20.10.2008, 10:36
IMO, IL2 has some of the best AI of any combat flight sim I've played - and AI modeling is the toughest part of programming any simulation. I'm not saying that it's perfect - not by a long shot - but it's pretty good.
If you have control over the planes in your flight (i.e., you are flight leader), you can (sort of) get the AI to back off by commanding them to "reform," or telling them to attack another target. If you don't have control over the AI planes, then you're out of luck. I think that's realistic - there was (and probably is) a strong tendency for fighter pilots to "fixate" on a target to their front, ignoring other targets, and to claim any target they shot at as a kill. Also, unless the flight leaders strictly enforced fire discipline and the "wing/lead" system, it was common for several pilots to attack the most obvious target simultaneously - what on-line players refer to as "shoulder shooting."
I'd actually argue that the "kill claiming" system in IL2 is crocked.
1. You always get credit for aircraft which crash far out of your sight, well behind enemy lines, which realistically you could only claim as "damaged" or "probable."
2. You always get credit for aircraft you shoot down on your own, roving behind enemy lines, with no "friendly" confirmation. In some Air Forces, you might be able to claim such kills, especially if you were flying a plane equipped with a gun camera (if it worked, if you remembered to turn it on, if it didn't run out of film . . .), but in air forces with restrictive kill claim policies, the intelligence officers would laugh at you, or just credit you with a "probable" for such kills.
3. If the rest of your squaddies cripple an enemy aircraft and you finish it off (the reverse of AI kill stealing), you get full credit for the kill, rather than having to share a partial kill. Until the program indicates that an enemy aircraft is shot down, or until another pilot claims the kill (or confirms it for another pilot), you're free to "vulch" doomed enemy aircraft.
4. The program perfectly registers kills as they happen, eliminating any possibility of overclaiming (very common, historically) or underclaiming.
5. Enemy aircraft killed by bombers aren't claimed by bomber gunners. (And bomber gunners were prone to vastly overclaim enemy aircraft shot down - since everyone in the formation shot at the same attacker).
6. You actually get individual credit for a kill, as opposed to having to split credit between every pilot in your flight (common for USN units, especially later in the war).
7. Your flight leader doesn't take credit for your kill (common among IJN and IJA units).
What I'd like to see is a system where the AI would credit shared kills, and where it would record not just kills but also different categories of damage, ranging from category I (minor) to category 4 (write-off). In combat, category 1 & 2 damage (or minor damage to just one system) would count as a "damaged" claim, while category 3 & 4 damage (major damage to one system, or minor damage to multiple systems) would count as a "probable." Damage categories would affect the time required to repair aircraft for the next sortie in capaigns.
Once you've got categories of damage and the damaged/probable/confirmed kill system in place, you could build in a system where you actually had to claim your kills as you made them, and then the AI (playing the part of debriefing officers) would allow or disallow your kills, or downgrade kills to probables, based on the claims of other fliers and observations by friendly ground units. You could then also set up historical levels of accuracy for kill claims, ranging from restrictive (e.g., Luftwaffe or USAAF) to downright fanciful (e.g., IJNAF or IJAAF).
If you have control over the planes in your flight (i.e., you are flight leader), you can (sort of) get the AI to back off by commanding them to "reform," or telling them to attack another target. If you don't have control over the AI planes, then you're out of luck. I think that's realistic - there was (and probably is) a strong tendency for fighter pilots to "fixate" on a target to their front, ignoring other targets, and to claim any target they shot at as a kill. Also, unless the flight leaders strictly enforced fire discipline and the "wing/lead" system, it was common for several pilots to attack the most obvious target simultaneously - what on-line players refer to as "shoulder shooting."
I'd actually argue that the "kill claiming" system in IL2 is crocked.
1. You always get credit for aircraft which crash far out of your sight, well behind enemy lines, which realistically you could only claim as "damaged" or "probable."
2. You always get credit for aircraft you shoot down on your own, roving behind enemy lines, with no "friendly" confirmation. In some Air Forces, you might be able to claim such kills, especially if you were flying a plane equipped with a gun camera (if it worked, if you remembered to turn it on, if it didn't run out of film . . .), but in air forces with restrictive kill claim policies, the intelligence officers would laugh at you, or just credit you with a "probable" for such kills.
3. If the rest of your squaddies cripple an enemy aircraft and you finish it off (the reverse of AI kill stealing), you get full credit for the kill, rather than having to share a partial kill. Until the program indicates that an enemy aircraft is shot down, or until another pilot claims the kill (or confirms it for another pilot), you're free to "vulch" doomed enemy aircraft.
4. The program perfectly registers kills as they happen, eliminating any possibility of overclaiming (very common, historically) or underclaiming.
5. Enemy aircraft killed by bombers aren't claimed by bomber gunners. (And bomber gunners were prone to vastly overclaim enemy aircraft shot down - since everyone in the formation shot at the same attacker).
6. You actually get individual credit for a kill, as opposed to having to split credit between every pilot in your flight (common for USN units, especially later in the war).
7. Your flight leader doesn't take credit for your kill (common among IJN and IJA units).
What I'd like to see is a system where the AI would credit shared kills, and where it would record not just kills but also different categories of damage, ranging from category I (minor) to category 4 (write-off). In combat, category 1 & 2 damage (or minor damage to just one system) would count as a "damaged" claim, while category 3 & 4 damage (major damage to one system, or minor damage to multiple systems) would count as a "probable." Damage categories would affect the time required to repair aircraft for the next sortie in capaigns.
Once you've got categories of damage and the damaged/probable/confirmed kill system in place, you could build in a system where you actually had to claim your kills as you made them, and then the AI (playing the part of debriefing officers) would allow or disallow your kills, or downgrade kills to probables, based on the claims of other fliers and observations by friendly ground units. You could then also set up historical levels of accuracy for kill claims, ranging from restrictive (e.g., Luftwaffe or USAAF) to downright fanciful (e.g., IJNAF or IJAAF).