INS Alignment procedure (draft)

[shagrat]

OK, but I don't get why this INS align procedure was posted.

 

Second line, first post of this thread: (...)As stated in the title, this is a draft document and some steps can be modified/deleted.(...)

 

It allows us to prepare the necessary checklists and kneeboard pages in advance, and familiarize with the multiple options. So as soon as this is implemented, we may know a couple steps and options, already.

[dimitrischal]

A cheat is a way of "circumventing" features and gameplay mechanics in a way not planned or implemented by the developer.

A feature/option is implemented by the developers for use by the customer as he prefers.

You may not like a feature like the Arcade avionics, the INS pre-alignment, or by your definition even the F10 map CTRL+F11 Satellite "Spy View", padlock-view, the precise position markers in the kneeboard, and so on.

All these are features to shape the DCS experience to your personal liking.

 

Eagle Dynamics is even advertising(!) this on the website and in the cover of DVDs of their products...

 

It still is your personal preference you want to enforce, by telling us your preferrence is exactly the intentions of Eagle Dynamics and that simply isn't true.

 

I dont have a problem with arcade avionics or the F10 map or anything else ,stop putting words in my mouth, and stop trying to convince me that me that when i build a mission and have to go find the option to force align and drift on the mirage is the right way to do it when all the other assists are by definition turned off.

 

The proper way would be like with easy avionics to have the option turned off from the start of a blank mission.

There should also be separate ME options for the drift and alignment so clients don't waste time on the ground but the ins behaves realistically in flight.

 

As a matter of fact another aircraft that suffers from drift the viggen has no menu options to zero it, funny how that developer choses another approach which is the same as ED on an ground attack aircraft that can have its weapon employment crippled by excessive drift and become practically useless.

[QuiGon]

And here is the problem, you dont care for 90+x % of the customers. Who you wan't to see happy from the salesman side?

 

Btw, great INS implementation Razbam :thumbup:

Looking foward.

 

The problem is, the majority of customers does not play Multiplayer (we are a tiny niche in a niche).

As with the alignment on the Mirage, it is the job of the mission designer to make a fair and realistic Multiplayer mission, so he should deactivate that option.

 

A campaign builder may find it necessary to assure a non-drifting INS for the progression of a campaign mission and not breaking the storyline.

 

I would be upset if this was mandatory, but as an option... It simply gives newcomers and starters an option to enjoy DCS, even when they don't have the years of experience.

 

As long as it can be managed, fine with me. It helps in peaking interest in Simulations for people coming from far simpler games, without spoiling the experience for everyone.

You guys did understand me wrong there. My bad, I guess I wasn't clear enough. When I said I don't care about SP, I meant, that I'm fine with what ever cheats or simplifications RAZBAM/ED offers for SP as it doesn't bother me what people do there (why should it?). What I care about is what simplifications/cheats are available for MP and their impact on fairplay.

 

I am sure Razbam implemented it in the Mirage 2000C specifically to piss of you and the few dozen other customers who think this is a problem... Or they had a larger group of non hardcore simmers in mind?! The couple thousands of people buying DCS for their personal enjoyment, maybe?

That basically is a pretty big customer base...

Neither of the two. They had a group of casual gamers in mind when implementing this...

 

Not really, the A-10C EGI was from the start implemented without issues of a drift error.

The alignment phase is also synching INS to GPS. There basically was no need for that. As the A-10C does not have a radar, it cannot do a radar fix for a drifted INS anyway.

With the Mirage Razbam introduced INS as a primary source and drift and radar position fix was introduced, together with the option to have it proper aligned and not drifting, with it.

Consequently they give us the option in their next plane, as well.

 

The funny thing is, the time aspect of the alignment is no problem anyway, as while you align you still need to do more stuff and preparation than the alignment takes.

 

Last but not least, stop implying to know what ED had in mind by implementing or not implementing features, as you are simply speculating to make up an argument in your favor.

 

It is about you not happy with the feature, nothing else.

 

Edit: I am also pretty sure the menu is an integral part of DCS and ED is very aware of the options that are made available. So they pretty much deliberately (on purpose) allowed that feature into the DCS Menu.

So were do this simplifications end then? Why not removing cool down time for Mavericks too as Dimitrischal said? If people don't want to bother with startup then they can hot start. Problem solved.

 

A cheat is a way of "circumventing" features and gameplay mechanics in a way not planned or implemented by the developer.

This is just plain wrong. Most cheats in videos games are implemted by the devs themselves. They do this for two reasons: To help debugging/testing during development and/or to give players some options to have fun in a way that the normal gameplay doesn't offer. Every played GTA? A lot of users don't want to bother with playing the story to unlock stuff. They just want to mess around a bit and for that reason cheats are implemented by the devs. Especially on consoles they often had to be activated through specific button combos, which were often listed in the game manual.

Edited August 3, 2018 by QuiGon

[shagrat]

You guys did understand me wrong there. My bad, I guess I wasn't clear enough. When I said I don't care about SP, I meant, that I'm fine with what ever cheats or simplifications RAZBAM/ED offers for SP as it doesn't bother me what people do there (why should it?). What I care about is what simplifications/cheats are available for MP and their impact on fairplay.

 

 

Neither of the two. They had a group of casual gamers in mind when implementing this...

 

 

So were do this simplifications end then? Why not removing cool down time for Mavericks too as Dimitrischal said? If people don't want to bother with startup then they can hot start. Problem solved.

 

 

This is just plain wrong. Most cheats in videos games are implemted by the devs themselves. They do this for two reasons: To help debugging/testing during development and/or to give players some options to have fun in a way that the normal gameplay doesn't offer. Every played GTA? A lot of users don't want to bother with playing the story to unlock stuff. They just want to mess around a bit and for that reason cheats are implemented by the devs. Especially on consoles they often had to be activated through specific button combos, which were often listed in the game manual.

That is called "Easter Eggs" or "hidden features". Anyway the point is, it is optional in DCS and every mission designer can decide if he wants to allow it, or not (at least that's how it is in the Mirage).

Now if someone feels cheated, ask the mission designer to block the option in Multiplayer missions.

 

What you call a "cheat" is a feature that is part of the customization options for others.

As Eagle Dynamics advertises DCS as:

 

(...)"DCS World is fundamentally a deep, authentic and realistic simulation designed also to offer a more relaxed gameplay to suit the user and his particular level of experience and training. The ambition is to hand hold users from novice pilot all the way to the most advanced and sophisticated operator of such complex weapons systems as the A-10C Warthog or the F/A-18C Hornet."(...)

 

all the optional (!) simplifications are deliberare parts of the product.

 

EDIT: ...and from the Feature list of DCS World: (...)"Both hardcore realistic and casual gameplay modes and options available.(...)

 

SOURCE: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/world/

Edited August 3, 2018 by shagrat

[shagrat]

So were do this simplifications end then? Why not removing cool down time for Mavericks too as Dimitrischal said? If people don't want to bother with startup then they can hot start. Problem solved.

 

A pretty good idea. I am all for that. If this is implemented in a way that it is optional and a mission designer can enforce it or enable it.

This way everyone can enjoy DCS. Casual players or Family members with very limited free time, as well as hardcore sim fans and die hard ex-military pilots.

 

Just suite the mission to the task.

- Hardcore Multiplayer session with full realism? Check.

- Relaxed freeflight and aerobatics multiplayer server? Check.

- Quick Arcade style airquake with a friend who only has an Xbox gamepad? Check.

- Singleplayer campaign for novice pilots where bombing runs should be trained, rather than INS correction? Check.

 

As long as it is optional to the mission designer and can be locked in the ME giva us ALL options. From always on Mavericks, AAR-Automode to simplified taxiway steering for beginners.

 

I will certainly never use any of these, but it may attract and help hundreds if not thousands of newcomers, or handicapped people and who knows who to enjoy DCS. :thumbup:

[QuiGon]

As I said before: I have no problem with casual stuff beeing available. My issue is with mixing this stuff up, especially in MP. If you want to have a casual or arcade experience, then use the arcade mode or what ever it is called. That's what it is there for.

Where it gets dangerous is, if arcade stuff gets mixed into the sim mode, especially in MP when people fly on a server in sim mode, but then have to encounter other people that use these arcade functions in sim mode to get an advantage over the enemey. Say whatever you want, but that is the very definition of cheating and everything else but fairplay!

[dimitrischal]

Easter eggs are the pilots teeth rattling with the canopy open in caucasus winter or hal9000 in the nav computer and not ins auto aligned with zero drift.

Get your facts and definitions straight.

Allowing single player options on in mp by DEFAULT is bad practice and on the mirage the option is like that on PURPOSE. Sugar coat it however you like it is not a FEATURE.

INS auto aligned and zero drift belongs in game avionics settings and not a hidden option turned on by default in the editor.

Edited August 3, 2018 by dimitrischal

[QuiGon]

INS auto aligned and zero drift belongs in game avionics settings and not a hidden option turned on by default in the editor.

This! Give the people their simplifications, but put them were they belong. That's why the game avionics mode exists: To have gamey avionics to avoid having to fiddle around with the actual simulation of things.

Edited August 3, 2018 by QuiGon

[shagrat]

As I said before: I have no problem with casual stuff beeing available. My issue is with mixing this stuff up, especially in MP. If you want to have a casual or arcade experience, then use the arcade mode or what ever it is called. That's what it is there for.

Where it gets dangerous is, if arcade stuff gets mixed into the sim mode, especially in MP when people fly on a server in sim mode, but then have to encounter other people that use these arcade functions in sim mode to get an advantage over the enemey. Say whatever you want, but that is the very definition of cheating and everything else but fairplay!

Yes, but that is why a Mission designer can set all these things in the ME.

The Arcade-Mode and Arcade-Avionics can be "blocked" and if you want to, "enforced" in the Mission Editor. The same for most other options... The "mixing" happens when the Mission designer decides to allow a mixed environment. So rather than demanding from Razbam to deactivate a feature not even implemented, yet, you should kindly ask the server admins/mission designers of your favorite Multiplayer server to take care and enforce alignment in the missions... If they not already do it anyway. I rarely saw a Multiplayer server with simplifications and Arcade features allowed in my years of DCS simming.

[QuiGon]

The "mixing" happens when the Mission designer decides to allow a mixed environment.

In most cases it doesn't happen because the mission designer consciously decideds to allow it, but because he is unaware of the setting, because it is pretty deeply hidden and activated by default, which is stupid IMHO. This option should be set to off by default at least, because such simplifications should not be the standard in DCS! It would be even better if it would be removed completly from the mission editor settings and integrated into the Game Avionics Mode where such features belong to, because that's the reason it exists!

Edited August 3, 2018 by QuiGon

[shagrat]

This! Give the people their simplifications, but put them were they belong. That's why the game avionics mode exists: To have gamey avionics to avoid having to fiddle around with the actual simulation of things.

That is exactly how the simplifications are implemented.

 

You can set your preferrence in the Menu. The Server Mission on the other hand has the configuration of what is allowed or not. If the mission designer does allow for Arcade Avionics, you can use it. If he enforces Arcade Avionics (which he can) you will fly Arcade Avionics whatever you have set in your personal Menu, if he blocks Arcade Avionics everybody will have hardcore sim Avionics.

 

The mission designer decides about the settings in the mission editor. The Menu only affects single player, and if you have the "for all missions" setting active AND the mission designer has the option set to neither enforce or block a setting your personal preference is used. That is the ONLY way to mix Arcade and Hardcore settings in a multiplayer session.

 

Example: Unlimited fuel.

 

Personal settings - OFF (and use personal settings in all missions)

 

A) Mission setting - Unlimited fuel both checked > you will fly with unlimited fuel as the server /mission setting overrides your personal setting.

 

B) Mission setting - Unlimited fuel first checkbox checked, but not second > you will fly with NO Unlimited fuel, even if your personal setting is to ON, the server setting does not allow for unlimited fuel.

 

C) Mission setting - first checkbox not checked > allow personal setting, so you get no Unlimited fuel and somebody with unlimited fuel on in his personal settings will have unlimited fuel.

 

And it works since that for roughly over a decade!

[shagrat]

In most cases it doesn't happen because the mission designer consciously decideds to allow it, but because he is unaware of the setting, because it is pretty deeply hidden and activated by default, which is stupid IMHO. This option should be set to off by default at least, because such simplifications should not be the standard in DCS! It would be even better if it would be removed completly from the mission editor settings and integrated into the Game Avionics Mode where such features belong to, because that's the reason it exists!

Wait a minute, the simplification is ACTIVE by default?

That is indeed a bit strange. It should be optional to be turned on. I need to check that.

But it shouldn't be "integrated" into "Arcade" settings. There is a reason, even Arcade mode is basically two separate settings. One for the flight model. One for the Avionics, that enables 360° Radar/Situation display and "enemy here" markers etc.

 

Thus you can better adjust, how much ease of use you want to have.

[mvsgas]

You guys remember when the Mirage INS was first implemented and you had to wait the time to align it? You remember how many post people complaining until they finally got the option?

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2807883&postcount=2332

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=153971

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=157605&page=2

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=169780

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=205037

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=180441

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=156925

 

They point is, no matter how they implemented, a group of people will not like it.

Edited August 3, 2018 by mvsgas

[QuiGon]

That is exactly how the simplifications are implemented.

 

You can set your preferrence in the Menu. The Server Mission on the other hand has the configuration of what is allowed or not. If the mission designer does allow for Arcade Avionics, you can use it. If he enforces Arcade Avionics (which he can) you will fly Arcade Avionics whatever you have set in your personal Menu, if he blocks Arcade Avionics everybody will have hardcore sim Avionics.

 

The mission designer decides about the settings in the mission editor. The Menu only affects single player, and if you have the "for all missions" setting active AND the mission designer has the option set to neither enforce or block a setting your personal preference is used. That is the ONLY way to mix Arcade and Hardcore settings in a multiplayer session.

 

Example: Unlimited fuel.

 

Personal settings - OFF (and use personal settings in all missions)

 

A) Mission setting - Unlimited fuel both checked > you will fly with unlimited fuel as the server /mission setting overrides your personal setting.

 

B) Mission setting - Unlimited fuel first checkbox checked, but not second > you will fly with NO Unlimited fuel, even if your personal setting is to ON, the server setting does not allow for unlimited fuel.

 

C) Mission setting - first checkbox not checked > allow personal setting, so you get no Unlimited fuel and somebody with unlimited fuel on in his personal settings will have unlimited fuel.

 

And it works since that for roughly over a decade!

 

Wait a minute, the simplification is ACTIVE by default?

That is indeed a bit strange. It should be optional to be turned on. I need to check that.

But it shouldn't be "integrated" into "Arcade" settings. There is a reason, even Arcade mode is basically two separate settings. One for the flight model. One for the Avionics, that enables 360° Radar/Situation display and "enemy here" markers etc.

 

Thus you can better adjust, how much ease of use you want to have.

I think we are talking past each other. I was still talking about how RAZBAM implements their INS cheats (alignment and drift). Instead of integrating them into the Game Avionics Mode, where they belong to, they make them available as seperate functions that can be turned on or off. To allow for fairplay in MP they offer the option for mission designers to enfore this setting to off through the aircraft special options panel in the mission editor (see attached screenshot). The problem with this is (apart from beeing an arcade feature that gets mixed into the sim mode instead of beeing part of the game avionics mode), that this option is OFF by default. This causes mission makers to just forget about it (or not even knowing about it in the first place) and thus leaving it OFF unconsciously, enabling cheating and unfair gameplay in MP. That is what is really bothering me.

[dimitrischal]

You guys remember when the Mirage INS was first implemented and you had to wait the time to align it? You remember how many post people complaining until they finally got the option?

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2807883&postcount=2332

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=153971

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=157605&page=2

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=169780

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=205037

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=180441

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=156925

 

They point is, no matter how they implemented, a group of people will not like it.

 

Nobody argues about the option, but the fact that it is on by default in the settings. Right now in every dcs server (except maybe blue flag) you can do 1 minute preflight and takeoffs in the mirage whereas that is impossible irl and no other full fidelity module has such an option let alone turned on by default.

Being on by default leads to it being overlooked by mission creators rather than being a conscious option to allow this.

[QuiGon]

Nobody argues about the option, but the fact that it is on by default in the settings. Right now in every dcs server (except maybe blue flag) you can do 1 minute preflight and takeoffs in the mirage whereas that is impossible irl and no other full fidelity module has such an option let alone turned on by default.

Being on by default leads to it being overlooked by mission creators rather than being a conscious option to allow this.

I think the INS enforcement for the Mirage is even OFF in blue flag, but I'm not sure. This itself is another issue with that, as it beeing implemented that way, makes it very intransparent as this kind of setting is not beeing shown in the server info in the server browser. So you can't tell if others are allowed to use these cheats or not.

Having to manually enable INS enforcement for every aircraft is pretty tedious work for such big missions like Blue Flag btw, which is another issue with this implementation. So again: The enforcement of INS alignment (and drift) should be ON by default, not OFF as it is now! That is the very least I expect here.

Edited August 3, 2018 by QuiGon

[mvsgas]

Nobody argues about the option, but the fact that it is on by default in the settings. Right now in every dcs server (except maybe blue flag) you can do 1 minute preflight and takeoffs in the mirage whereas that is impossible irl and no other full fidelity module has such an option let alone turned on by default.

Being on by default leads to it being overlooked by mission creators rather than being a conscious option to allow this.

 

That is what people wanted. The problem is the post are mix with the thousands of post of people complaining about the Mirage. But people wanted it as a special option and on.

 

Is funny how we all want realism on some things but not other stuff. I want realistic avionics but do not want random failures. I don't want a FCR fail in the middle of a fight or ground abort because radios don't work even do is realistic.

 

You guys want full INS alignment but I bet you don't wait around for 30 minutes or so to refuel or re-armed and a quick turn around inspection or a couple of hours for a thruflight inspection.

Edited August 3, 2018 by mvsgas

[shagrat]

That is what people wanted. The problem is the post are mix with the thousands of post of people complaining about the Mirage. But people wanted it as a special option and on.

 

Is funny how we all want realism on some things but not other stuff. I want realistic avionics but do not want random failures. I don't want a FCR fail in the middle of a fight or ground abort because radios don't work even do is realistic.

 

You guys want full INS alignment but I bet you don't wait around for 30 minutes or so to refuel or re-armed and a quick turn around inspection or a couple of hours for a thruflight inspection.

Yep, that is why I am a big fan of "options" so anyone can get the experience he wants, out of DCS.

But I must admit, to have the not realistic simplification ON by default, makes it difficult for Mission designers, yet it is in line with EDs implementation of their simplifications (Takeoff assist is 100% by default).

It seems to be easier to have the DCS pros who have deeper knowledge of the sim already to deactivate the options.

 

And basically they cater for the wishes of the vast majority...

[QuiGon]

Yep, that is why I am a big fan of "options" so anyone can get the experience he wants, out of DCS.

But I must admit, to have the not realistic simplification ON by default, makes it difficult for Mission designers, yet it is in line with EDs implementation of their simplifications (Takeoff assist is 100% by default).

It seems to be easier to have the DCS pros who have deeper knowledge of the sim already to deactivate the options.

 

And basically they cater for the wishes of the vast majority...

Again: Takeoff assist is at least not giving you any advantages over other players. You can take off just fine without takeoff assist if you're skilled enough, but even the most skilled pilot can not make his INS become aligned immediately! ED has not implemented a skip alignment cheat for their modules!

Edited August 3, 2018 by QuiGon

[dimitrischal]

That is what people wanted. The problem is the post are mix with the thousands of post of people complaining about the Mirage. But people wanted it as a special option and on.

 

Is funny how we all want realism on some things but not other stuff. I want realistic avionics but do not want random failures. I don't want a FCR fail in the middle of a fight or ground abort because radios don't work even do is realistic.

 

You guys want full INS alignment but I bet you don't wait around for 30 minutes or so to refuel or re-armed and a quick turn around inspection or a couple of hours for a thruflight inspection.

 

We want this not to be allowed by default in ME which contradicts directly with other aircraft that don’t have this option at all.

Failures can be implemented if you want A10C or F18 quick align not. 30 minutes refuel and rearm might be possible if one desires so.

All this stems from 1 thing only that we must all admit. 7 minutes is along time to wait and people got bored waiting in the mirage.

[shagrat]

Again: Takeoff assist ist at least not giving you any advantages over other players. You can take off just fine without takeoff assist if you're skilled enough, but even the most skilled pilot can not make his INS become aligned immediately! ED has not implemented a skip alignment cheat for their modules!

 

Ok, you are right, but that won't likely change the implementation. :tomato:

[QuiGon]

Ok, you are right, but that won't likely change the implementation. :tomato:

That's up to RAZBAM to decide.

[Frederf]

Will it be an option of the mission editor for an AV-8B to start such that it may make use of a stored heading alignment?

 

QuiGon is thinking correctly. The default behavior must be the most accurate simulation behavior. DCS is mostly consistent that this is the case. Where DCS is inconsistent and makes the less-real behavior default this must not be taken as any reason for any particular developer to do the same.

 

In the case of Mirage 2000 remember that INS alignment and INS drift are special tab options and there is also a unit-by-unit-basis option in the mission editor. The ME unit setting overrides the module special tab setting. If the desire was to have an "impatient user" option it was probably better to have full alignment/memory alignment be the choice instead of full alignment/ developer debugging cheat. Memory alignment is quite fast and few users, even the most hurried, would complain if that was the fastest choice.

Edited August 3, 2018 by Frederf

[shagrat]

The default behavior must be the most accurate simulation behavior. DCS is mostly consistent that this is the case. Where DCS is inconsistent and makes the less-real behavior default this must not be taken as any reason for any particular developer to do the same.

 

I am sure you meant "it would be better", or maybe "should" instead of must?

 

In the end it is a decision made by Razbam.

 

Maybe even you are wrong and it should be the other way round? Make it as easy AS possible for newbies and first time pilots converting from consoles, so they don't feel discouraged and take interest in DCS. Then when they took interest they can step up the pace and tweak for full realism.

 

From a marketing perspective and even the logic behind "learning things from easy to complex" makes far more sense than "make it as hard as possible so no new customer can manage it! If you fail, your to weak!"

 

The truth may be something inbetween.

 

I would have expected this feature to be off, by default, but after reading a little bit into the afore mentioned thread and the complaints of a far larger customer group, I don't think Razbam made a "wrong" decision. And since I actually never noticed that I have to switch it "off" in the tab of the ME, I can still do it now. Hardly a difference as I had it on in the user preferences.

[shagrat]

That's up to RAZBAM to decide.

Sure, I would like them to do it, as well, but I think the odds are against us, here.