Jump to content


Photo

AI Gunners in Bombers


20 replies to this topic

#1 whippingboy

whippingboy

    Corporal

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 58
  • 0 Thanks

Posted 23 June 2013 - 10:58 PM

I now understand everybody's complaints regarding the AI Gunners, I was flying an A-20G and found my gunners did a really good job, what seems to be everybody else's problem, then I got a B-25J and found out the hard way, I get bounced from astern and within seconds am going down in flames, after the 4th time this happened I switched to the external view, and what a surprise, my dorsal gunner is blazing away but my tail gunner appears to be sleeping, checked this through several events and, yup, my tail gunner doesn't actually fire at anything. That plus the fact that the B-25 seems to be very fragile with a pathetic bombload means its back to the good old, and well defended, A-20G. Note :- my A-20 dorsal gunner has accounted for 9 fighters so far, I wish I was that good. 


  • 1

#2 Talyllyn

Talyllyn

    Pilot officer

  • Ground Forces Tester
  • PipPipPip
  • 676
  • 2 Thanks

Posted 23 June 2013 - 11:02 PM

G5N is an excellent example. Its terrible. Gunners are broken as hell. Tail gunner never fires, and when it does, always misses. Hell, if anything the ONLY working gunner is the 20mm on top of the thing..


  • 0

#3 long5hot

long5hot

    Air Forces Tester

  • Ground Forces Tester
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,484
  • 180 Thanks

Posted 24 June 2013 - 01:35 AM

Maybe add your observations to the bug report? http://forum.warthun...ting-is-bugged/
  • 0

#4 long5hot

long5hot

    Air Forces Tester

  • Ground Forces Tester
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,484
  • 180 Thanks

Posted 24 June 2013 - 07:04 AM

... and here's a very clear example of how bad AI gunnery now is.



I wonder what's next in the list of Gaijin bomber nerfs?
  • 0

#5 Gookster

Gookster

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 66
  • 0 Thanks

Posted 24 June 2013 - 10:10 AM

I have noted in a couple of other threads turrets are broken, but will keep plugging away:

 

1) Not all turrets fire at the same rate, many refuse to fire, the order from best to worst seems to be, dorsal, ventral,beam,rear nose. The nose exception is twin gunned nose turrets for some reason the are fine, my ace He111 nose turret has never fired.

 

2) No more than 3 turrets will ever fire even if you have 6 and they are all in arc and range.

 

3) You need to get an expert crew on each turret if you have more than one or suffer massive turret penalties, which if you have 6 turrets is a LOT of dosh.

 

4) reload times are stupidly long, a hubmounted 37mm cannon firing through engine and propeller 30 seconds a 7.7mm magazine fed turret 1 minute

 

5) Multiple bogey situations confuse the poor AI coding and the turrets splutter and then give up until you are hit.

 

6) One unconscious gunner tends to mean they all are.

 

7) They are just not accurate enough considering you can be one shotted from 1km away by some cannon jock.

 

8) Turrets are slow moving both to react and track (see above screenie)

 

All these issues need to be addressed but as yet I have seen nothing from Gaijin, and WoWP is coming...........................


  • 4

#6 El_Barto

El_Barto

    Aircraftman

  • Ground Forces Tester
  • Pip
  • 15
  • 0 Thanks

Posted 24 June 2013 - 10:41 AM

+1 to gookster

 

We have sniper destroyers and aaa who can kill you in 3 km distance but your gunners did not hit a plane sitting behind you in 100 m....


  • 1

#7 aussiejeff

aussiejeff

    Flight lieutenant

  • Flight Model Designer
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 915
  • 6 Thanks

Posted 24 June 2013 - 11:00 AM

... and here's a very clear example of how bad AI gunnery now is.



I wonder what's next in the list of Gaijin bomber nerfs?

Ha! I identified the problem. That poor gunner was trying to shoot all the lousy Barabashkas littered all over the map doing their best to ruin the game...give him a medal for effort. So brave.....well done Devs for trying to solve the Gremlins problem with this unique method....   :salute:  


  • 1

#8 PugsleyAddams

PugsleyAddams

    Aircraftman

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 17
  • 0 Thanks

Posted 24 June 2013 - 02:19 PM

AI Gunners for me are crap, yes there is a good moment sometimes being 1/100 but the rest is BS. All my gunners have 100%+++++ experience, in some cases I have more gunners than actually required for the plane. All they seem to be doing is drinking at the back of the plane and forgetting they have a job to do. Having planes with 1,2,4 and 5 turrets, they are all just sipping on the vodka and my bombers get owned in 5 seconds flat from take off.

 

Fix it please, I spent lots of $$$ to make sure the gunners were 100% skilled from the start - otherwise please refund my money!!

Attached Thumbnails

  • shot 2013.06.24 20.48.10.jpg

  • 0

#9 Jonotallica

Jonotallica

    Guitar Fiend

  • Ground Forces Tester
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,438
  • 6 Thanks

Posted 25 June 2013 - 12:19 AM

Yeah that's the point.  You expect them to be bad when they have low crew points.  That should be why you need to use crew xp in the first place.  And with bombers that have 4 or 5 gunners, it isn't cheap.

 

And then.. to do that and then not notice much difference.. very bad for morale.  Once they reach the level that is in that screenshot, you would expect them to perform at a certain level to justify the price or time it takes to get that far.

 

You don't want them to be godlike.. and you don't expect them to be one shotting people, but you do expect them to be able to defend the plane somewhat.. and to discourage bad pilots from being able to park on your tail.  And to get hits.. and to get the occasional critical or kill, if the pilots are flying in a straight line and being an easy target.


  • 6

7ojj.jpg      bhyx.jpg


#10 aussiejeff

aussiejeff

    Flight lieutenant

  • Flight Model Designer
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 915
  • 6 Thanks

Posted 25 June 2013 - 01:07 AM

Yeah that's the point.  You expect them to be bad when they have low crew points.  That should be why you need to use crew xp in the first place.  And with bombers that have 4 or 5 gunners, it isn't cheap.

 

And then.. to do that and then not notice much difference.. very bad for morale.  Once they reach the level that is in that screenshot, you would expect them to perform at a certain level to justify the price or time it takes to get that far.

 

You don't want them to be godlike.. and you don't expect them to be one shotting people, but you do expect them to be able to defend the plane somewhat.. and to discourage bad pilots from being able to park on your tail.  And to get hits.. and to get the occasional critical or kill, if the pilots are flying in a straight line and being an easy target.

Especially this when you have thrown thousands of Lions into upgrading gunner skills to Max. The in-game difference between gunners aim and accuracy with zero training compared to Ace Maxed gunners is way too small

 

To add to your list of things that Ace Maxed gunners should be able to do a whole lot better than novice greenhorns can is the issue of gunner reload times, which I find is currently one of the most frustratingly annoying features of bomber piloting.

 

The reload times for Ace Maxed gunners should be substantially better than novices. For better game balance in Arcade I'd suggest no more than about 10 secs max to reload bomber turret guns. Tail gunner reload time is so bad that a lot of fighter jocks aware of this will just sit back at max range and ping away until the fireworks display from the tail gunner ends, then dawdle closer knowing they have got a full 20-30secs free time to knock you down without any danger at all. Reducing the reload time substantially will force fighters to slash/retreat a lot more than they do now.

 

The other issue I'd like to add is we need gunner ammo status on-screen readouts. In real life a gunner can call out if he is getting low on ammo so the pilot might alter his flying style to suit (ie more evasive or head back to base BEFORE running out while being attacked!) Currently, the only clue to gunner ammo status is that dreaded high pitched "ka-ching" sound when one has run out! Then you die.  


  • 0

#11 BR3Z

BR3Z

    Flying officer

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 810
  • 1 Thanks

Posted 25 June 2013 - 01:21 AM

Stop hiring partially blind gunners and putting in the read position!

 

 

Problem Solved.

 

 

 

LOL

 

 

 

Seriously.. That's bogus.. Hope they fix it


  • 1

#12 Drone42077

Drone42077

    Warrant officer

  • Ground Forces Tester
  • PipPip
  • 267
  • 0 Thanks

Posted 25 June 2013 - 03:09 AM

Yeah that's the point.  You expect them to be bad when they have low crew points.  That should be why you need to use crew xp in the first place.  And with bombers that have 4 or 5 gunners, it isn't cheap.

 

And then.. to do that and then not notice much difference.. very bad for morale.  Once they reach the level that is in that screenshot, you would expect them to perform at a certain level to justify the price or time it takes to get that far.

 

You don't want them to be godlike.. and you don't expect them to be one shotting people, but you do expect them to be able to defend the plane somewhat.. and to discourage bad pilots from being able to park on your tail.  And to get hits.. and to get the occasional critical or kill, if the pilots are flying in a straight line and being an easy target.

 

I have a suite of aced maxed out gunners - and they couldn't hit the ground if they fell out of the back of the plane.

 

I can only assume that unimproved gunners shoot the tail off their own plane then take out their service revolver and shoot the pilot before turning the gun on themselves - it's the only way gunners could be worse.

 

I have wasted my money. I won't do it again.


  • 4

#13 GET_LIBERATED

GET_LIBERATED

    B-24D Liberator

  • Ground Forces Tester
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,620
  • 102 Thanks

Posted 25 June 2013 - 04:27 AM

It's even better with the B-17. All of those .50 cals manned by complete xxxx all shooting the air in various directions.


  • 0

8t82.png8bog.pngTaREARt.png 6OhiW8R.png  REMOVE_TICKET_BLEED_FROM_THE_GAME

 


#14 Luftwaffe_1940

Luftwaffe_1940

    Warrant officer

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 163
  • 1 Thanks

Posted 25 June 2013 - 04:56 AM

... and here's a very clear example of how bad AI gunnery now is.



I wonder what's next in the list of Gaijin bomber nerfs?

 

so you expect a BOT to do the job for you?


  • 0

WT_sig90_zps52f4558a.jpgm8w2x6Y.jpg


#15 aussiejeff

aussiejeff

    Flight lieutenant

  • Flight Model Designer
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 915
  • 6 Thanks

Posted 25 June 2013 - 06:45 AM

so you expect a BOT to do the job for you?

AAA AI does a marvellous job. What's the problem with expecting some of that skill when they sit their bums in an a/c?  :dntknw:


  • 0

#16 Jonotallica

Jonotallica

    Guitar Fiend

  • Ground Forces Tester
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,438
  • 6 Thanks

Posted 25 June 2013 - 07:02 AM

There's a difference between being shot by a Destroyer from 3 km away.. and being shot by AI gunners, where the pilot can't possibly man them and fire them all at once.


  • 0

7ojj.jpg      bhyx.jpg


#17 Gookster

Gookster

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 66
  • 0 Thanks

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:37 AM

Gunners do need to be effective, there are after all enough blind spots on most bombers.

 

Remember in a bomber each gunner is supposed to be a dedicated person who has nothing else to do (in combat), other than scan the sky and fire. If you shift to gunner control, that means dorsal, (no other positions are available), and the auto pilot flies you straight and level (as autopilots do), making you an even easier target.

 

The difference between ace gunners maxed out and novice gunners is small because of all the other turret deficiencies. On a T6 K49 you can easily spend 500 eagles per turret and still not notice an appreciable difference for all the hard earned dosh you put in. Gaijin ought to note that if paying customers are disatisfied, then they should amend the product accordingly, any business can get customers/clients for free, keeping the payers keeps the business going.


  • 2

#18 Fugenchutenz

Fugenchutenz

    Recruit

  • Members
  • 6
  • 0 Thanks

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:04 AM

Agreed.  I just spent tens of thousands of eagles on my german and american crews and the bomber crews are the most expensive as not only do you need all the pilot and ground crew skills because they're still just as important, but you also need the gunner crews and gunners are THE most expensive in the crew skills list.  For all that, I found my gunners didn't do a lick better.  I might as well have just made them fighter crews and stuck with them since they're cheaper to skill up, and kills in fighters pull more in rewards than bombing does.


  • 4

#19 long5hot

long5hot

    Air Forces Tester

  • Ground Forces Tester
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,484
  • 180 Thanks

Posted 25 June 2013 - 11:49 AM

 

do you expect a BOT to do the job for you?


Looks like maybe you expect a BOT to write your posts for you. He needs updating, as his answers are just as accurate and relevant as 1.31 Bomber AI shooting :)

No-one in this thread, including me, has suggested that we want BOTs doing the job for us. No more than fighter jocks want laser-accurate mouse aim with a cheat lead indicator and auto-reload giving them endless ammo ... oh wait...

Bomber AI gunners were NEVER this bad. This is a recent bug, people aren't asking for an enhancement here, just a return to their prior accuracy levels. If you think that random shooting at the sky & ignoring the fighter on the bomber's tail is acceptable, maybe there shouldn't be AI gunners at all. Perhaps bombers should just crumple at the first 7.62mm hit & make it _really_ easy for the fighters.


  • 5

#20 flak_bait

flak_bait

    Warrant officer

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 159
  • 0 Thanks

Posted 25 June 2013 - 04:27 PM

Is the dorsal turret gunner the only effective one?, I have noticed with the B-25 that only the dorsal turret seems to fire back at attacking fighters.
  • 0



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users