DCS World Patch Notes Discussion Thread

[majorandme]

Any estimate for the next stable update?

[Northstar98]

Any estimate for the next stable update?

 

I would give it another month at least. I'm a stable player, but I don't want 2.5.6 to kill my performance, my set-up is hardly ideal as it is.

[jasonbirder]

Again Our update system does not work like that

So, what...4 months to get some simple fixes to .miz/.cmp files that third party developers have already written...

For something that won't mess with core code anymore than a user downloading a user-created Mission or Skin would?

 

 

A fix for one might not work with the other - I also love how you completely ignored the fact that all these fixes are on the OB for testing purposes and once they get fully tested and ED is satisfied they can make a stable build

If changes to 3rd party DLC campaigns could affect "a stable build" there'd be no User created Missions would there? its a change to a text file in your Users/yourname/savedgames folder...how is that going to affect a "stable build"

[S D]

If the DCS patchnotes actually said what they changed in DCS, then the folks that don't understand would see why it's so slow to get to stable and why we get pushed into "OB as live".

There is so much under the hood maintenance and change in DCS core that just never comes to light. We see just a fraction of the effects, feel such a fraction of the bugs and are prvy to such a small amount of the total drama that goes on. It takes some experience and a leap of faith to imagine the scale of it all, so it does bug me, that people moan about delays to the supercarrier or whatever module whilst being oblivious to it all.

 

 

PLEASE ED!! Provide additional "under the hood" changes in the changelog, that have been fixed. So we can test this stuff easier.

[ngreenaway]

I would give it another month at least. I'm a stable player, but I don't want 2.5.6 to kill my performance, my set-up is hardly ideal as it is.

 

If I had to guess, I'd say you're close. I would assume that stable would be updated just prior to release of supercarrier to OB.

[ngreenaway]

So, what...4 months to get some simple fixes to .miz/.cmp files that third party developers have already written...

For something that won't mess with core code anymore than a user downloading a user-created Mission or Skin would?

 

 

If changes to 3rd party DLC campaigns could affect "a stable build" there'd be no User created Missions would there? its a change to a text file in your Users/yourname/savedgames folder...how is that going to affect a "stable build"

 

Regarding the first half of your post, in a word: yes. Stable waits till ED feels the current batch of bugs are quashed and they're ready to take on the next round of bugs. You either wait, or you change over to OB. It's a binary choice, and that's not going to change.

If it's documentation you're itching for, it's a PDF, someone with OB can send u a copy. I know the same has been done for the DCS manual. But frankly, this is picking and choosing the lowest level changes.

It's been explained multiple times why it's done the way it's done, and the fact is it's not going to change.

This is an unprecedented update cycle, so there's absolutely no reason ED should change how they push out updates on account that some of us have to wait during a particularly troublesome update. Like I mentioned earlier, we normally see updates every 3 weeks. 4 months is completely out of the norm.

And as it's already been noted, many of these changes are version specific, often in reaction to changes brought about by a new dcs version

[jasonbirder]

4 months is completely out of the norm

 

 

Indeed...so why the difficul;ty in doing something else completely out of the norm IE: releasing an interim update to Stable of those LOWEST LEVEL changes that will not affect the core game? (Documentation/changes to .miz/.cmp files)

It would have no effect on version controls - as there would still only be two versions Open beta and Stable. It would have no effect on stabilty as those changes would not effect core game files...

Not "sense checking them" bundling them into a stable update and then releasing them just seems like pig-headedness at his point...

[Gary]

Could you not do this yourself? - at least partly.

 

 

Update to open beta - save what you need (i.e. documentation and other non core files) - revert to stable and add in the documents and files you need from OB?

 

 

Regards,

 

 

Gary

[BIGNEWY]

So, what...4 months to get some simple fixes to .miz/.cmp files that third party developers have already written...

For something that won't mess with core code anymore than a user downloading a user-created Mission or Skin would?

 

 

If changes to 3rd party DLC campaigns could affect "a stable build" there'd be no User created Missions would there? its a change to a text file in your Users/yourname/savedgames folder...how is that going to affect a "stable build"

 

Indeed...so why the difficul;ty in doing something else completely out of the norm IE: releasing an interim update to Stable of those LOWEST LEVEL changes that will not affect the core game? (Documentation/changes to .miz/.cmp files)

It would have no effect on version controls - as there would still only be two versions Open beta and Stable. It would have no effect on stabilty as those changes would not effect core game files...

Not "sense checking them" bundling them into a stable update and then releasing them just seems like pig-headedness at his point...

 

Sorry

 

as mentioned already, our system does not work this way,

 

at this stage I am not sure how I can help you understand,

 

we can not change how the system works, stable version will be updated once we are happy with 2.5.6.

 

Thank you

[jasonbirder]

Sorry

 

as mentioned already, our system does not work this way,

 

at this stage I am not sure how I can help you understand

Thanks for your feedback Bignewy communication is always appreciated (even if I guess it doesn't feel like that sometimes)

It does seem a little like "We've always done it this way" therefore "we cannot do it any other way regardless of circumstance" though...

It is what it is and I can see that no amount of pointing out how simple or helpful reconsidering that (in exceptional circumstances) would be, will change the current update/release process...

After all we're just Single Player/Stable release slugs...we should get with the program...right?!?

[TLTeo]

It's not that "ED has always done it this way". It's that literally all of complex software development works like this - there is one, and only one main branch, and updates are only pushed to it in groups once they are tested.

 

Having multiple branches that may or may not be pushed, with separate teams each uploading their own changes independently, means that you will much more easily get in situations where team A makes a change, and that breaks team B's code without them knowing about it. This already happens in DCS a fair deal, but if ED started taking random things from OB and pushing them to stable without doing any version control it would get far worse.

[Airhunter]

As a general question to the devs - when can we expect the Multiplayer player ID's to finally be fixed as this sort of renders MP useless for the most part at the moment. Isn't this a top priority?

[sirrah]

It requires some more testing, but my first impressions on the latest 2.5.6 patch are that performance has slightly been improved :thumbup:

 

Tested with F-16 instant action cold and dark PG, while on the ground and looking around in the cockpit:

2.5.5 ±45fps

2.5.6 (before last patch) ±23fps

2.5.6 (after last patch) ±29fps

 

(all tested with same settings)

 

 

Still not "there" yet, but hey, it is improvement! :)

[xXEVOXx]

I don't understand how 2.5.5 can be taken as a reference for performances.

They are bad and the only hope is that Vulkan will take us to 90 fps in VR otherwise they are only hundreds of euros thrown away

[Fang333333]

It requires some more testing, but my first impressions on the latest 2.5.6 patch are that performance has slightly been improved :thumbup:

 

Tested with F-16 instant action cold and dark PG, while on the ground and looking around in the cockpit:

2.5.5 ±45fps

2.5.6 (before last patch) ±23fps

2.5.6 (after last patch) ±29fps

 

(all tested with same settings)

 

 

Still not "there" yet, but hey, it is improvement! :)

 

 

Very respectfully,

I would not call a 6fps jump while your frames are still halved and vr unusable an "improvement"

[Focha]

The last version of the beta is really unstable... I keep always having CTDs and the frame rate is now terrible. Anyone else having these problems?

[Pikey]

So, what...4 months to get some simple fixes to .miz/.cmp files that third party developers have already written...

For something that won't mess with core code anymore than a user downloading a user-created Mission or Skin would?

 

 

If changes to 3rd party DLC campaigns could affect "a stable build" there'd be no User created Missions would there? its a change to a text file in your Users/yourname/savedgames folder...how is that going to affect a "stable build"

Honestly @jasonbirder you would be happy you missed the first 2.5.6 release. if it werent for several iterations now, ED would only be making OB into Stable, which they've taken valid criticism on in the past, however by fixing a LOT of stuff, stable will now benefit.

 

DLC is massively different, they set super low requirements for complexity for support reasons. I was going to get into 3rd party DLC it but when I found out that you couldnt use custom scripting to any big degree, it became unattractive for me. And now you can see, there is some impact but not quite so much impact to DLC as multiplayer, servers and deeper scripting on top of DCS.

 

OB took it full in the face on this round. It took down servers. Yet people still welcome the opportunity to be in it. Given that, and people fighting for the right to be involved (according to the terrible popularity of my post suggesting we could ban OB from multiplayer), having stable branch supporters wanting to enter this mess earlier strikes me as the exact opposite of the entire point of all the last weeks of pain OB has been through.

 

Aside from that... you don't simply revert parts of code in certain areas and take them and selectively pile them into stable as you go. Sadly (and wouldnt it be great!) you cannot seperate most code in isolation and apply it to stable. I can't explain that to you easily, and some of the explanation involves on ED's coding methodology and the application itself, and the code itself. Not to forget the COO called it "spaghetti code" in her own words, and that is a hard legacy of the many years of development.

[BuzzU]

If they would give stable the new A-10C cockpit i'd go back to it stable.

[FalconPlot16]

If they would give stable the new A-10C cockpit i'd go back to it stable.

 

IIRC A10 cockpit is already in stable but not ka 50's.

[BuzzU]

IIRC A10 cockpit is already in stable but not ka 50's.

 

Stable hasn't been updated since 12/24/19. Was the new cockpit out then? What update installed it?

[razo+r]

Stable hasn't been updated since 12/24/19. Was the new cockpit out then? What update installed it?

 

This one did: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4143422&postcount=83

[Northstar98]

Stable hasn't been updated since 12/24/19. Was the new cockpit out then? What update installed it?

 

Nope, new cockpit came out after the stable update.

 

And yes, I exclusively play stable :cry:

 

EDIT: The A-10Cs one is in the stable build (and is quite performance intensive for some reason, I get better frames in literally everything else, including the F-14B). The Ka-50s one isn't in the 2.5.5 stable.

Edited March 21, 2020 by Northstar98

[ThorBrasil]

Any chance to add it to the A-10C and Ka-50?

 

DCS 2.5.6.45317 Open Beta F-16C and F-18 by ED

"Added canopy and MFD reflections options"

 

Thank You ED Team!

[BuzzU]

This one did: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4143422&postcount=83

 

That was the OB update. I was asking when stable got it in response to Falcon's post.

[Eldur]

Any chance to add it to the A-10C and Ka-50?

 

DCS 2.5.6.45317 Open Beta F-16C and F-18 by ED

"Added canopy and MFD reflections options"

 

Thank You ED Team!

 

Didn't even notice that in the first place. Sucks when you can't read

 

I totally support that request, but I guess they're working on it for all their modules. Thanks for doing so, very much appreciated!