2015, 09:00 PM
idefix44's Avatar
idefix44 idefix44 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: France
Posts: 127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuivant View Post
Were you around when DT released the 4.10 patch? Huge improvements in limiting AI visibility:





So, yes, it is possible to limit AI visibility in the game, and most of the work is already done. It was a massive amount of work, and one of DT's triumphs for which I am eternally grateful.

The only problems we've got left with regard to AI visibility is that they still seem to be a bit too good at detecting distant aircraft, correctly ranging distance, and keeping track of aircraft when they lose sight of them.

We might complain about current AI abilities, but DT has actually made MASSIVE improvement compared to what AI used to be like.
I agree with Pursuivant!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-29-2015, 09:23 PM
Furio's Avatar
Furio Furio is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 299
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuivant View Post
Were you around when DT released the 4.10 patch? Huge improvements in limiting AI visibility
Yes, I was, but missed these clips and never noticed much difference between dogfights taking place in clear or cloudy skies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuivant View Post
and keeping track of aircraft when they lose sight of them.
And that’s perhaps the problem. They keep track, and they shouldn’t. They should disappear from the battle scene. Clearly it's easier said than done. I’m aware of the difficulties faced by TD, and I’m no less grateful to them than you are.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-30-2015, 08:09 AM
Pursuivant Pursuivant is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,439
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Furio View Post
And that’s perhaps the problem. They keep track, and they shouldn’t. They should disappear from the battle scene. Clearly it's easier said than done. I’m aware of the difficulties faced by TD, and I’m no less grateful to them than you are.
I think it's fairly "easy" as these things go, although it would require lots of coding to add the necessary "decision trees."

4.12 finally got AI "target acquisition" more or less right, and it seems that Rookie or Average pilots can be pretty clueless if you get into their blind spots. What doesn't seem to be modeled is loss of Situational Awareness (SA) due to target maneuvering, information overload, and other factors.

A "simple" way to make loss of SA possible would be this:

Baseline ability to retain SA is based on pilot quality.

When an aircraft flies into an AI plane's blind spot, there's an x% chance every second that AI will lose SA with respect to that plane (lose "Tally" - visual confirmation of a plane's position & type), based on the target's range and speed. (Elements like target size, camouflage, visibility, etc. don't apply because this algorithm attempts to model the human ability to mentally track targets you can't see.)

This base chance is modified upwards if the spotting plane is damaged, under attack, or pulling Gs, or if the pilot (or some of the crew) are wounded. If the other plane is pulls Gs, or gains or loses altitude while in a blind spot, there's also an upward modifier. (This is also a simplification which represents that its harder to keep track of a fast or wildly maneuvering target.)

If the other plane is smoking, leaking fuel or coolant, or contrailing, there's a big downward modifier. (This represents a pilot's ability to track a plane, and follow its path, by using its smoke or vapor trail.)

Big downward modifier if the "lost" planes are flying in formation, as long as the viewer knows the position of at least one plane in the formation. (This simulates the fact that a human can easily determine the relative location of a hidden plane's position in formation as long as he can see at least one plane in the group.)

There's also a big downward modifier if the other plane is firing on the plane attempting to sight it. (Simulating the fact that a human can easily extrapolate a firing plane's position from the angle of the tracers going past the cockpit.)

Finally, there's a cumulative penalty to keep track of targets after the first, based on pilot skill. This represents "information overload" of SA, with more distant and faster-moving targets being lost first.

A simple but arbitrary formula for maximum number of objects a pilot can track at once might be (pilot skill level)^2. With Rookie pilots being assigned a skill level of 1 and Ace pilots being assigned a skill of 4. (The very high number of objects an Ace can potentially track represents the fact that ace pilots tended to excel at the sort of spatial reasoning tasks represented by SA.)

If AI loses SA and is attempting to disengage, Rookie pilots might fly straight and level at top speed. (They assume that they're safe, even if they're not.) Otherwise, Rookie and Average or better pilots will dive or climb at full power, as appropriate, while gently maneuvering to reestablish Tally & confirm that they're not being pursued.

All pilots will use clouds and terrain as cover when attempting to disengage.

All pilots will fly towards friendly flak and fighter formations as a method of discouraging pursuit.


If AI loses SA and is attempting to engage, it will attempt to reestablish visual contact by maneuvering.

Rookie pilots might maneuver to establish line of sight to the target's last known position (i.e., they will forget that their target isn't likely to be where they last saw it). Otherwise, Rookie and Average pilots will attempt to regain line of sight by turning towards the target's last known line of travel.

Veteran or better pilots maintain some degree of SA with respect to lost targets and will usually turn towards the quarter of the sky which the target currently occupies. The exact percentage depends on pilot skill, say 60% for Veteran, 90% for Ace. Otherwise, they behave like Average pilots and turn towards the target's last known line of travel. (This represents a gross simplification of the mental calculations that a human would make regarding the opponent's energy state, speed, direction of travel, maneuverability, etc. It's not intended to make AI omniscient, just to give them a better than even chance of being able to reestablish Tally.)

If you wanted to get even fancier, you could give AI (and the player!) the ability to ask where other planes are if they lose Tally. Again, not hard to implement, but time consuming, not just due to additional coding, but also due to new commands and voice programming needed.

Last edited by Pursuivant; 08-30-2015 at 08:14 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-06-2015, 01:54 PM
major.kudo major.kudo is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Japan
Posts: 64
Default

Everyone, thank you for your very good opinion.
I interpreted as follows.


about gun shooting

- Gun shooting of AI more inaccurately. In particular, Rookie and Average.

- The deflection shooting is made more inaccurate.

- head on between the fighters is made more inaccurate.


Behavior

- AI Decision to "return to base immediately" by more less damage.

- The enemy who took Serious damage doesn't attack any more.

- AI loses sight of an enemy more easily.

- AI stop to attack a bomber of heavy armament from just behind.

- If the prudence of AI can be set at QMB and FMB, it's more better.


As far as it's possible, I make all opinion simple. 
And I'm thinking I'll show that to DT in the future.
It's necessary to be change as simple as possible for it.
When being complicated, that wouldn't be achieved.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-06-2015, 08:48 PM
majorfailure majorfailure is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 320
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by major.kudo View Post
Everyone, thank you for your very good opinion.
I interpreted as follows.


about gun shooting

- Gun shooting of AI more inaccurately. In particular, Rookie and Average.
I still think they shoot too inaccurate - and they correct their aim abysmally.
Quote:
Originally Posted by major.kudo View Post
- The deflection shooting is made more inaccurate.

- head on between the fighters is made more inaccurate.
Yes on both counts - and also the willingness to risk serious damage by offering head-ons is to great IMHO.
Behavior
Quote:
Originally Posted by major.kudo View Post
- AI Decision to "return to base immediately" by more less damage.

- The enemy who took Serious damage doesn't attack any more.

- AI loses sight of an enemy more easily.

- AI stop to attack a bomber of heavy armament from just behind.

- If the prudence of AI can be set at QMB and FMB, it's more better.
And add to that that the better AI should at least when in a favourable plane/position try to disengage when a fight goes south once in awhile.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-19-2015, 11:12 AM
major.kudo major.kudo is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Japan
Posts: 64
Default

Dear Pursuivant.

I think opinions of Pursuivant are very deep and important good opinions.
But I can't simplify those in my poor English.
I tried several times. But I think some important points are missing.
So I want you to describe only important part using a sentence of 300 characters degree.
Excuse me, please.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-19-2015, 12:58 PM
Pursuivant Pursuivant is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,439
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by major.kudo View Post
But I can't simplify those in my poor English.
No need to apologize. Your English is far better than my ability to write in your native language!

My post was many ideas for how to improve artificial intelligence programming, by making the computer simulate "awareness of surroundings" that humans have.

The big idea was that the computer should have some ability to know where planes will be if an AI pilot can't "see" them, but not perfect knowledge.

* Rookie pilots don't have as much knowledge as aces.

* It is much harder to lose knowledge of where a particular airplane is if there are many airplanes in the area.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-19-2015, 11:56 PM
Igo kyu's Avatar
Igo kyu Igo kyu is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 681
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuivant View Post
* It is much harder to lose knowledge of where a particular airplane is if there are many airplanes in the area.
Eh, I'm having trouble with that one.

It seems to me that in real life, it would be more difficult to keep track of a particular aircraft if there were more planes in the air, and that is what the AI ought to be emulating.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 1C Company. All rights reserved.