**MiG-21 Changelog 5/2/2016**

[ESAc_matador]

It keeps my bis in the hangar... so sad...

[zaelu]

I don't think any Mig21 made it into this stable version. Only the entry.lua was found changed. Mig21 remains grounded for me.

Edited May 13, 2016 by zaelu

[Tello]

It is starting to be painfull - Now I have to ask my self, do I want to take the risk and get all addicted to the Viggen if they pull this same stunt of saying something is going to be fixed with in "next two weeks" when in reality it is not.

 

This is starting to get crappy like when you drop surströmming all over your new shirt.. :lol:

 

*Forum kings chillax this is only fun, no need to get all defensive about your favorite third party dev. Best friends forever !

 

I don't think any Mig21 made it into this stable version. Only the entry.lua was found changed. Mig21 remains grounded for me.

[demon84]

No trust to Leatherneck Simulations anymore. They can not fix one module. Imagine what will be with 2 or 3 planes in beta? Only way to buy - steam sale.

[Rlaxoxo]

Imagine what will be with 2 or 3 planes in beta?

 

lol ... Correct me if I'm wrong but they have Viggen and F4U currently in Closed Beta and their goal is to fully release the module

 

Not to mention all the work they're doing with Viggen releasing new map campaign then F-14 + carriers ...

 

You need to chill out

[simapajik]

I agree with "demon84" MiG-21bis is a long time already for non-use .. With the F-14 Tomcat it will do the same .. No throwing money away. It's all just business, make money .. Developers do not care that the module does not work. :music_whistling: A lot of work with the module F-14, how to make money again on another module inoperative.

[Andrei]

I wouldn't be so harsh on LN as it's not completely their fault - some of the bugs are due to ED changes to the engine. But indeed, it's taking too long for the fixes to be rolled out.

 

While business is business, when you have a software in production and available for end-users, the priority should be in keeping it running as expected and making sure all bugs and inconsistencies are taken care of. Other development should wait.

[Marioshata]

Very disappointing...

[statrekmike]

I am not going to jump on this "LN is just in it for the money and does not care about is!" bandwagon. They have a history of timely and attentive bug-fixing and I don't see how that has changed significantly.

 

If this issue were entirely in their hands, it would have been fixed already, I suspect that they are waiting on ED for something.

[Cobra847]

The release version of the current patch contains no changes from the BETA version of last week. This was not our choice.

It's simply relabeled as release.

 

The new, current, BETA release contains various MiG-21 fixes.

We've found another few issues with radar issues in the new DCS versions and are preparing hotfix binaries for these. I will post them shortly.

Edited May 13, 2016 by Cobra847

[JanTelefon]

Thanks for letting us know Cobra. It feels good to be out of the dark. Can't wait to test it.

[Shively]

I think that, probably, the assumption is that Leatherneck has sole responsibility over what gets updated regarded their module on a week-to-week basis.

 

Simply put, that's Eagle Dynamic's job. Leatherneck cooks up the fixes, but it's not them that controls what gets uploaded to ED's patch servers and rolled out on Friday.

 

Glad to see the fix is in the beta patch, though. Let's all hope it gets implemented next week.

 

I can understand why people are frustrated, though, they've been told "it would be fixed in the next patch" multiple times now, with multiple patches, only to see them come and go with no fix applied. This may be a bit of conjecture, but I'm fairly certain Cobra and the rest of the Leatherneck team have been going through similar frustrations in trying to get this thing rolled out.

Edited May 13, 2016 by Shively

[Frederf]

I think LNS cares but struggling there are systems that need serious effort like ARK, RSBN, PRMG, SORC, weapon selection, SPO, and the ASP. Most haven't received any attention. (OK not any but the particular aspects that I care about).

 

I hope development doesn't get so exhausted fixing some issues that it never gets to the ones I care about (how's that for honest?).

 

One thing I never understand is how I can tell which version of the module is present in each of the 3 DCS branches. Is the MiG-21 in OB ahead/same/behind the one in OA? Is Main equal to OB but both ahead of OB?

Edited May 13, 2016 by Frederf

[zaelu]

I don't agree of placing the blame from side to side. It just creates confusion and throws vapors in people's eyes. People want solutions/fixes not excuses and blames.

 

ED seems to take a lot of punches from some 3rd party devs and it takes them without noise but is not completely fair.

 

ED is the maintainer and the developer of the main technology, is rational to have the largest delays from everybody if delays are present.

 

But ED kinda got us used with the weekly updates wagon. And it seems not all 3rd parties dev are doing their homework and they miss that weekly wagon. Some with digestible excuses some without.

 

If all 3rd parties devs would strive to have some fixes ready for that weekly wagon the level of frustration would surely be lower.

 

As prime example is this radar bug from Mig21. This is a LEVEL 0 World Stopping bug. In real life such problem grounds the fleet of planes manifesting it. Why LNS thinks is different with a game/simulator?

 

There is simply no other excuse available for such action other than these two:

 

1. Lack of interest for old module - attention is fully on future modules/gains

2. Inability - hidden behind excuses.

 

Another bug that was plaguing the Mig21 was the activation one... it's almost gone but I still see people here and there struggling with it. The activation is like the Ignition Key... Level 0 bug... all forces should focus upon it until it is forever squashed... like most of other modules.

 

 

 

I do like how RAZBAM does the updates though and the dedication they put to polish and finish the Mirage. I like the humble statements (I don't know how to say it better) of Zeus when he talks about their work/struggle. They never blame ED. They just work on the plane. And they are developers that really work hands on the module not like other devs that are merely "managers".

 

I think, Cobra, that you lost focus when you went full steam to the other modules and lost interest in keeping your customer base not happy but at least content. You said many times that the first impression for the future modules (as for Mig21... I still remember the awe and the pain in jaw articulation when you posted the first redone Mig21 cockpit shots) is highly important. Maybe too important because the fact is we now know what they are so you lost the element of surprise and we are a bit... doubtful? about them and how they would develop knowing that after more than a year and a half the Mig21 has problems that renders it grounded, not to mention lack of "promised" development (cockpit lights, 1st person pilot body, etc).

We can only "fear" that if Mig21 with its simple but detailed systems are giving you such problems then 3 planes, one of them more than double fold in complexity might give you nightmares... not to mention the added maps and objects they will suppose to bring with. And that for sure will be on top of the work on your future then to be modules... whatever they will be.

 

Maybe we the buyers of Mig21 are a minority in your future sales... or our word is worthless but what you planned as a first impression on your future modules did not work and it should give you thoughts.

 

Or maybe you really are holding an ace or something...

Edited May 13, 2016 by zaelu

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

I don't agree of placing the blame from side to side.

 

ED still controls what goes into patches, whether you agree or not. Why would LNS outright lie to the consumer base and say they're working on a module they aren't?

 

If they were done, they'd honestly outright say "Yeah we're done updating this, deal with it." They have your money and the hypetrain for Viggen and especially F-14 has no brakes. The fact that they say they're working on it should be more than enough. To top it off, Cobra just stated a few posts back that they found more issues. Why would he even post that if they haven't any inclination of working on it? MiG's gonna get improved on.

 

And yes, their attention is focused on Viggen. They came out and said, outright, it's crunch time for Viggen. This shouldn't be shocking.

Edited May 13, 2016 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[Cobra847]

Who is doing any blame shifting? When have we ever laid any punches on ED?

 

We're getting strangely offtopic now-- and worse yet, strange conclusions are being drawn from really simple informative statements

(BETA was migrated into Release branch while new builds are now in the BETA branch)

 

Please give constructive critiscism about new issues in the appropriate subforum or on our bugtracker.

Edited May 13, 2016 by Cobra847

[BadHabit]

And yes, their attention is focused on Viggen. They came out and said, outright, it's crunch time for Viggen. This shouldn't be shocking.

 

I'm sorry but I didn't pay for the Viggen nor will I. I am not interested to the aircraft. I would like to see the number one reason I 'm flying in DCS ready to final and not grounded. We are not talking about small bug fixing. This is major.

Without blaming and flaming but politely most of us are asking to fix the Major bugs continue to the minor and keep us updated not only with simple update dates and statements but also what changes and how it applies to the module.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

I'm sorry but I didn't pay for the Viggen nor will I. I am not interested to the aircraft. I would like to see the number one reason I 'm flying in DCS ready to final and not grounded. We are not talking about small bug fixing. This is major.

Without blaming and flaming but politely most of us are asking to fix the Major bugs continue to the minor and keep us updated not only with simple update dates and statements but also what changes and how it applies to the module.

 

Was there any indication that they weren't going to continue with fixes?

[BadHabit]

Was there any indication that they weren't going to continue with fixes?

NO but it's getting old and ppl as I are getting nervous.

[Cobra847]

Was there any indication that they weren't going to continue with fixes?

 

NO but it's getting old and ppl as I are getting nervous.

 

Stop getting or being nervous.

DCS is a moving platform. It's currently moving very quickly.

 

The price everyone (including us) pays for this is the expectance of a few things to happen:

 

• New fixes and builds to be made available for all aircraft
  
  
• New bugs to inevitably appear
  
  
• New bugs to get fixed
  
  
• New bugs to inevitably appear
  
  
• Repeat to infinity
  
  

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

NO but it's getting old and ppl as I are getting nervous.

 

Well, the fact that Cobra's stated that they've found more issues that need to be addressed should be indication they're working on it. There's no need to be terribly nervous. Not to insult, I mean this as a genuine inquiry: What's your experience with software programming, if any?

[BadHabit]

I will or I would if I could enjoy the aircraft.

The platform had a steady pace prior to 1.5 and must go back to a 1.2 steady build. I'm sure it will sooner or later. And your job as a 3rd party dev is top pace with it. Of course we understand nothing is moving on railways.

Keeping us posted in a weekly base will shut us up.

[Hyperion35]

I don't agree of placing the blame from side to side. It just creates confusion and throws vapors in people's eyes. People want solutions/fixes not excuses and blames.

 

ED seems to take a lot of punches from some 3rd party devs and it takes them without noise but is not completely fair.

 

ED is the maintainer and the developer of the main technology, is rational to have the largest delays from everybody if delays are present.

 

But ED kinda got us used with the weekly updates wagon. And it seems not all 3rd parties dev are doing their homework and they miss that weekly wagon. Some with digestible excuses some without.

 

If all 3rd parties devs would strive to have some fixes ready for that weekly wagon the level of frustration would surely be lower.

 

As prime example is this radar bug from Mig21. This is a LEVEL 0 World Stopping bug. In real life such problem grounds the fleet of planes manifesting it. Why LNS thinks is different with a game/simulator?

 

There is simply no other excuse available for such action other than these two:

 

1. Lack of interest for old module - attention is fully on future modules/gains

2. Inability - hidden behind excuses.

 

 

I have done professional programming before, although I have not done any programming for DCS (or for any flight sims). Based on my experience, the reality of this situation is almost certainly far more complicated. Those two options are actually the least likely.

 

It is unlikely that the radar bug was introduced by LN. If they had made changes to the radar that had resulted in this bug, they would most likely have reverted those changes and this would have been fixed a long time ago. In fact, doing so would have allowed them to focus more effort on upcoming modules, rather than having to spend time and effort locating and fixing this bug.

 

It is more likely that something was changed within DCS involving radar detection. You mentioned Razbam and the Mirage in your post, and if you check the Mirage board, there is a thread discussing changes that have been made and that will be made in the future for their RDI radar, they have made many changes over the past few months that have increased the complexity of how their radar functions.

 

I do not know how DCS and Third Party Devs work their licenses and share their code. In my limited experience, I have worked in situations where I had been given a closed-source API that would allow my code to interact with someone else's larger system. In those situations, I would do various things and then send out a function call through the API to get certain information from the system, and it would return certain values, and my code would have various conditional statements based on the information that was returned, and calculations based on those values, etc. This is a broad generalization of how a lot of third-party API setups work, although DCS is several orders of magnitude (orders of magnitude of orders of magnitude, really) more complex than anything I've worked with.

 

So it is entirely possible that Razbam added features to their radar, and these features required ED to make changes to how DCS handles radar detection. Remember that the DCS planes that currently use air-to-air radar are only the FC3 fighters (F-15C, Su-27/33, and MiG29A/G/C), the MiG-21bis, and the Mirage-2000C. And the FC3 fighters use very simplified systems that are almost generically identical between them. So the MiG-21bis and Mirage-2000C are the only two DCS aircraft with complex radar systems. It's very easy to imagine how changes to ED's DCS:World code to accommodate new RDI features could easily alter how the Sapfir interacts with elements in DCS:World.

 

Bughunting is tricky. Figuring out which piece of code is responsible for a given bug can get fiendishly complex. Just figuring out what's causing the problem can take a lot more time than you might expect. And that's assuming that the problem is in your code. If the problem is caused by changes/bugs in the external system, or in your closed-source API? I've had that happen, and it's a headache and a half. Now your bughunting goes from finding a needle in a haystack to finding a slightly differently-colored grain of sand on a beach, at midnight, with no moon.

[ESAc_matador]

Cobra.

 

I have my mig21 in the hangar, but, you have all my credit. When you released the Mig21 was really polished. It means, you care about your product. I will wait, and I will by new modules. 100% sure.

[Rlaxoxo]

Well It's generally debate weather or not ED will push the update or not

 

Take for example Razbam

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2777450&postcount=19