On-Line Missions

[Mister Fork]

For the SEA and AvA.  Abilty to load up the arena with AI flown missions.

[USRanger]

IL-2 has had this forever.  Players can fly co-op or vs. missions that include AI on both sides.  It's something I would LOVE to see here.  I would donate mucho time to hook AvA staffers up with lots of AI missions to choose from to run.  At least it would give the people that do go there more planes to tangle with.  There was a recent thread asking for Snapshots multiple times a day.  With this, it would be possible.

+1!!

[jimson]

There was a recent thread asking for Snapshots multiple times a day.  With this, it would be possible.

+1!!

Yeah, that thread was mine. With this, an automated scenario arena would indeed be possible, and you could keep AVA active with augmented AI.

[Mister Fork]

Yep - I've been asking for a few months now. Dare 2 dream I suppose.

[USRanger]

Like I said, IL-2 has had it a long time, so it's not unfathomable or non-doable. I really think it would open up a whole new dimension for AH.  Imagine, you are the only player in the AvA, yet you still have 50 other planes to fight an historical battle with/against.

 

[bravoa8]

IL-2 has had this forever.

You played IL-2?

[jimson]

Not just do-able, but being considered as recently as last year when CT was shelved.

Quote from Pyro:
"We’re going to pull the CT AI mission system and redevelop it for use by CM’s in scenarios and special events."

 I would donate mucho time to hook AvA staffers up with lots of AI missions to choose from to run.

I've played Ranger's missions. I get a "thrill up my leg" thinking about what he and the CM's could do with this.

One big obstacle is people's aversion to playing against AI, but since there would be humans in there too, you'd never really know what you were going to run into.

If it would really give everyone heartburn to get the message "You shot down AI#3", the AI could be named, you wouldn't have to automatically know that "Dogface22" was real or robot.

Or you could eliminate names entirely, not for general game play because it's cool to know who you shot down, but just for these historical game play situations where you are trying to approach realism.

How often would a real pilot have known he had shot down "Hideo Takashi"?

He would only know he had shot down an A6M5.

[Denholm]

That would be entertaining!

Would a slot system come along with all of this? For instance, a scenario or mission is launched allowing pilots X number of minutes to join. The mission will require a certain predetermined amount of fighters, attack aircraft, and/or bombers. After the time-limit to join expires, any slots not taken by pilots would be filled by AI.

[jimson]

That would be entertaining!

Would a slot system come along with all of this? For instance, a scenario or mission is launched allowing pilots X number of minutes to join. The mission will require a certain predetermined amount of fighters, attack aircraft, and/or bombers. After the time-limit to join expires, any slots not taken by pilots would be filled by AI.

Not sure how the OP or US Ranger see this but, that would be exactly the kind of set-up I envisioned in my threads, at least for snapshot type scenarios.

[rabbidrabbit]

Personally, I would not like AI fighters but AI bombers, goons and tanks make sense in some scenarios.

[jimson]

Only some AI fighters if needed. Still human pilots as well.

[Mister Fork]

My thinking too was towards the larger aircraft for AI use - or the heavier loaded Attack fighters (i.e. Juggs and Bf-110s) on JABO's.

 

Guess I need to make a few phonecalls...

[Stalwart]

+1 

It might be nice sometimes to have an AI plane lead certain flights, since they can't disco or screw up.   

[Mister Fork]

Here's 3 question for most of you - if this was turned on:

1. Would you want to take over an existing AI flown aircraft?
2. Would you rather have the AI flights scheduled and just have them run in a loop on a map?
3. If you came into an arena with AI bomber and JABO flights continously in the air,  would you rather escort or intercept?

[USRanger]

1.  Taking over an AI's plane isn't coded in (offline mission-wise) and I don't think would be necessary. See #2.

2.  A schedule for missions running would be needed for players to know when/where to take off with the mission.  A multitude of mission choices for the staffer/CM would be needed for variety.  Running missions in an automated loop wouldn't work if base captures are enabled.  Don't want AI bombers attacking a friendly field after it changes hands.  AI aircraft won't deviate from their plotted course/target, no matter who owns it at the time.  A human staffer would be needed to choose which mission to run based on which field belongs to whom.  Editing a mission's route to a new target is not hard if you know how to work the Editor.  Would only take a couple minutes.  Either that or have a nice selection of missions that are programmed for a variety of bases i.e. a mission made for each field of the map.  I personally could do this in a day, possibly two, per terrain.  The staffer would still be free to change the planeset/loadout at any time.  That part is very easy.

3.  I would do both.  Just remember, with AI, only bombers can drop ord.  No AI jabos.  They will carry ord, but not drop it.  Human pilots still could of course.

Great AI uses:  bombers(from small to huge formations never seen before), fighters(escorting & intercept) or even just to furball.  Just no AI jabos, except for immersion purposes of large flights, they just will keep their ord, even when fighting it out.