bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraft

Take command of air and naval assets from post-WW2 to the near future in tactical and operational scale, complete with historical and hypothetical scenarios and an integrated scenario editor.

Moderator: MOD_Command

Rongor
Posts: 451
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:35 am
Contact:

bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraft

Post by Rongor »

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar
one problem is that planes with bingo fuel totally ignore enemy threats.
Sardauker wrote this in the SAM-evasion threat and I couldn't resist placing this issue into a new thread because in my opinion it absolutely deserves a thread of its own, as this can be a major annoyance.

Your pilot might even be in the midst of combat, regardless how possible or even easy it may be to finally kill the adversary before heading home, the AI will break off and switch to RTB Bingo behavior when bingo state is reached. Mostly this is a death sentence since the opponent will insta-tail the homebound and kill him from his six.

What would a real pilot do? Turn his back to the enemy fighter and head home, because the reserve fuel mustn't be touched? Or assure survival first by killing the enemy and then deal with possible fuel insufficiency later, preferable after fencing out?
anxiousbob
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:10 pm

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraft

Post by anxiousbob »

I think if I recall right it's been said that 1.11 will let us define joker fuel states for aircraft, so hopefully this problem won't be around much longer!
User avatar
AlGrant
Posts: 912
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 4:38 am

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraft

Post by AlGrant »

#### EDIT: was still typing this when the above about Joker/1.11 was posted #####

I saw something similar to this and posted it in the SAM Evasion thread fb.asp?m=3981073

It was a couple of issues with aircraft not recognising or ignoring the threats from the rear guns on Badger bombers, either during an initial attack or when RTB.
The response was that it would be added to the list.
I don't think it's in the latest release candidate (but not tried it) but if it's on the list I'm guessing it will get looked at.


Suggestion:
Thinking about this ..... I know there is something in the Mega FAQ about Bingo or Joker fuel states, but I don't ever recall seeing an aircraft reporting 'Joker' (have I just missed the Joker call?)
"JOKER - Fuel state above Bingo at which separation/bugout/event termination should begin"

Perhaps RTB Joker could be an option in the side Doctrine, this would mean an aircraft would break off sooner, but still have enough fuel to deal with anything immediate during the bugout or transit home!
As JOKER is a pre-briefed fuel state I suppose it could be set automatically or perhaps by the player as a percentage above Bingo ... just an idea.

Al




GOD'S EYE DISABLED.
anxiousbob
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:10 pm

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraft

Post by anxiousbob »

I don't think joker is in at all yet, unless I just haven't been noticing it either. Maybe it's included in the FAQ because it's just a useful concept to keep in mind for air ops?
Rongor
Posts: 451
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:35 am
Contact:

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraft

Post by Rongor »

Also a Joker or any other defined fuel state still shouldn't let the AI turn its back to the nearby enemy.

If the combat consumes too much fuel to reach home base thereafter, this is one problem. The inevitability to be killed upon turning away from a nearby hostile, and intending to head home with cruise speed with the opponent in my six is plain suicide. Maybe I'd have to eject later or do a belly landing in some swamp, but I'd never simply drop out the ongoing midair combat without seeing a realistic chance to escape the other guy.

The current RTB on Bingo logic puts your AI into suicide mode. No new fuel level would prevent that. We need the AI to determine which threat is the more immediate one, and for which one a solution to find is to prioritize.
mikmykWS
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:34 pm

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by mikmykWS »

ORIGINAL: Rongor

Also a Joker or any other defined fuel state still shouldn't let the AI turn its back to the nearby enemy.

If the combat consumes too much fuel to reach home base thereafter, this is one problem. The inevitability to be killed upon turning away from a nearby hostile, and intending to head home with cruise speed with the opponent in my six is plain suicide. Maybe I'd have to eject later or do a belly landing in some swamp, but I'd never simply drop out the ongoing midair combat without seeing a realistic chance to escape the other guy.

The current RTB on Bingo logic puts your AI into suicide mode. No new fuel level would prevent that. We need the AI to determine which threat is the more immediate one, and for which one a solution to find is to prioritize.

Players have the ability to override at any point. That leaves the run out of fuel decision in their hands rather than the AI's which is what they asked for many moons ago. At the end of the day this game is about planning so its on you to make some of these decisions.

Mike
Rongor
Posts: 451
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:35 am
Contact:

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by Rongor »

I appreciate the human player being able to override. Still this is only a workaround for a serious incapability of the AI. Also it is somewhat unfair, because the computer controlled opponent's side doesn't benefit from this workaround.

The core problem persists. There are situations in which the AI proves to be unable to prioritize threats. You can't really make decisions in advance for all kind of threats during a pre planned mission. You have to trust basic abilities of the AI to deem it capable of accomplishing the mission. Otherwise nobody would create missions anymore, we would all fly our missions manually. As much as we don't need to land aircraft manually at the end of a mission, we shouldn't be needed to override rather suicidal decisions of our AI pilot.
Currently the AI pilot may solely focus on mission tasks or some bingo state, while he has the foe in weapons range at is six. AI should be able to handle a basic and simple decision like that. Currently it isn't. The AI is deciding wrong. And in my opinion it would improve the gameplay very much if something would be done about that. The AI has to understand that preserving it's own existence is ALWAYS the highest priority (see below) and that the more immediate danger to its existence deserves the highest attention at all times.

Working around this inability can help in the shorter term. But this has limits.
1. To be able to override this wrong AI decisionmaking, the human player before even has to notice this situation happening. Probably no issue with a small scenario, but absolutely depending on luck if you have a dozen assets flying across your screen.
2. To interfere after noticing it, you will still have to unassign from current mission (possibly triggering unwanted departures of other a/c tasked with this mission when obeying a 1/3 rule) and issue a F1 onto the nearby threat. This takes several seconds. Seconds in which your pilot, who may even have been in the advantageous position, will have dropped into a disadvantageous dogfight stance, leaving him much more vulnerable and likely to become downed unnecessarily.
3. The computer controlled side doesn't have this workaround. If the red side pilots runs into bingo while dogfighting with your pilots, they are doomed and will be shot by your guys like sitting ducks.

Self defense is always the priority. The player shouldn't have to plan for that, nor do I see how he could do so.
Like in my other thread addressing the AI focusing on a ground target instead of defending against nearby interceptors, the AI displays a serious lack of ability to prioritize threats. Since this currently can lead to quite unrealistic unit behavior, I would love to see you guys acknowledging some potential for improvement.
Not only would we gain an increase of immersion and realism, we'd also have this wonderful feature of mission planning improved even more.

I absolutely understand that the AI will never be able to react reasonably to ALL surprises. But in my opinion this issue is as basic as the ability to fly along waypoints, drop weapons efficiently or how to land.

The player wouldn't want to send his a/c on pre planned missions if he'd risk them crashing because he had to override to issue a landing clearance. Please teach the AI that the predictable missile from behind is much worse than running out of fuel in about an hour or having to do another attack run on the tasked ground target AFTER the immediate lethal threats have been dealt with.


preserving own existence is ALWAYS the highest priority
as demonstrated decades ago by

W.O.P.R. (1983)
HAL9000 (1968)
Skynet (1984)
ImageImage
Image

CMANO - 2016 ?
mikmykWS
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:34 pm

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by mikmykWS »

Sorry you don't agree with our approach on this. Its not my intent to upset you.

Could you explain in detail how we should approach AI behaviors not driven by tangible data but but by human nature? Perhaps this will help us come to a better solution. Obviously this isn't an issue for the player side as they understand this. Bit brains...much more complicated.

All this being said you do understand that no matter what we code we will not be able to match what every player thinks we should do.

Thanks!

Mike
Rongor
Posts: 451
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:35 am
Contact:

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by Rongor »

I don't feel upset, I am glad and appreciating the possibility to have the developers of this simulation being willing to read my opinion. I don't claim to know it better.

Back on track: well, I suppose everything needed is already implemented. I have no idea of coding but you guys successfully implemented the AI's ability to switch into defensive stance. So simply disallow switching to RTB (or any other stance) as long as the conditions normally leading to defensive stance are still present.
ComDev
Posts: 3116
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 1:20 pm
Contact:

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by ComDev »

Hi Rongor,

Implementing what you say will cause aircraft to run themselves out of gas, and they crash [8D] Preserving own existence and all that.

Version 1.11 will allow the player to set Joker fuel, in which case the aircraft will use any fuel between Joker and Bingo to exit the area at maximum speed. I.e. making it more difficult for an attacker to nail the aircraft.

We also added player-configurable Winchester and Shotgun settings, some of which will allow the AI-controlled aircraft to take a last-ditch shot at nearby targets before disengaging.

Would that help solve the problem?
Image

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!
mikmykWS
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:34 pm

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by mikmykWS »

ORIGINAL: Rongor

I don't feel upset, I am glad and appreciating the possibility to have the developers of this simulation being willing to read my opinion. I don't claim to know it better.

Back on track: well, I suppose everything needed is already implemented. I have no idea of coding but you guys successfully implemented the AI's ability to switch into defensive stance. So simply disallow switching to RTB (or any other stance) as long as the conditions normally leading to defensive stance are still present.


We were able to do that because there is a data driven way of determining what the AI should do

So what would be the logic behind turning around and shooting while on RTB bingo even though you will run out of fuel? How do we program the AI to understand this. Bingo is easy and measurable. What's the logic path of deciding to run of fuel (in 90% of cases a no no) and fight (which you might die anyways)? What if you're a tucano and the guy coming after you is a Fulcrum. Wouldn't the path be evade not fight? How do we evaluate for that? Should we add pride scores?[:)]

Do you know of a flight simulation that currently has this logic? Perhaps we could look there.

Thanks!

Mike
JPFisher55
Posts: 589
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2014 7:54 pm

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by JPFisher55 »

IMO, an aircraft that RTB's due to low fuel should do so at maximum (afterburner) speed until it must use cruise speed to reach home base. Thus, it will be less vulnerable if it has to exit a dogfight or an area with lots of SAM's.
mikmykWS
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:34 pm

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by mikmykWS »

ORIGINAL: Rongor

I don't feel upset, I am glad and appreciating the possibility to have the developers of this simulation being willing to read my opinion. I don't claim to know it better.

Back on track: well, I suppose everything needed is already implemented. I have no idea of coding but you guys successfully implemented the AI's ability to switch into defensive stance. So simply disallow switching to RTB (or any other stance) as long as the conditions normally leading to defensive stance are still present.

BTW. What's your name mean? When I see it I always think Wrongor for some reason[:)]
mikmykWS
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:34 pm

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by mikmykWS »

ORIGINAL: JPFisher55

IMO, an aircraft that RTB's due to low fuel should do so at maximum (afterburner) speed until it must use cruise speed to reach home base. Thus, it will be less vulnerable if it has to exit a dogfight or an area with lots of SAM's.

You understand the impact that would have on mission radius correct?

Mike
Rongor
Posts: 451
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:35 am
Contact:

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by Rongor »

Myk, probably I didn't make myself so clear. Your Tucano/Fulcrum example doesn't apply here. The decision to fight was already made here, Fulcrum and Tucano are already engaged into a "fight".

I was discussing the situation of getting into Bingo state while already being involved into a dogfight. I am talking of units already engaged in combat during which one of the units reaches Bingo. So they both already are in defensive or attacking stance by what ever logic you implemented there. Simply keep them in that stance, disregarding other aspects.

Currently your AI switches to suicide by forgetting about the nearby enemy to focus on cruising home. As you will know, Bingo doesn't exactly mean you run out of fuel within the next 10 or so minutes. While being in a dogfight, suddenly ignoring the opponent to focus on fuel sufficiency doesn't appear that smart to me. But again, that is only me.
mikmykWS
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:34 pm

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by mikmykWS »

ORIGINAL: Rongor

Myk, probably I didn't make myself so clear. Your Tucano/Fulcrum example doesn't apply here. The decision to fight was already made here, Fulcrum and Tucano are already engaged into a "fight".

I was discussing the situation of getting into Bingo state while already being involved into a dogfight. I am talking of units already engaged in combat during which one of the units reaches Bingo. So they both already are in defensive or attacking stance by what ever logic you implemented there. Simply keep them in that stance, disregarding other aspects.

Currently your AI switches to suicide by forgetting about the nearby enemy to focus on cruising home. As you will know, Bingo doesn't exactly mean you run out of fuel within the next 10 or so minutes. While being in a dogfight, suddenly ignoring the opponent to focus on fuel sufficiency doesn't appear that smart to me. But again, that is only me.


Do you have an example of another game. Even a tactical flight sim that actually does this?

Our ai doesn't switch to suicide because it doesn't know what suicide is. Its logic is data driven (I'm running out of fuel I go home). What I've asked you for is the logic of determining why it would stay in a fight? What could we could use to evaluate for a decision? It needs to apply to all cases. As I mentioned fight or RTB are not the only two choices. Evade is as well so this complicates this further.

I think what you're asking for is a decision driven by a human emotion (bravery, gut instinct) that computers have no measure of and people do make different decisions. I'm not sure expecting the computer AI to do what you want it to 100% of the time is reasonable. People don't[:)]

Mike
ComDev
Posts: 3116
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 1:20 pm
Contact:

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by ComDev »

Think the solution is to wait for Command v1.11 and try again [8D]
Image

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!
mikmykWS
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:34 pm

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by mikmykWS »

Agreed[:)]

Mike
Rongor
Posts: 451
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:35 am
Contact:

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by Rongor »

To answer your question, I had in mind that currently each combatant involved into defensive or offensive engagement stance, regularly returns to its former task when the combat is resolved. So I had thought there isn't any further logic required, as one could tell the AI to take the Bingo data into account only when not being within an engagement. So I thought it would be kind of simple to just attach the Bingo decision outside any engagement phase and forbid it inside combat phases. Despite that, you are absolutely right with that evade option. I am not sure I have yet noticed evasion out of an ongoing air combat in CMANO, I can imagine this being hard to model.

But ok, will wait then for 1.11[:)]

Thank you for your patience with my explanations. Since I am not a native English speaker, I can imagine my statements might not be as efficient as I would like to have them and so I probably frequently overcomplicate things quite a bit.
mikmykWS
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:34 pm

RE: bingo fuel while dogfighting first kills common sense, then the aircraf

Post by mikmykWS »

ORIGINAL: Rongor

To answer your question, I had in mind that currently each combatant involved into defensive or offensive engagement stance, regularly returns to its former task when the combat is resolved. So I had thought there isn't any further logic required, as one could tell the AI to take the Bingo data into account only when not being within an engagement. So I thought it would be kind of simple to just attach the Bingo decision outside any engagement phase and forbid it inside combat phases. Despite that, you are absolutely right with that evade option. I am not sure I have yet noticed evasion out of an ongoing air combat in CMANO, I can imagine this being hard to model.

But ok, will wait then for 1.11[:)]

Thank you for your patience with my explanations. Since I am not a native English speaker, I can imagine my statements might not be as efficient as I would like to have them and so I probably frequently overcomplicate things quite a bit.

No worries. Your English is fine.

if you have an example of a game that does it let us know. We'd like too see how it handles this logic

Tabled until after 11

Mike
Post Reply

Return to “Command: Modern Operations series”