[ASC-III] Air Superiority Challenge - King of the Hill (BDArmory 4v4 AI Duels: WW1 Theme) - Now Concluded!

[DoctorDavinci]

6 minutes ago, drtricky said:

 ..... I've observed it able to shoot down my own fighter, admittedly on some occasions.

And there is the reason it is useless to enter a fight with a turreted craft ... for the most part you're going to lose unless by fluke the AI gets the attack vector right

4 minutes ago, gag09 said:

We could force people to use certain pitch angles so they only fire in a cone in front of the craft.

Personally, I believe that if turrets are involved and they aren't locked forward then there's no point in entering a craft ... just my 2 cents on that subject

I'll try to find the post from BahamutoD about turrets and post it in this thread although that's a lot of searching

Edited April 9, 2016 by DoctorDavinci

[SuicidalInsanity]

On 4/5/2016 at 10:59 AM, inigma said:

3 - Reaction wheels will not be banned. I want to test the limits of BDArmory and Kerbalized aerial engagements. I literally want ASC to produce the toughest air targets in history for use in later GAP contracts (I have an ulterior motive to hosting the ASC). A gold standard development goal if you will. Therefore, no tactic is considered too cheaty. If it works, kudos. You deserve the crown until someone else can unseat you...you sneaky bast..er um... stand-up guy. If everyone agrees a specific King is just too tough or cheaty to defeat, we will reset the challenge but that that King will earn a place in the Hall of Fame as rules changes would probably only then be considered.

Keep in mind this contest isn't specifically about making fighter jets, although that's what most people have gone for. This tournament is about making the most difficult-to-kill, best area denial SoB weapon platform that can be designed and proven by the community via the crucible of gladiatorial combat. We have the freedom to enter anything: C-130 Spectre gunships, space frigates, jetboot mecha, armored flying doom fortresses. We have been given mandate and sanction to push the design paradigm here. All that matters is that they can fly. (And, presumably, that one has fun making an entry, however serious or silly, orthodox or unconventional it may be).

[drtricky]

33 minutes ago, DoctorDavinci said:

And there is the reason it is useless to enter a fight with a turreted craft ... for the most part you're going to lose unless by fluke the AI gets the attack vector right

As I've said, I've witnessed Redshift's fighter attack my aircraft, even though it was barely dodging gunfire. And I'm not talking just about head-on games of chicken, it was attacking at angles it was still vulnerable to Goalkeepers. So the issue is not necessarily the enemy AI being unable to attack because it is dodging gunfire (Truth be told, I'm not fully sure why Redshift's fighter does not fear my Goalkeepers, and I respect it immensely for that among its other design aspects), it is plain and simply that turrets can shoot at almost any angle.

And as I've said, kill range is not the issue either because the AI also maneuvers my fighter and makes the Goalkeepers surprisingly inaccurate. I could make my fighter maneuver less to increase the effective kill range of the Goalkeepers, but that would make it more vulnerable to longer-ranged missiles like AIM-120 AMRAAMs.

Edited April 9, 2016 by drtricky

[NotAnAimbot]

1 hour ago, ScriptKitt3h said:

Also, the Matadors are good jets, but still die all the same

Could you test the CRAS-3s against the Geminis? I had a confirmed kill on my PC, and would like to see what it does on yours. There's a small modification tho, just set the missile per target to 2.

[inigma]

11 hours ago, YargJay9991 said:

Sure, I'll give it a go soon. Probs tomorrow now though, been out all day.

something like this and these colors: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-311013611/stock-vector-blue-wing-logo-wing-logo-eagle-logo-freedom-blue-logo-auto-logo-vector-logo-template.html

[inigma]

1 hour ago, ScriptKitt3h said:

Nothing wrong with unconventional design, but turrets somewhat defeat the purpose of having a maneuverable fighter- especially when it allows a plane that would have lost otherwise to win.

I understand your concern. If a turret King becomes unbeatable without turreted craft, we will reset the series and consider a rules change. But I want to see what really happens in competition and what evolves as a result.  The point of ASC is to see what constitutes an OP Kerbalized BDA craft so BD can make improvements based on our feedback.

1 hour ago, ScriptKitt3h said:

We ARE doing planes- armed planes nonetheless, but still planes. If a plane's solely winning due to a target-tracking gun turret, and even the best other designs are dying as a result, than that is quite arguably overpowered.

For example, let's say there's two teams of 2 aircraft, evenly matched in terms of performance and armament- but one team's got a plane with a turret vulcan. The team with regular guns gets a BVR kill with their missiles on the first enemy plane, and then passes into gun range. They proceed to engage the turret-equipped enemy with their guns/missiles, but the turret shoots both down.

That's not quite a fair fight, now, is it?

We are doing aircraft. AKA flying weapons platforms, but flying and maneuvering nonetheless.   The idea is to find ways to defeat an opponent. If no one can defeat an opponent, we will consider a rules change (and the champion memorialized on the hall of fame).

[DoctorDavinci]

3 minutes ago, inigma said:

I understand your concern. If a turret King becomes unbeatable without turreted craft, we will reset the series and consider a rules change. But I want to see what really happens in competition and what evolves as a result.  The point of ASC is to see what constitutes an OP Kerbalized BDA craft so BD can make improvements based on our feedback.

The only thing going to be confirmed for BD is that turrets are very OP in regards to how they operate and cause planes to veer off their target vector because turrets can't be targeted properly by other craft ... that's even with the second craft having turrets themselves

[inigma]

1 hour ago, gag09 said:

I just don't want to fight bombers with around 20 goalkeepers. There should be limits I think.

The island runway limits the designs of aircraft to prevent large bombers.  And if one ever makes a vtol bomber, im not sure how the AI would handle that, or how well it'd be able to dodge missiles. I think turreted planes have their own sets of problems to overcome... maybe more so than conventional.

1 hour ago, DoctorDavinci said:

It was discovered and confirmed by BahamutoD in previous challenges that turret equipped craft essentially can't be targeted as the AI on the targeted craft will always try to dodge like it is being targeted by a missile .... Essentially making a turreted craft invincible

This is why I haven't bothered entering any new crafts as no matter what a craft with turrets is going to win (unless by fluke it gets hit ... which is unlikely)

Well... we will see.  thats the point of ASC. To prove or disprove these things. I say let's hold off until we see some actual recorded results and what players come up with to compensate.

[DoctorDavinci]

4 minutes ago, inigma said:

Well... we will see.  thats the point of ASC. To prove or disprove these things. I say let's hold off until we see some actual recorded results and what players come up with to compensate.

Already been confirmed in previous challenges and confirmed by BD himself ... This is just turning into a rehash of what has been done previously in regards to turrets

[drtricky]

1 hour ago, inigma said:

And if one ever makes a vtol bomber, im not sure how the AI would handle that, or how well it'd be able to dodge missiles.

Based on testing from suicidalinsanity's Zartron II, it will fly it like a conventional aircraft. Its AMRAAM-dodging ability is non-existent for various reasons, like its low forward velocity. I'm not sure how other VTOL planes with the capability to have a greater forward velocity would fare.

If I do become king, and my aircraft is able to defeat a lot of competitors because of its Goalkeepers, I am willing to step down from the hill voluntarily (assuming my plane does not lose due to aerodynamic failure), and re-submit it to conform to any possible rules against turrets that may form .

Edited April 9, 2016 by drtricky

[SuicidalInsanity]

In previous challenges contestants were retrained by contest rules and design orthodoxy.
We are not.
If a turret craft becomes King, I will be considerably surprised if the community doesn't come up with some creative and innovative craft to counter to it that, in any other tournament, we would be unable to field on the grounds of being considered heterodox or illegal designs.

[NotAnAimbot]

1 minute ago, SuicidalInsanity said:

doesn't come up with some creative and innovative craft to counter to it that

I had a gunfight competition with @Triop, and am still having one. He always came up with new tiny fighters. I just upgraded my existing ones (The current F-2 and XF-4) and kept beating him.

It's not that some of us can't come up with original things, it's that some of us don't want to go into full-blown Sci-fi. I'm fine with others doing it, but I'm still sticking to orthodox solutions for now.

[drtricky]

Just now, NotAnAimbot said:

It's not that some of us can't come up with original things, it's that some of us don't want to go into full-blown Sci-fi. I'm fine with others doing it, but I'm still sticking to orthodox solutions for now.

Hence why I don't do wing stacking or part clipping. I know I could have made my plane a lot smaller and less vulnerable that way, and I know some non-Goalkeeper aspects of my aircraft still wouldn't work in reality, but even I have standards.

[SuicidalInsanity]

I was thinking more along the lines of solutions like adding armor plating to fighter craft or giving them enough missiles to blot out the sun or using enough reaction wheels to make then hypermaneuverable that other tournaments frowned upon.

[jrodriguez]

New version of my X-Wing here X-Wing BD 1.3 .It has Vulcans(4) with limited pitch and yaw. If I remember the lasers of x-wing can't turn 360 lol. Also @NotAnAimbot I just did a test against your planes..uploading video right now

Edited April 9, 2016 by jrodriguez

[Kokanee]

CF-86 "SNOOPY" Turreted Fighter

https://www.mediafire.com/?nt5u8hd4mjy3jzv

[gag09]

Adding a second fighter so i won't have 2 wyverns. https://www.dropbox.com/s/qvgjahsfdyuuxqn/Swift.craft?dl=0 Designed to fully exploit all of the stuff usually banned in other competitions, 

This is also based of the plane that originated my signature.

Edited April 9, 2016 by gag09

[drtricky]

22 minutes ago, gag09 said:

Adding a second fighter so i won't have 2 wyverns. https://www.dropbox.com/s/qvgjahsfdyuuxqn/Swift.craft?dl=0 Designed to fully exploit all of the stuff usually banned in other competitions, 

EDIT: you may want to add missiles to your craft.

Edited April 9, 2016 by drtricky

[NotAnAimbot]

New plane

[jrodriguez]

@NotAnAimbot this is for you! Quick one...

 

[drtricky]

4 minutes ago, NotAnAimbot said:

*picture of my fighter destroyed*

Lemme guess, an AMRAAM took it out?

[NotAnAimbot]

2 minutes ago, drtricky said:

Lemme guess, an AMRAAM took it out?

How did you guess?

8 minutes ago, jrodriguez said:

this is for you! Quick one...

Damn, didn't know the old fighters were that bad. Might wanna test the X-wing against the new plane tho, if you want.

Just did a test flight. My idiotic plane fired an AIM-120, it hit an AIM-9 near it and the plane exploded.

I love this game.

[inigma]

1 hour ago, Kokanee said:

CF-86 "SNOOPY" Turreted Fighter

https://www.mediafire.com/?nt5u8hd4mjy3jzv

Added to your roster. I'm thinking one active challenge entry per person. Not fair to watch a match against your own planes.   Do you want me to make this your current entry then?

37 minutes ago, NotAnAimbot said:

New plane

replacement, second plane, or second entry? second entries not permitted yet. I should probably add that to the OP. no fun to watch a self-challenge.

[NotAnAimbot]

36 minutes ago, inigma said:

replacement, second plane, or second entry?

I'm replacing both the XF-4 and the vanilla Sea Predator with the new version. Might wanna delete the old entry in the OP too @inigma

Edited April 9, 2016 by NotAnAimbot

[inigma]

All craft updated on OP. If your entry is incorrect, please simply post back what you want your entry to look like on the OP. Mediafire links are not working per forum rules. Suggest using alternate links.

1 hour ago, jrodriguez said:

@NotAnAimbot this is for you! Quick one...

 

Nice job! Good test on setting things up. Try an island matchup test, and dont forget to cycle to at least every plane once during pre-game flight and at least once during battle.

 

My current videography is to try to video the battle mostly from the challenger first, then next round the loser of the previous, and then in third round the loser in the second round.  I try to follow at least one missile shot using the ] and [ keys to switch to it, and if any plane is being chased, I generally like to film it from the targeted plane's perspective since Camera Tools will immediate switch to chaser (usually) after the kill. I can't wait for transparent cockpits in 1.1 to see the doomed Kerbal's faces in their final moments. It will add to the drama.