Feedback Thread - Tomcat Patch 07-21-2021

[QuiGon]

1 hour ago, Gunslinger22 said:

Fair dinkum you’re right. They’ve never had an issue or missed a deadline they’ve set, they’re bloody awesome.

 

1. I never said they never missed a deadline.

2. Estimates are not deadlines. Please learn the difference!

[Skysurfer]

Basically, get your s*** together, Heatblur. Literally just hire someone who does project management for a living. This is not ok and most customers had all the patience imaginable with yall. 

Edited July 22, 2021 by Skysurfer

[Blinde]

How freaking hard is it to just make those EIG correct? It takes about a day for someone who has some acknowledge of texture designing.

 

Hardly the "COMP -> COMB typo on hydraulics gauge" is that much more important.

Edited July 22, 2021 by Blinde

[IronMike]

18 minutes ago, Blinde said:

How freaking hard is it to just make those EIG correct? It takes about a day for someone who has some acknowledge of texture designing.

 

Hardly the "COMP -> COMB typo on hydraulics gauge" is that much more important.

 

 

No, it doesn't take just one day. And one has nothing to do with the other...
 

[Skysurfer]

21 minutes ago, Blinde said:

How freaking hard is it to just make those EIG correct? It takes about a day for someone who has some acknowledge of texture designing.

 

Hardly the "COMP -> COMB typo on hydraulics gauge" is that much more important.

 

 

It doesn't take a day (it requires a new 3d model as well as the gauge internals are different and digital) but this shouldn't have taken 2+ years for sure.  Pretty essential item for the B. Same as the untextured TCS internals and additional LAU-7 pylons or lack of the ECM bulges/fairings since release. 

Edited July 22, 2021 by Skysurfer

[IronMike]

5 hours ago, Skysurfer said:

Literally just hire someone who does project management for a living. This is not ok and most customers had all the patience imaginable with yall. 

 

 

We certainly won't, we do that ourselves. We set quality marks for ourselves, not timelines. If your patience ran out, fine, that is your perogative, and no one has more understanding for that than us. But we will not change the way how we do things, because the end result speaks for itself. Nothing worse than some "manager" at Ubisoft telling some developer that Cliffs of Dover has met its timeline now, and needs to be released. If anyone remembers what kind of mess that was - yeah, no thanks. This isn't how this works, and hopefully never will. Really, it would be the worst imaginable thing to take away the freedom we allow ourselves to do things at our own pace and at the level of quality we want to achieve, while pushing boundaries in simulation at the same time.

If this was the case, it would have resulted in you getting the F-14B only, and 1 campaign, and no multicrew, no Jester, even, and nothing of the extra content. I don't think anyone of us would want that.

Timelines are great and all, but not in our world and not for the stuff we do. We need freedom to create what we want. And anyone would do bad in taking that away from us.

Edited July 22, 2021 by IronMike

[reinerjl]

@IronMike i totally agree . Take  all the time you need to release a polished product . Your tomcat is a wonder . And we have or will have 3 campaigns , the forrestal , A6 AI and more for FREE . What can we ask more ? Thanks for all that stuff ...

[draconus]

2 hours ago, IronMike said:

I think what is most important, is that you guys know that you can always ask us anything, and you will always get a straight answer.

Cool, how about our pilot body?

[IronMike]

43 minutes ago, draconus said:

Cool, how about our pilot body?

 

It is getting there, but rather slowly, because the animations are a pita to get right, and we now want to focus on finishing the forrestal, but ofc: before end of early access it will be there. It is one of the items we work on off/on, as other stuff comes in between. However, it isn't lost on us how much you guys want it.

[Donut]

3 hours ago, IronMike said:

please explain to me how being a paying customer does not mean anything these days?

I purchased the Tomcat...not the "free" extras.  Take a poll on which everyone want first...completed Tomcat, Forrestal, AI A-6.  While the extra stuff is greatly appreciated, it's ultimately not what we bought or what we are really here for...it's the Tomcat.

2 hours ago, IronMike said:

 

No, it doesn't take just one day. And one has nothing to do with the other...
 

Does it take 2,555+ days...you said the Tomcat has been in development for 7 years.  Maybe some insight about why this one instrument is taking so long....

1 hour ago, reinerjl said:

@IronMike i totally agree . Take  all the time you need to release a polished product . Your tomcat is a wonder . And we have or will have 3 campaigns , the forrestal , A6 AI and more for FREE . What can we ask more ? Thanks for all that stuff ...

What more can we ask for?  A completed Tomcat before all the free stuff.  

[draconus]

16 hours ago, Donut said:

Maybe some insight about why this one instrument is taking so long....

I can answer that. They were doing this: https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/201735-dcs-f-14-changelogs-amp-updates/#comments

other things not listed there and also other things that are in active development. Not all HB stuff does cockpit instruments of course.

Edit: we also know now that they were busy making friends with TrueGrit and taking part in EF Typhoon dev.

 

About the instrument - it is already correct for the A and by the look and functionality almost the same as for the B. So it's a low priority because it's cosmetics. It's like I'd love to have basic Su-25 pilot already implemented and just wait for the better one patiently.

Edited July 23, 2021 by draconus

[IronMike]

14 minutes ago, Donut said:

I purchased the Tomcat...not the "free" extras.  Take a poll on which everyone want first...completed Tomcat, Forrestal, AI A-6.  While the extra stuff is greatly appreciated, it's ultimately not what we bought or what we are really here for...it's the Tomcat.

Does it take 2,555+ days...you said the Tomcat has been in development for 7 years.  Maybe some insight about why this one instrument is taking so long....

What more can we ask for?  A completed Tomcat before all the free stuff.  

 

I get what you want, but again, that is not how it works. Everything needs to be worked on, when the need arises, or when time permits. The free stuff is just as important, because it complements the module, and in the end: you did pay for that, too. Not everyone has the same pet peeves either, so we need to take all in consideration. And some things, say like the aim54, are not soleley depending on our willingness/ability/chance to work on them, but also depend on ED or DCS in general, etc etc...

You did get a fairly complete Tomcat, more complete than any other module upon EA release I would carefully dare to suggest. Yes, EIG is missing, ECM fairings are missing, the TCS interior texture is missing - and none of it makes it unplayable or unusable. For you these things may be high priority, for us priorities shift all the time. Not by abritrary mood swings, but by necessity of what can be worked on at the moment. And on top of that, we also need to work on new modules, need to work on core code integrations that can be re-used long-term, need to work on base dynamics that will benefit (and accelerate the development of) all future modules, etc. It is very hard for you guys to understand the why, but with each subsequent module, things will become more and more streamlined. These are all things we need to juggle at the same time, and then things like ECM fairings suddenly have a much much smaller priority for the sake of the bigger picture we need to always keep in mind. Afterall, long term sustainability is something that needs to be achieved in the end, too.

[Roosterfeet]

For some reason I feel compelled to post something for context here. I remember a time when flight sims were a huge part of the PC games industry. A half dozen new flight sim titles came out every year from major publishers. EA licensed the Jane's name and released about a dozen titles under that umbrella between '95 and 2000. Then as technology advanced, games got more complex and expensive to develop while at the same time the PC and console games industry boomed. Other genres grew rapidly while interest in and the profitability of flight sims died. PC military flight sims became a niche market with only a handful of active developers who were motivated more by passion than profit and barely able to stay afloat. We don't even get a half dozen new products per decade now unless you count individual DCS modules.

 

I've seen small project after small project fail for 20 years. It really is a miracle that DCS and especially Heatblur's Tomcat exist at all. DCS has its issues and so does the Tomcat but the fidelity they've achieved given the number of people working on theses things and the size of the flightsim market is truly unbelievable.

 

Yes it's frustrating when things break, don't work as advertised, or take ages longer to deliver than expected but I also think that these extraordinary products produced in spite of the realities of modern software development warrant extraordinary patience. I will happily report problems with a concise description and the requested files along with a "thank you." Thank you for making this and thank you for continuing to make it better. 

Edited July 22, 2021 by Roosterfeet

[IronMike]

Thank you all for your continued input and support. All voices are important and cherished by us.

[Donut]

Well, we now know the reason for all the delays and slowed progress with the Eurofighter announcement.

[Skysurfer]

Did any of the hotfixes make it into today's hotfix?

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

[quote]As it currently is we can't guide a missile in DCS on just a track in the radar, it needs to track on a real target.

What we did to allow some of this functionality is that when a track is lost we compare the location of the held track to the real target and if those are close enough together we still guide the missile. If they're not we don't. This means that if the target is not within this box anymore it will look as if the missile just stopped guiding and if it is it will continue to guide.

It's not optimal for sure but it's better than nothing and we'd be more than happy to model it in a more correct way if we can in the future. Optimally we would be able to guide the missile towards a spot in the sky that we can decide on and then tell the missile to go active and find the target on it's own. But that's not currently possible afaik.[/quote]

So how is this done ? 
 

• Fix for AIM-54 not going active on held tracks.

Did you make the 'box' bigger, or did you make the 'held track' do some magic ? 
Just a bit worried that you made it into a 80 nm > fire > turn around > always magic track missile, again. 

 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Csgo GE oh yeah

[Skysurfer]

7 minutes ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

[quote]As it currently is we can't guide a missile in DCS on just a track in the radar, it needs to track on a real target.

What we did to allow some of this functionality is that when a track is lost we compare the location of the held track to the real target and if those are close enough together we still guide the missile. If they're not we don't. This means that if the target is not within this box anymore it will look as if the missile just stopped guiding and if it is it will continue to guide.

It's not optimal for sure but it's better than nothing and we'd be more than happy to model it in a more correct way if we can in the future. Optimally we would be able to guide the missile towards a spot in the sky that we can decide on and then tell the missile to go active and find the target on it's own. But that's not currently possible afaik.[/quote]

So how is this done ? 
 

• Fix for AIM-54 not going active on held tracks.

Did you make the 'box' bigger, or did you make the 'held track' do some magic ? 
Just a bit worried that you made it into a 80 nm > fire > turn around > always magic track missile, again. 

 

 

 

Dude, let it go, seriously.

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

Why ?

First they say they can't do it. Then suddenly it's 'fixed'. 
And i see triple the amount of MK60 kills i normally see on the server. 

Why can't i ask how they did something they said they couldn't do ?

[Skysurfer]

2 minutes ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

Why ?

First they say they can't do it. Then suddenly it's 'fixed'. 
And i see triple the amount of MK60 kills i normally see on the server. 

Why can't i ask how they did something they said they couldn't do ?

 

You don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about. Go back to your airquake server.

Edited July 23, 2021 by Skysurfer

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

Why, is it a secret how they've done it ?
Maybe you can explain it to me ?

Edited July 23, 2021 by Csgo GE oh yeah

[Skysurfer]

6 minutes ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

Why, is it a secret how they've done it ?
Maybe you can explain it to me ?

 

 

Sorry, already tried.

[Csgo GE oh yeah]

What does "close enough" even mean?
I'm guessing "close enough" has just been widened or something? I'm curious.  
Or does the missile just track fluently now even though there is no radar lock ?

 

As it currently is we can't guide a missile in DCS on just a track in the radar, it needs to track on a real target.

What we did to allow some of this functionality is that when a track is lost we compare the location of the held track to the real target and if those are close enough (??) together we still guide the missile. If they're not we don't. This means that if the target is not within this box anymore it will look as if the missile just stopped guiding and if it is it will continue to guide.

It's not optimal for sure but it's better than nothing and we'd be more than happy to model it in a more correct way if we can in the future. Optimally we would be able to guide the missile towards a spot in the sky that we can decide on and then tell the missile to go active and find the target on it's own. But that's not currently possible afaik

 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Csgo GE oh yeah

[IronMike]

4 hours ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

What does "close enough" even mean?
I'm guessing "close enough" has just been widened or something? I'm curious.  
Or does the missile just track fluently now even though there is no radar lock ?

 

As it currently is we can't guide a missile in DCS on just a track in the radar, it needs to track on a real target.

What we did to allow some of this functionality is that when a track is lost we compare the location of the held track to the real target and if those are close enough (??) together we still guide the missile. If they're not we don't. This means that if the target is not within this box anymore it will look as if the missile just stopped guiding and if it is it will continue to guide.

It's not optimal for sure but it's better than nothing and we'd be more than happy to model it in a more correct way if we can in the future. Optimally we would be able to guide the missile towards a spot in the sky that we can decide on and then tell the missile to go active and find the target on it's own. But that's not currently possible afaik

 

 

It is very simple to explain that: we fixed what you quoted in the bold text from not working at all to working again. Nothing has been changed about the way we do it. The bug was that what you quote just didn't work at all for a while, and now, after the fix, it does again. That is all. No box was made bigger, no flankers were harmed in the process, and we are still not trying to make the missile into an uber MiG-Schreck, that is developed to haunt your dreams. Really, you are way too paranoid about this. We are interested in realistic as possible simulations, and nothing else. And I am not saying this to put you down, but to put your mind at rest.

At the same time I would like to remind everyone to stay kind to each other please! Thank you!

[IronMike]

14 hours ago, Donut said:

Well, we now know the reason for all the delays and slowed progress with the Eurofighter announcement.

 

Let me put your mind at rest that it has 100% nothing, but absolutely zero, to do with the delays with the Tomcat. None whatsoever.