Ver 1.2.3 News

from the Russian forum..... a big troubled....by ФрогФут

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1681971&postcount=32

 

 

 

This is a big problem...... if problems with vehicles and naval vessels can not be solved, I think certain parts of DCS: W can be remove of them and put hold any 3rd Parties development or add new vehicles and ships if applicable...., to help the aerial devices section (planes and helos). If the problem persists, that can be make tragic situation for a part of the community interested on land / sea warfare (remember that stability problems began with Combined Arms) Delay all by mouth or years :(.

 

this is just a guess on my part, but if the worst fears are confirmed, we will have to sacrifice that part of world to safeguard the gameplay?

nah .. they just have to debug the netcode and find out why Ground Units cause the problem.

basically instead of transmitting player data of just aircraft, it's now transmitting Aircraft and Ground units.

It's just another thing that needs to be worked on, and it will be. There are a bunch of different things to be done, and now it's all about priorities. Handling the ground/sea unit online issue is one of those things.

This is a big problem...... if problems with vehicles and naval vessels can not be solved, I think certain parts of DCS: W can be remove of them and put hold any 3rd Parties development or add new vehicles and ships if applicable...., to help the aerial devices section (planes and helos). If the problem persists, that can be make tragic situation for a part of the community interested on land / sea warfare (remember that stability problems began with Combined Arms) Delay all by mouth or years :(.

 

this is just a guess on my part, but if the worst fears are confirmed, we will have to sacrifice that part of world to safeguard the gameplay?

Hey guys I can live with a 16 player air sea land battle. Give me 4 ground commanders and 12 pilots and you will end up with a frickin awesome event.

According to the Russian forum, 1.2.3 is more stable than 1.2.2 in terms of MP, with the problems starting when there's 16+ players plus naval and ground units. When there's no ground nor naval units, there can be 32 players in deathmatch.

So, release 1.2.3 already, will ya? :D

nah .. they just have to debug the netcode and find out why Ground Units cause the problem.

 

basically instead of transmitting player data of just aircraft, it's now transmitting Aircraft and Ground units.

i see this is the most spinining and exploding topic today

as Mustang wrote we need to be calm :lol:

hopefully Wags will write something soon tonight - there is afternoon in Arizona :helpsmilie:

but there is a saturday already in Moscow, i dont think the boys of ED still work

(or in my dream they uploading auto-patcher files right now to the server) :D

so maybe we will need to wait till next week for the patch or for next usual monday evening official words :(

According to the Russian forum, 1.2.3 is more stable than 1.2.2 in terms of MP, with the problems starting when there's 16+ players plus naval and ground units. When there's no ground nor naval units, there can be 32 players in deathmatch.

 

So, release 1.2.3 already, will ya? :D

and when it causes more problems because it wasn't tested thoroughly we'll all blame you, deal?

:pilotfly:

I am confused, are we facing another delay? is this official?

and when it causes more problems because it wasn't tested thoroughly we'll all blame you, deal?

 

:pilotfly:

Feel free. :)

As I mentioned before - netcode is a moving target. Nothing wrong with incremental patches. FrogFut / ФрогФут (an ED team member) already stated that 1.2.3 is more stable than 1.2.2. This could be a snapshot release, wile they continue improving the netcode. I don't foresee that netcode will be "fixed" in one single swoop. Delaying content because of this seems strange.

Today a new 1.2.3 installer is being tested. Assuming testing of the installer goes well, it should not be long after that. As to exactly how long, I really don't know and that decision is made in Moscow.

Thanks for the heads-up, Wags. Greatly appreciated.

great news!

Awesome, thanks for the update Wags!!

Matt, you ought to change your avatar to an F-4 Phantom to get people off your back about 1.2.3. :D

Thanks Wags

To be honest with ya, if it isn't perfect but better than 1.2.2 I would think it would be welcome by most. One thing that I think would help though is to offer some details of any items that appear to cause the most issues. That way the mission makers can design around them. After all, even with 1.2.2 the better servers have figured out the weak points and have designed missions that minimize crashes. Offering notes up front would just make it easier and expose issues to the average player less. There's obviously a little snag that will take some time and the pressure isn't going to make it happen any faster. The issue will be found for sure but not with a gun to their head with the deadlines.

Just my opinion <S>

from the Russian forum..... a big troubled....by ФрогФут

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1681971&postcount=32

 

 

 

This is a big problem...... if problems with vehicles and naval vessels can not be solved, I think certain parts of DCS: W can be remove of them and put hold any 3rd Parties development or add new vehicles and ships if applicable...., to help the aerial devices section (planes and helos). If the problem persists, that can be make tragic situation for a part of the community interested on land / sea warfare (remember that stability problems began with Combined Arms) Delay all by mouth or years :(.

 

this is just a guess on my part, but if the worst fears are confirmed, we will have to sacrifice that part of world to safeguard the gameplay?

Not necessarilly. This started before Combined arms. There were issues with 1.1.1.1 before world.

What I think you're seeing is a little internal finger pointing (if the russian quote is from an internal source). Everyone inside needs to keep focused on their jobs. Whoever is running the show needs to look at current running servers that are having the least problems. They've already figured out what the main culprits are. Work on fixing the culprits one by one and releasing along the way.

Personally I would allow anyone who wanted a different level of beta to help troubleshoot the crashes. With this provide a couple of beta servers both stateside and europe centered on the net issue.

Have at least one moderator in each beta. When someone crashes have the moderator verbally ask them questions about configuration, actions etc to get the info. That way you can get valuable info from unexperienced people with beta's.

Edit: I also wonder if they've tried a striped down version of the server, similar to a dedicated server. If the serving PC doesn't have to deal with graphics, controls etc, do you get better stability. Just curious because that's how many companies with large scale servers do it.

Personally I would allow anyone who wanted a different level of beta to help troubleshoot the crashes. .

I agree. Open beta should allow those, who want to help with this, access to 1.2.3 (or any other future patches). If done right via a ticketing system for bug-reporting, I believe the devs would definitely benefit from it.

Good to hear, was just crashing like crazy in MP with 1.2.2 :) it always makes me suspect my hardware, but then all tests come out clean on that...

Today a new 1.2.3 installer is being tested. Assuming testing of the installer goes well, it should not be long after that. As to exactly how long, I really don't know and that decision is made in Moscow.

Thanks for the update. Standing by.

Today a new 1.2.3 installer is being tested. Assuming testing of the installer goes well, it should not be long after that. As to exactly how long, I really don't know and that decision is made in Moscow.

Thank you, these heads ups are very appreciated.

Don't worry about it taking time, just as long as ED releases it when they think everything is working. :thumbup:

Thanks for the update Wags but......

Someone wake me up please from my Aquavit stupor when V1.2.3, or V1.2.4. becomes available, you'll see all the empty bottles outside.

Jippeeeeeeeeee :prop:

take your time Gents.. we want perfection.

take your time Gents.. we want perfection.

Perfection? I'm glad to see you're not setting your expectations too high! :D

Not necessarilly. This started before Combined arms. There were issues with 1.1.1.1 before world.

Was a different issue.

What I think you're seeing is a little internal finger pointing (if the russian quote is from an internal source).

The post he quoted is from a thread that is pretty much identical to this one, but on the russian side of the forum.

Everyone inside needs to keep focused on their jobs. Whoever is running the show needs to look at current running servers that are having the least problems.

Looking at v1.2.2 servers doesn't necessarily help with v1.2.3.

Testing is a targeted process. You might look into the "wild" for ideas perhaps, but when testing you run a protocol with specific things you need to do and cover and specific variables you need to test for. Random servers on the net doesn't help as much as you might think there, since you don't have control of variables and have to spend your time checking which variables are in play where rather than just test them directly. And of course, if the server is running a different version of the program than the one you are testing, that is a problem.

Now, if the cause of a problem was completely unknown, QA department is stumped and doesn't know what to do to find the problem, then yes - doing an analysis on the wild is the right thing to do. (And of course, if you have huge resources, it can be a good idea in general as long as it is automated - sort of like how Blizzard Entertainment tracks all games played automatically in order to statistically analyze for game balancing issues.)

I agree with the ones before that suggested open beta.

Wags, look at Gaijin and CCP all players can be betatesters. Either because the whole game/module is beta or because they switch to a beta server and play a test/targeted/timed session.

We could all help, each after own posibilities. Create a launcher that should have production or beta server selectable. Put the news tab there and say: Today we test from x time to y time this bugger... please join and take this plane and all do this and that... etc. And give rewards... seriously! Not big... small. Like: for each hour you help us on scheduled tests your account receives 2-3 hours of free single player or multiplayer on beta version.

"all is subject to change", right? :D