Dangerzone

Wasn't there supposed to be some sort of official scoreboard coming to DCS's supercarrier for the supercarrier that was going to have a greenie board or similar? While the lack of response and acknowledgement on this is blatant, I'm holding on hope that maybe this will get a look-in if/when that board gets closer to completion.

Fully agree. Actually - I love the idea of EA. The ability to get feedback from the community as the module is being developed would in my way of thinking be quite an asset for the developers. I understand bugs with EA as well, and have no problems with that. It's a privilege to have access during the development phase before something is complete. (Although at times can be painful too ). The time for EA being developed I think is well known too. While I would always like things done a bit quicker - I'd much prefer to have EA as it is, as opposed to no EA at all. That aside, I'm looking forward to the day when we have more stability with the non-EA stuff. With the core, AI, ground units, events, API/scripting, etc. Stability so mission designers, app dev's, server operators, and scripters can rely on DCS being stable enough from release to release for the non-EA stuff, and when bugs are introduced that they get prioritized so that we can have continued success with the content generation side of things. The end of this year has finished good in regards to the amount of bugs being addressed, and I'm hoping as we get further down the track now that MT/ST dual builds are a thing of the past, and we get closer to the newer technology that we'll see more fixes in the year to come.

Going from past dates we have releases... 2021 and Beyond - 2020-12-18 2022 and Beyond - 2021-12-24 2023 and Beyond - 2023-01-04 2024 and Beyond - 2024-01-05 So we could either have a week to know... or up to a month before we find out. Will be interesting though to see what they have.

https://dcs-briefingroom.azurewebsites.net/

I bet that’s only part of the story though… my guess. You didn’t fly straight home. You went via the pub, stayed out too late with the boys and by the time you got back the door was shut and locked, and there’s probably an angry misses you’ll be dealing with in the morning when she wakes up.

Napalm?

Oh - so to confirm - your problem was with just the plane moving, as opposed to the directors then when it came to not being able to taxi out?

I agree with the lack of communication, but I get the feeling it wouldn't be in ED's best interest to provide a public listing of just how many known bugs there are outstanding, how long it takes for them to rectify their bugs, or how long many of the still currently outstanding ones have remained outstanding for, so I wouldn't be too optimistic about a master list made available to us.

I can confirm core parking was a major player in my instance as well. Definitely one to be on the first list of things to check/disable. Additionally - I have found it turned on automatically again at times. Not sure if a windows update does this or not - but worth keeping in mind if the stutters ever return.

Oooh - this is very interesting! Thanks heaps for sharing if this workaround works. Did cycling the parking brake and puping the breaks cause the directors to 'wake up' for you?

Not sure if you're aware, but you've double-posted this twice... https://forum.dcs.world/topic/365713-super-carrier-deck-crew-incompatible-with-large-group-deck-ops/ Which aircraft are you using? FA18's, or F14's? F14's I've heard you can try removing the wheel chocks, and then taxi forward a little, and then the deckcrew may wake up. Also, were you using dynamic or static client slots? Do you also have AI aircraft? If so - disabling them may help, as from some stuff I've experienced, I think they can get in the way. (Even if they're not on the ship - if they're linked to the ship for landing later, etc). FA18's though are totally screwed when this happens, as there's no way to remove the wheelchocks, so disabling might be the way to go until DCS resolve the bugs with them, and it's been tested by the public for a while and proven stable. Are you able to confirm if you were able to disable them completely? I've heard other people trying but the deck crew was still showing up? I haven't tried this myself. We have only ran one MP session in the last week as a test.

Interesting. I've found the opposite. I've had to twist my head in all sorts of directions to try and get the 'best' lines to see clearly - as looking directly at it creates some of the worst instances. I'm guessing it's going to be related to a combination of upscaling, initial resolution, HMD device, and a bunch of other settings as to how it can differ from user to user.

I don't see the same contrast. From my observation, there's lack throughout all products - not just the base product. Many paid modules still in EA. Those that aren't are still missing some very much sought after features (still waiting on DTC for instance). Bugs introduced into paid maps years ago still remain unaddressed (Persia with the floating line for example). And in saying that, I also need to credit ED - as a lot of work has been put in this year on the core product. Multithreading, DLSS, Fog, VOIP, and we even a drag and select in the mission editor now. So from my view, the gaps in DCS don't seem to be in any one area - the strengths and weaknesses seems to be more or less consistent throughout both the core and paid modules. I'm quite willing though to concede that my perception might be limited and I'm wrong - and lack of income is eroding the base product - and if so - I'd be more than happy to pay for upgrades like other software for a perpetual license, even if it costs me more over that time than a subscription. I just wouldn't want a path where people lose access to what they already have if they go through some tough financial hardship. While we're all disagreeing here in this thread - I think the one thing we all agree on is that our passion even though we disagree on this matter is for the same outcome. To see DCS thrive, and move 'onwards and upwards '. It's the passion I see in the community that I find encouraging, even if we disagree on the best way forward. But likewise, the discouragement I see when bugs aren't addressed and lack of understanding from ED that gives me greater concern than any income concern I have. What good will more income do if the core attitude doesn't shift to start with? And I think this is where I conclude on the matter: I would summise that ED's success or failure I will stem more from the decisions they make in this area, more than the financial (given that they are apparently financially stable). The more recent discouragement I've observed with moders and designers - especially within the MP community (particular server admin's, mission designers, scripters, etc) and no perceived change of direction from ED with their approach is likely to affect DCS's future far more than even if DCS was able to double their income. But then again, I'm also told that MP is a very small part of the userbase, so again my concerns are filtered through the lens of a portion of the community that may not matter as much to the success of DCS, even though I suspect otherwise.

We don't even have to go that far... ED have stated that their finance position is strong. How would 'making even more money' that ED doesn't need make any difference, except maybe add to Nick's collection of aircraft? Not only isn't it beneficial to customers, it's not beneficial to ED's development either. Sure - if ED were in financial trouble then it might be worth considering how ED could gain extra finance, but ED has stated numerous times there is no financial issue, so it's absolutely pointless to talk about subscription models to make more money for ED to create a solution that's not going to address the perceived problems people are trying to address to start with. These discussions seem to come from a perspective that the lack of development in certain areas is because of financial hardship, and ignore all the things that ED reps have said over the past few years as to why development is slow - and not once has it been finance.

How much time, and email back and forth did you have to do, just to get to that part? Did they come back quickly, or did you have to 'fight' to even get through to someone who was willing to offer a solution?

This has been brought up numerous times, and ED have made it clear that they will not be switching to a subscription model. They've also made it clear that finance isn't an issue for them at the moment - and they have plenty - so the issue with "where is the DCE?" (which is where you created this thread from) is not financial, so this wouldn't help to see DCE any quicker. Subscription would be the end of DCS for me. I love DCS, but I'm not going there. I quit Adobe when they went subscription (even though subscription was cheaper for me than buying every major upgrade that came out), and switched away to other products. (Never regretted it either - it forced me to find Davinci Resolve for video editing, which I absolutely love!). I know I'm not alone, and others have made it clear that if ED did - they'd be gone too. (Wouldn't surprise me if a ED Rep says this again, and locks this topic shortly ) I don't mind paying extra for new features. If DCE was a paid addon, like combined arms, I'd be fine with that too. I wouldn't even mind paying once-off's for major updates (such as DCS 3.0 being released), like <redacted> other simulators - although I know that ED's business structure is different to this and I respect that too. Subscriptions just encourage companies to get lazy and lose incentive to develop as much - especially when there is no competition. It also disadvantages those who only play occasionally - and at the moment, I'm seeing within our group the average hours per week/month of DCS drop significantly, so a subscription would definitely be a bad move there. I honestly think that subscription would destroy DCS - not make it better, and I suspect ED know this too. Don't get me wrong - I believe there are some serious hurdles to overcome with the development of DCS - but it sounds like finance isn't one.

Agreed. Going from past experience - if it's not in now... we probably have a 2 yearstm. wait on our hands - and that is if our request is listened to. There seems to be a trend that once a feature is released, only pressing bugs are considered. Don't expect any future enhancements / changes for a significant period of time. It'll be filed away under WIP. At least with this option we still have the ability to disable it and go back to the previous option. Hopefully they won't remove that feature prematurely like they did with the spotting dots.

Thanks for the clarification. That makes more sense. Here I was assuming the lack of API was only affecting us 'external' scripters/coders/modders...

And here I still use OvGME, because if it ain't broke... I don't wanna fix it.

Was this on SP or MP? Did you have any other AI aircraft that are in the sky at the time?

ED may be reluctant to update the manual yet as they may not even know themselves - especially if fog is a WIP, as parameters might change with each update/patch moving forward. Probably better asking for ED to throw us a bone here, or otherwise for the community to figure it out and share info here.

IDK if Polychop frequent these forums, but it's PC, not ED that would be doing the fix I would imagine, so might be better to look them up on their discord. (Being a 3rd party dev - they may also be more interested in resolving it in a more timely manner if they're aware of how bad it is)?

Aah - that explains the 40 years in the wilderness. And it may be the first recorded instance in history of men refusing to stop and ask for directions. So we've got maps for modern warfare. Cold warfare era, WW2 era... and now 2000BC era? Does this mean the 'Chariots and horses' asset pack is near completion?

I don't think that's necessarily being pessimistic - just managing expectations. One thing I've mentioned here that has helped my frustration levels is that I've had to lower my expectations of DCS in order to maintain a healthy mindset, and decide if I want to use DCS for what it currently is now. In my minds eye I know what DCS could be... but it's not... so I need to live in reality of the here and now. There's a youtube video going around at the moment that I think shares this concept - of DCS being a digital museum, but it's been used for more than intended which creates problems. I think there's some merit to that mindset. We also need to consider that we no longer have a stable release (just a continued Open Beta). Playing semantics may word the other way around, but I think it's pretty obvious that the community is being used for beta testing now with DCS, and as such I think DCE is a long way off. It's getting harder to maintain existing missions as being workable as more things are bugged out (especially for scripting with events, etc) that are not being addressed. Seeing Enigma wear out, RJ give up, the change in CFRAG's enthusiasm here (as well as the change in enthusiasm with other dev's and mission designers I converse with) to name a few, I can only imagine what ED Dev's are going through behind the scenes trying to develop a far more complicated DCE system on the platform in it's current state. My guess (hope) is that the dual development between DirectX11 and Vulkan is creating a lot of these bugs, and that with Vulkan we will see these bugs resolved. If correct, then I don't expect to see the DCE until well after these scripting bugs have been fixed, and Vulkan is released. (IIRC - it was mentioned that Vulkan needs to come first anyway, so that gives that thought some possibility)? If so - I think you are managing your expectations, as opposed to being pessimistic, as we could well be talking another 4-5 years away at a guess, as Vulkan needs to be released first, and then the bugs ironed out. As above, I suggest manage your expectations. Even if it was released now - there's no guarantee that it will be usable outside open beta testing for some time. Expectations of ED as to what a DCE should entail could be completely different to ours. It could also be released in Early Access, and contain numerous bugs that make it unworkable for what you're looking for. As an example - consider the supercarrier. The Airboss (which half a year on still isn't usable in VR). Or the recent release of the plane directors and the complications that various bugs are causing that may take quite some time to get reseolved. Or take Dynamic Spawns for an example. My expectations were that this would allow us to have a more dynamic experience where we could setup FOB/FARP's as new spawn points in game at realtime, and that the game would be more dynamic according to how the players did things. Reality was that ED have decided not to include that as an option (I can only assume intentional given that I found a very easy way to 'hack' this with a couple of variables in a .lua file but it's denied and hasn't been addressed since) - so our expectations and ED's plans can and often are very different at times. The general pattern seems to be to release something to the public in an Open Beta state - and then take a long time to work and iron out the kinks. And while I don't like this approach - I have to acknowledge that I've purchased numerous modules in "Early Access" - so I can either get frusturated, or change my expectations. I'm not expecting a smooth day one experience with the DCE, but rather it being released to the public for open beta testing, and like other modules and functions not containing all the functionality we're expecting, and also taking no small time to get those bugs resolved. This isn't to say that the DCE won't be good. Just to say that like the waiting for release, we need to keep our expectations in check by observing ED's current development cycle and maintain our expectations accordingly to avoid disappointment. DCS is a game best played focusing on enjoying what we have now - not looking forward to something that may be many years away. There's an old proverb "Hope deferred makes the heart sick". The best thing I believe is to enjoy what we have in front of us, and allow ourselves to be pleasantly surprised if we see releases of things we long for - without holding and waiting on to them so tightly that it causes us to start resenting DCS. After all, DCS is an incredible game, and unique - nothing comes close to it. It can be easy to take for granted what we have (which is pretty incredible), due to our disappointments with our own level of expectations.

Does anyone know if this has been acknowledged by ED as a bug and there's intentions to fix - or whether there's been official response that this is 'correct as is', and the Airboss station is only going to be supported for 2D?