AI to supplement sides and do away with ENY.

[Traveler]

That's true but if you aren't competing for MA score you could fight AI in another arena since ENY hasn't yet seen a better alternative. Those who want to duel only need one other player looking for a fight.

What is MA score ?  I just looking for a way to have balanced sides, using is not perfect but neither is what we have now.  Balancing numbers using AI would seem like a good approach.  removes the ENY issue and provides additional numbers to fight.

[Slade]

I'd like to see AI bomber missions when player numbers are low.

+1

[caldera]

+1/-1

I like the idea of AI bomber streams, but for all three countries.   AI would provide action at all hours.  They could be programmed to hit strats or remote bases and not interfere with the front.   Players could attack the bombers or use them for bait.   Merchant fleets with some defense ack could provide additional targets over water.


ENY is a good thing, keeping the steamrollers from the best weapons.   The flaw in ENY is that it takes a large numbers disparity to have any effect.  In other words, ENY is watered down.   


At odds with ENY is the now six hour rule.  ENY encourages switching, while the 6 hour rule discourages it.   If switch time went back to one hour and ENY hit much harder, they would work better together.

[bustr]

In 2014 Hitech shot this idea down.

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,361996.0.html

I don't know if it was specific to AH2 and any code rewrite he would have to invest time in to place random AI into the AH2 MA without converting the MA into an AI mission environment. Or, if he is against random AI in the sand box MA environment as a policy. There are differences between the AH2 functions and the AH3 functions besides the graphics and sound engines. I'm not sure how many of you joined the alpha back when it was the closed alpha.

For the alpha we tested a two side Europe air war with massive numbers of AI. First BoB, and then the 1944 AAF bomber streams and Luft defenders. When you entered the arena you were randomly placed into the fight. Or waited the few minutes between the end of one run and the beginning of the next. Very often I couldn't tell the difference between FSO and the AI. It was obvious you were not in the MA. The AI had balls, never ran away, and their wingman had a clue what a wingman was supposed to do.

[jimson]

I think there is just too much resistance to AI in the MA. People want that to be a player only environment. You will be seeing them in other arenas though.

[Wiley]

I think there is just too much resistance to AI in the MA. People want that to be a player only environment. You will be seeing them in other arenas though.

I'm moderately excited to see what the AvA guys can do with bomber streams.  I'd hope to see large numbers of bombers with player escorts moving across the map on a regular basis.  Jabo/fighter AIs I'm not quite as excited about, but I really do want to see how it works out.

There've been enough people on the wishlist claiming to speak for a lot of people apparently wanting to see AI and 2 sided war for a while, maybe it will become a thing.

Wiley.

[bustr]

I guess none of you ever watched the alpha mission video on the AH front page. That was only one of the bomber groups being hit by the 110G. Just after that you would be in flying G14 or Ta152 in gaggles.

While testing the AI war arena I flew in everything included in that war from the bombers, their escorts, to all of the different defenders. It was a lot more cohesive than SFO scenario, and you ended up in action most of the time you were in the air if in a fighter. Some of the fighter to fighter get home off the continent past the defenders mop up fights were not much different than the MA.

The whole thing was a lot more like we saw in WW2 movies about bombing Germany. Even in FSO because the attackers are human, they don't go for the juggler like those AI do when they engage the bomber groups or your escort groups. And you aren't being dumped on by players from 30k trying to game their odds on surviving and shooting you in the back. The AI have been programmed more realistically to the bomber stream combat alts from WW2 while accomplishing a mission, versus players using a mission intercept to whizz on players trying to accomplish a mission.

The biggest difference, no AI ran away, and you really had to run a long way to get the AI to break off if things got bad for you say 10 v 1. Shades of WW2 after action reports especially with the rides historically matched.

Should have been there for BoB attacking 60 He111 with an 8 .303 HurriI.

[Slade]

[rhetorical]
Just curious, do the AI bombers "bomb-and-bail" or is that just a phenomena of some select human players?
[/rhetorical]

Point: If AI bombers behave like we'd expect RL WWII bombers they have my vote. 

[bustr]

They plod on to their demise......

[SPKmes]

It would be nice to have more to shoot at but the problem I foresee is where do the AI fly? Due to the random nature of Aces fronts and where / what people are attacking / doing there is no defined area for them to be...

[Traveler]

It would be nice to have more to shoot at but the problem I foresee is where do the AI fly? Due to the random nature of Aces fronts and where / what people are attacking / doing there is no defined area for them to be...

Easy, they take off with the first flash of any base, or they are on patrol between three bases where one is flashing and move towards the flashing base or Sector that has reported enemy.

[Greebo]

Having AI bomber missions hit random strat factories rather than fields would probably be easier to program. The bombing accuracy could be set fairly low as the idea isn't so much to influence the base war but to give a focus for player fighter activity, both for intercepting and escorting fighters. Having said that bomber players might tag onto these AI missions to get some mutual protection and to pick up free kills generated by the AI gunners' defensive fire.

The HQ status could be tied to these missions rather than to reducing radar coverage. A damaged HQ might delay that side's system messages warning of incoming raids or reduce the information given. So a system message with the HQ up might read "Bomber Raid Alert: 18 B-17 bombers at sector 10,11, 12K alt, inbound radar factory, ETA 7 minutes." HQ damage would progressively reduce the information in the messages until with it fully down the message might read "Bomber Raid Alert: radar factory."

[Puck]

Having AI bomber missions hit random strat factories rather than fields would probably be easier to program. The bombing accuracy could be set fairly low as the idea isn't so much to influence the base war but to give a focus for player fighter activity, both for intercepting and escorting fighters. Having said that bomber players might tag onto these AI missions to get some mutual protection and to pick up free kills generated by the AI gunners' defensive fire.

Logistically this makes the most sense.  Semi-scheduled, fixed missions that depart from a given field or fields and attack a specific strat target or targets (nothing says you can't string them together).  Numbers and type could depend on current war status, routes can be one of a pre-planned set, and country notification automated.  Given the AI mission editor is in place and the missions themselves can be pre-set with the terrain, the rest would seem to be calculations from existing environmental stats.

Having said that, there are lines of code and testing involved.  It would need to be something of a priority, and that would mean there is a problem to solve.  The chances of this "fixing" eny are pretty low.  Seems to me eny was first introduced to help solve the imbalance "problem", and now people are viewing that solution as the problem in itself.  At what point do the AI missions become the problem? 

I actually like the concept a LOT; background missions that keep the arenas active whether or not people are in them (early war, anyone?).  Heck, if numbers get low enough I could see AI field capture missions rolling, just so the five more or less living players have something to do, but I don't see it as a way to balance the sides.  There ought to be a way to put these in the background without substantially affecting the overall results of game play.

[bustr]

Maybe there is a middle ground, still the unintended consequences from human nature and AI could change the character of the game. The worry being that the more AI running around to shoot at, the more attractive to the easily bruised ego crowd to avoid fighting human controlled planes. As you see in the Mid and Early MA's groups unwilling to put up a fight to the point of changing fronts to distance themselves from an aggressive single player.

In the alpha we have tested mission arenas but, so far no MA with random AI running around to shoot at. Those attracted to random AI in quantity would probably end up in a 24x7 mission arena to avoid other humans. During all of the testing of missions, I think once I shot at a human controlled fighter. So unless the mission has very small numbers, a massive mission like the Euro15 1944 bomber stream mission. I doubt very few humans will be shooting at each other. No bruised egos from ch200 chest thumping over how they were humiliated by some vet because you are a skillzless dweeb.

You can choose not to tune 200 but, for some people, knowing they are being slaughtered by another human is all the ego bruising it takes. So some trade off has to happen to retain the broadest spectrum of paying customers. That 900lb gorilla in the room, retaining numbers to pay the light bill while knowing most humans are not fire and brimstone belching monster players with titanium egos.

[Traveler]

Maybe there is a middle ground, still the unintended consequences from human nature and AI could change the character of the game. The worry being that the more AI running around to shoot at, the more attractive to the easily bruised ego crowd to avoid fighting human controlled planes. As you see in the Mid and Early MA's groups unwilling to put up a fight to the point of changing fronts to distance themselves from an aggressive single player.

Just how would a player know that the other aircraft is human or AI controlled ? All I see when spotting an enemy aircraft is the type of aircraft being flown, not who is flying it.