Polychop Simulations

Hi VampireNZ, It would be great if you could supply me with a trackfile without mods. Would be very interested to see if we can replicate this behaviour.

We'll be looking at optimizing the multicrew feature. It's on our list. If there is anything we can do on our side to make it work more smoothly, we will certainly try.

Good question, the multicrew functionality is personally one of my favorite features. We have found out that latency is a very big factor in the way it works now. The fact that you share the very same buttons and switches between the WSO and the pilot is something that isn’t handled very well at the moment. Truth be told we hope ED will some day come up with a solution for multicrew on the Mi-8 and Huey as they face the same problems. That’s not to say we won’t be looking in to optimizations on our side. We’ve got different reports, for some people it works rather well, for others it does not. It all comes down to the latency or ping. Thanks for your kind words on the situation report but yours truly is in fact Dutch ;)

We think we have found the source of this problem and are working hard to rewrite the needed code to fix this it.

Hi FoxAlfa, In the latest internal build we have added smoke to the Mistral and changed the missile behaviour drastically. We hope to bring this to you in an update as soon as possible.

As requested, you'll now find a locked sticky thread where we will keep you informed on our progress right here.

Dear community, As part of our effort to keep the community informed about the progress, this thread will provide you with a periodical status report on the development of the Gazelle in 2019 and onward. Although this thread will be locked and only Polychop developers will be able to update it, we’d like to stand by our earlier statement that we will try our best to be more receptive to your suggestions and feedback. A dedicated community coordinator has been assigned to streamline communication between the community and Polychop and to make sure the items discussed on these forums will reach the development team. SITREP 09-30-2019 It has been a week since we have decided to change our business strategy to developing the Gazelle in parallel with the new unannounced module. A new programmer has been assigned to work solely on the Gazelle. The new programmer has been set up with the SDK and has been working hard on getting the first bugfixes out and incorporate some features requested by the community. Setting up the SDK was completed on 09-28-2019. It will take some time for him to have a complete understanding of the complex SDK environment but the first results are there already and will be implemented into the public builds after they have been tried and tested. The past two days have been spent on the following fixes and changes: RWR The RWR has been updated to incorporate 3rd party modules and show the correct symbology for them. Furthermore, as requested by the community, the RWR symbology for the Su-27, Mig-29, Su-33 and J-11 has been changed to show up on the RWR scope as a 29 symbol. Sounds Thorough inspection of the source code has revealed that an API (Application Programming Interface) in the DCS World engine has become redundant and has been replaced with a new version, incompatible with the way sound events are coded for the Gazelle. With the source of the sound problems now discovered, work has begun on rewriting the sound code. In the end this will solve the missing sounds such as the mistral tone, RWR, fuel pump and many more. Mistral missile The mistral missile has long been an item of discussion. A community member has supplied us with an altered version of its Lua configuration. This configuration will serve as a base for future adjustments of the mistral missile performance as this configuration seems to be a configuration most people agree on. A first version will be implemented soon and includes amongst other changes, the removal of an apparent “ghost stage” and the addition of a smoketrail. Keybinds Work has begun on adding and correcting a number of keybinds as requested. This process will continue over the next few weeks. Magnetic brake and trim keys have been fixed and keybinds for the flare dispenser system have been added so far. The changelogs that will accompany the updates to the public versions will go over this in more detail. PBR textures Work on a complete PBR texture overhaul has been ongoing. We hope to show you some of the progress in one of the next reports. RWR symbology:

Hi 33-DFTC, Good idea, we'll arrange a locked sticky with the admins of this board.

Haha good to know! I have put it on the list to look in to. But with the list getting quite long as it is, I have to be honest interaction of the line with the powerlines won't have the highest priority on this list. We will look in to extending the range of the missile as you move closer to your target though.

No, this has been both a design choice and technical limitation. As you might know the powerlines in DCS, and I could be wrong here (I still avoid them when flying in DCS), have no collision shell at all. There can be no interaction between the powerlines and another object in DCS. Even so, calculating the movements of a 3d modelled wire in real time over the maximum range of the HOT missile at it's maximum speed would have quite an impact on performance.

You'll also notice the fact that certain actions from your side as the pilot or WSO will cut the wire. Switching to another weapon station while the missile is in flight for example.

Hi Redglyph, We've essentially doubled our personnel and created two teams who work on 2 projects independent from eachother. As for your grammar tip, I appreciate it. Keep in mind though none of us are native English speakers and what matters is that the message came across. Even more important, we understood the message from the community.

The wires aren't visibly modelled as in there is no 3d wire you can see. The max range of the wires is modelled codewise though.

Hey Devrim, Shoot me a private message or point me to a thread which specifies exactly what cockpit commands you are missing and like to have implemented. We can add it to the list that way.

Dear community, One of the many requests we’ve received is to be more transparent and keep you updated on what we’re working on. A valid request and this will be the first step in achieving exactly that. We’ll try to give you an insight of what is going on by posting sitreps like these at a frequent rate. This one will be rather short because it has only been three days since we’ve changed the company strategy in developing both the new yet unannounced module and the Gazelle in parallel. Code The past few days we’ve been setting up the new programmer who will be working solely on the Gazelle. This involves transferring data to him, getting him access to the encrypted files, setting up the SDK and authorizing him for access to the trunk build. The latter will give him the ability to start sending updates to be implemented in the public builds. The next few days will be spent on learning him the tricks of the trade. Art On the art front, work on a full PBR update has been started earlier but has now picked up momentum due to the mentioned shift in priorities. The plan is to do a complete makeover of the internal (cockpit) and external textures to adhere to the new Physically Based Rendering technique implemented in DCS 2.5. Even though the new art will have significantly less impact on the gameplay side of things compared to the planned code changes, the Gazelle would look less out of place in DCS world and readability of the cockpit gauges and text should be improved, especially in VR. We hope to bring you a new sitrep in the next few weeks where we will go in to more detail on the progress we’re making. Because our earlier statement might have been burried in an active thread on these forums, we'll post it here as well:

Hi Painter, We're working on this issue as we speak. A new coder who will be solely working on the Gazelle is getting setup with the appropriate tools to tackle this bug. We'll be updating you and the rest of the community more often from now on.

Dear community, In the light of recent events, in particular the bug report document posted here, we’d like to make a statement. We understand your concerns, the Gazelle hasn’t been supported as much as we’d have liked to for quite a while. Some bugs have been known for a long period of time but have not been addressed as of yet. Polychop has shifted it’s priorities and limited assets towards developing a new module. The idea has always been that the new module, with it’s more advanced flightmodel and other features we know you as a community would like to see, would pave the way for a number of much needed updates to the Gazelle. In hindsight we can all agree that this strategy did not work out for the best as simply too much time passed in which the Gazelle didn’t get the attention it deserves. The Gazelle as a module has deteriorated during this period of time even though some updates were released that did not get mentioned in the changelog. Some issues have been there from the beginning while others were introduced by many of the core engine updates of DCS, which we should have adapted to. The core engine is a constant work in progress, ED has been doing a great job in enhancing it and making it an ever more feature rich environment. The code of a module heavily relies on the core engine, when certain parts of the engine code are changed it might interfere with the module. A certain synergy between Polychop and ED is needed in order to be able to adapt to any core engine changes. Communication between Polychop and ED on the matter of these code incompatibility issues could be more streamlined and we’re determined to put more effort in to that. Your message is clear though and it made us reconsider our priorities. As stated before, our intentions were to learn from the flaws in the Gazelle and build the new module from scratch, then implement and adapt the new code for the Gazelle module. Now we will focus on finding ways to develop both the Gazelle and the new module in parallel. This means we have to expand as a company as right now Polychop has only one coder, a graphics artist and an intern. Your voice has been heard and we’re already in negotiations with a very promising coder who will focus solely on the Gazelle. With the above in mind we will try our best to bring you the updates you requested as soon as possible. We realize that actions speak louder than words and that we will have a lot to prove and improve. One of the things we’d like to change is the way we interact with the community. Asking of you to start with a clean slate might be too much at this point but know that our intentions are to be more receptive to your suggestions and feedback. This means items that were previously non-negotiable will now be up for discussion and possible implementation again. To set an example we will be implementing the changes to the Mistral missile. We have a long way to go and we know this statement won’t take away your skepticism. We’ve always had the intention to bring the Gazelle to a higher level. Making us reconsider our strategy might get it there at a faster pace. We thank you for that.

Hi Threeps! Good to read you actually managed to see a positive side to this issue. Increasing SA might help you in the long run even when the RWR is fixed. We're grateful to have DCS as an incredible and ever improving platform for the Gazelle and future projects. Improving the core engine all the time is inevitable and mostly a good thing but it also means new DCS core code will sometimes interfere with code used in 3rd party modules like ours. Keeping older modules working with the new code is dependent on a synergy between the 3rd party developer and ED in this case. Rest assured though that Polychop and ED are in contact about this specific bug. We understand the process of squashing this bug takes a long time and it seems like nothing is happening from our side. Know that we're on it and are confident we'll fix this as soon as possible.

We haven't been able to replicate this issue either. I believe you when you say it happened. There has been a short period where all helicopters would get stuck on ships for example as well until the DCS core was updated. If you can be a bit more specific we can see if the problem can be replicated and fixed.

There is no need for such a tone in your messages, we're always open for discussion. I understand your sentiment though as it takes a long time. We're in contact with 2 SME's other than Damcopter in order to prepare for a flightmodel update. I'm repeating myself but I want to be clear on this; Polychop is a small team and we're working on a new module, with different approaches to flightmodel coding, graphics etc. This new module will pave the way for Gazelle updates. In the mean time any Gazelle updates will be critical bugfixes, which we're working on as well.

Hi VampireNZ, while it's true our priorities are with a new module at this moment like toilet2000 already said, this module will in fact open the doors to some updates for the Gazelle. The fact that you haven't seen any updates in the changelogs is both because they have been sparse the past year and also they were not mentioned in the changelog. Last update was in July this year.

We've replied to you on Discord and to clarify, a moderator is not per definition a developer. They are there to moderate discussions and make sure they don't cross any boundaries, not to answer development specific questions. Also keep in mind the time difference between you and the developers. As for the mouse controls for the minigun variant, we will keep this feature request under consideration. We understand it might add a lot to the playability but also note that right now this is as designed and not a bug.

Both use the same sounder code Kocrachon. We're working on it.

Thanks for clearing that up xvii-Dietrich! :thumbup:

Yes you're right, the whole team is focused on this poll alone... :music_whistling: Kidding aside, as we have stated before we want to update the Gazelle after we have reached some milestones of our yet to be announced new module. We deem community input to be quite important when it comes to these planned updates. Enhancing the flightmodel has been discussed before and won't require a poll like this one, it's quite obvious this is something that needs to be done. Same goes for a number of bugfixes, we will try to implement them as soon as possible. The Gazelle's we originally modeled did not have the NVG compatible cockpit lighting. We thought it would be a good idea to ask the comminity for an opinion on this for a possible future implementation.