Talk about that AI

@Minolin "Totally agree, although I'm never sure about the exact version. No placebo, it was fighty and fast like hell in one instance. 100% sure it was rejected for either (driving related) problems we aren't aware of, or that too many people had problems with a less cautious opponent."

that makes me wonder why we dont have the option to set the aggression level like in rf2 and other titles with the same code.

 

Glad to hear I'm not becoming insane! (Or we both are, hahah) I'm not 100% sure of exact version number where it was lost, but 1.7 introduced this AI fairly sure.

@Lord Kunos must have backup of this old code. I really wish it would be included into AC in small update, as just temporary .ini option. If there was .ini option like

OLD AWESOME AI THAT MIGHT HIT OBLIVIOUS DRIVERS = 0

I would instantly set it to "1" and be happy camper. Then if some other update comes much later, would be awesome, but if not.. all good. I would be more than happy with that AI we briefly had

 

My experience is that the BOT cars can be really aggressive with side by side hard racing, bumping and grinding, controlled late braking,...great fun, but have problems when in a tight group or as others have said, passing slow cars of a different type.

Therefor I don't think an "aggression slider" is the solution, just more fine tuning as has been happening since day one.

Like racing it self,...the last 10th is the hardest.

LATE4APEX

 

I caught something marty said in the previous page that I agree because it ruins immersion of racing other drivers (the AI drivers):

"Maybe at the higher level where its more a procession as our last league race at Monza in the 911 GT3 cup, qualifying back a bit I struggled over 32 laps to make too many moves. Mostly as pace was very close but then also the guys ahead were smart enough to defend well and take away the few opportunities. The current AI even if at the same pace will tend to give up positions more if you get alongside they rarely will hang on to the battle especially if they are outside. But a good real driver will make you work hard for every position, if you make the AI at this level however even if possible how would you tone them down."

 

True. And with less calculations it would be less demanding on CPU and you could add more AI-opponents too.

But don't get me wrong. I still like the AI like it is now but some optimizations would be welcome. And if those optimizations are too complicated to program, I would take the probably easier workaround with "cheating" AI-physics...
But hey, Stefano is the mastermind and I'm sure he will make us happy as he always did.

 

I quite like the AI as it is. It might be a little more agressive, and even a little bit faster, since even as an average driver, with a good setup and some practice I've been able to beat 100% AI some times (except at the Nordschleife where I had to tone them down to 90% just now). But I'm happy with it as it is.
About the AI not being simplified. I think something should be done about that. It would be better, in my opinion, to be able to drive against a 24 field of simplified AI, than having to race against only 10 to not make it look like a slideshow. And if that would make them easier to program, then it would be even better!

 

I can run 40+ AI on my 5 year old PC without it being any kind of slideshow, maybe it is time to upgrade your potato rather than asking for the software to be dumbed down.

 

Heavy on the bump and grind... doity doity Fords!

 

I have a 5 year old PC and I can't.

 

I'm well within the recommended hardware requirements and I can't race 23, let alone 40+ AI without eventually running into CPU bottleneck. I know I need to upgrade my CPU next for games that release nowadays and I don't blame the sim but you don't need a potato to not be able to play the sim with a full grid smoothly.

 

Also, I never said they "must" change the software. But if it brings benefits with no downsides, why not do it? And if there is a big downside, just disregard what I said.

 

Having unrealistic physics for AI is pretty big downside imo. Put in some rubber banding AI for good measure.. If Hornbuckle's i5 2500K can run 40 AI, I don't think hardware requirement is legit reason to dumb AI physics down. My FPS dives if I try to put full grid of AI, but I don't think its about AI but everything else that comes with 24-26 cars, because I use so high graphical settings and 3 screens. For multiplayer I drop some settings

 

I hate when AI Kick my *** in some chicanes like a train on railroad , its my only complain. I agree with people , its worse now , i already have very good races with AI in the past

 

I hardly ever race in AC, I always hotlap. Recently I've been playing RR3 on my phone in my work tea breaks at work so I thought I'd see how the AC AI performed in similar quick race type setups.

First I set a full grid of road performance cars at Mugello, sports cars not hyper cars, nothing too slow, 95%. With me starting at the back driving the 388 things were pretty good, the side by side train effect seems much less than it used to be and in 4 or 5 starts I didn't witness any first corner carnage. Contacts feel quite realistic now but pushing isn't rewarded as it is in most arcade driving games which I like. I did include a GT86 and I did notice faster cars being stuck behind it on occasion, I t's weird as they seem to attempt overtakes on cars with similar performance. Generally the AI seems to like Mugello though.

Next I tried Spa, similar setup, 24 fast road cars, 95%. Me driving the 488 from the back. First thing I noticed was that the AI really doesn't like Eau Rouge... Having them brake hard unexpectedly is almost frightening and it's hard to avoid running into them... Blanchimont is also a problem.

Overall for a quick race with road cars the AI works quite well, I'll be using quick race more often, just not Spa. Frustrations are the strange braking in faster corners which on some tracks is almost a deal breaker, overtaking much slower cars is still a problem. It's a shame as without those two issues we could be onto something quite special here.

 

I am currently working on my "career" and am driving in the Formula Abarth Championship (AT2). In this series you drive against 9 AI opponents all in the same auto, difficulty set at 93% by default. There are two AI competitors that always have the best performance. On some tracks I can easily win, on some tracks I have to work to win and on some tracks I can't win. On all the tracks my performance is at the top 1/3 to 1/4 on RSR so my performance on all the tracks is pretty much similar relative to other humans.

How can one explain the difference in AI performance from one track to another when using the same car and setup.

I believe that the "line" that AI uses on some tracks is better than it is on other tracks. I have noticed across a lot of AI races that AI is tough to beat on Imola. As mentioned above the AI has problems on Spa with Eau Rouge. Clearly a poor line in Eau Rouge makes it difficult to have a good time at Spa because the turn and following space are a significant amount of the total track.

Certainly the AI could be better but overall it is quite good and day in, and day out it gives me highly competitive races without the craziness I encounter when I go online.

 

By default the AI uses a range of difficulty even though you only see just one 93% number. It is designed this way so that not all AI drive at the same pace and make dreary races.

 

They're bad at some corners, any tracks that have that style of corner will be bad (used to be hairpins in general, still is corners with heavy elevation change) If a track's just a bunch of fairly separate constant radius flat corners, like Mugello, then they're fast.

 

I've actually found the Ai to not be very good at Mugello, specifically between turn 8 and 9 as they slow down far too much there. Have been doing the challenge races there on alien difficulty and find they are fairly easy to beat