IC Issue, question needs to be asked.

[v81]

Quoting @BIGNEWY from another thread.

Quote

IC changes were made to prevent known cheats and exploits being used. 

What cheats and exploits?

We've been smacked over the head with no warning with this game breaking nightmare.... and there is no justification?

 

What exploit were you trying to prevent by removing the ability to have instruments exported?

What exploit was solved by removing the ability to set personalised CMD profiles?

 

I'm really keen to find the genesis of this decision making.

 

Someone knowingly did this, and surely should have known the obvious repercussions.

DCS is build on the modding community, a large portion of the user base is running one mod or another, with many of them actually dependant on the mods for functionality (display exports, elevator trim fix, RWR fix, etc..) and overdue convenience (Dice, custom quick starts).

 

The idea of coming up with a list of affected mods in that other thread so as they may be 'considered' doesn't sit right with me.

My concern is, that the gate is being shut here for future mods that don't exist yet, and given how reliant I've become on mods, often providing functionality ED can't/won't/haven't yet I'm pretty bothered by it.

 

I can see 1 thing happening for sure, many servers are going to ditch IC requirement either by necessity, protest or both.

 

ED needs to wheel this back in full immediately.

Whatever it was that was trying to be achieved needs to be done in a better and smarter way.

White listing a limited selection of current mods and forcing future mods (when the majority simply provide near essential functionality) to go through what WILL BE a difficult, slow and convoluted process and even face a prospect of a ban hammer is ridiculous and should not be the solution.

 

Removing exploitable items from these plain text config files seems to be a vastly superior idea, whilst leaving us the customisation we need to set-up our sims as we see fit.

 

To ED I say... Don't make us justify our mods that you already know are good and sensible.

How about you justify why IC got so broadly expanded with zero community consultation knowing full well it would break things.

 

Are we going to have a good business / client relationship here, or are you placing yourselves as overlords and us as mere peasants?

 

I think the above is more than reasonable and healthy debate should be allowed.

[BIGNEWY]

Hi,

 

We have covered this already, the changes were implemented to prevent cheating and exploits in competitive multiplayer, I wont discuss exploits openly on the forum, but it was necessary to implement the change to ensure competitive multiplayer was fair for all playing.

 

The open beta public testing build is the best place to get feedback from you all regarding mods and tweaks you have made and we are passing the feedback to the team who are looking into solutions.

 

Thank you

 

 

[v81]

With all due respect I think the forums are a better place to get feedback prior to such a massive change that is knowingly game breaking for a large portion of the playerbase.

Good or bad, OpenBeta is treated as 'release' for the bulk of the MP community, and making such a massive change without consultation is just not sensible.

 

I think the bulk of the frustration and fear are from several things, a few of what I list here others have repeatedly voiced...

1) Lack of communication / consultation.

2) The scale of the change

3) That it sets a precedent leaving us in fear it could happen again.

4) That other more important and overdue things aren't being worked on.

 

For number 4 I submitted .miz files for fixed Su-25T training missions several (4?) years back, I literally did the work for ED, and ED sat on them and did nothing until years later, when they were actually (partially) fixed just recently. This issue put off new comers to the sim for years.

Also on #4 a large portion of overdue or corrected functionality is provided by others in the form of files that now break IC, it's ultimately a slap in the face to people who have been doing ED's work for them.

 

Did no one spare a thought for the likes of Warthog Project and others who rely on this functionality along with untold thousands of others?, and the time and effort they put into promoting DCS and sharing what they learned.

 

Was it really necessary for us to lose the obvious functionality of CMDS and viewport configs?

If these things are exploitable they should have been fixed behind the scenes, not by removing what is essential functionality for some of us.

 

BIGNEWY, a lot of us just want to know how this happened, and want some assurance it won't happen again.

The vast majority of DCS users are advanced in terms of following development and I think a bit of communication is owed.

 

Lack of consultation and communication seems to be the core issue here, and is sadly a recurring theme when any drama happens, despite promises from ED staff that this would be improved on.

[AdrianL]

Maybe it is an option to provide a competition level IC check in addition to the current one. 

 

This change shows that the 'powers at be' have no idea of the mods being used and why they are necessary. 

I know that ED tests without mods and that is fine but many mods are due to a lack of functionality / options that ED have chosen not to prioritize.

   

Edited September 19, 2021 by AdrianL

[Cab]

Is this a good time to remind people they can revert to the Stable version while ED sorts it out?

Edited September 19, 2021 by Cab

[BIGNEWY]

23 minutes ago, v81 said:

With all due respect I think the forums are a better place to get feedback prior to such a massive change that is knowingly game breaking for a large portion of the playerbase.

Good or bad, OpenBeta is treated as 'release' for the bulk of the MP community, and making such a massive change without consultation is just not sensible.

 

Just to stop you there. 

 

How can we get feedback on a change without implementing it?  This is what open beta is used for, if stability is what you are looking for stable version is the best place to be with fewer update cycles.

The open beta is a public testing build, always will be. 

 

As for communication, we have been very active on the forums, discord, and private messages. 

 

thanks

[agrasyuk]

59 minutes ago, v81 said:

 

BIGNEWY, a lot of us just want to know how this happened, and want some assurance it won't happen again.

 

I just wanted to emphasize this part as It it is the most important part and it's almost getting lost in the long post. 

 

Thanks in advance 

[Cab]

1 hour ago, v81 said:

Lack of consultation and communication seems to be the core issue here, and is sadly a recurring theme when any drama happens, despite promises from ED staff that this would be improved on.

 

I disagree. The fact that people treat Open Beta like it's the Stable release seems the be the core issue here.

 

If people want stability they need to stick with the Stable release. If their favorite servers use OB, then they should take it up with the admins.

[al531246]

v81, to answer your question. A lua was modified in a SATAL tournament giving the JF-17 better performance, I believe it was a radar tweak. The issue was reported to Deka and Deka patched by hardcoding the modified parameter into a compiled .dll. Deka patched the issue.

 

ED's modification to the IC system was not requested. When players requested in mass that the change be reverted ED deleted all the comments and closed the thread. They also banned heaps of people from the ED discord for the same thing. 

 

1 hour ago, BIGNEWY said:

How can we get feedback on a change without implementing it?

 

You know this is the Eagle Dynamics forum? You can literally ask your players right here BEFORE making a change. 

 

[ams999]

20 minutes ago, Cab said:

 

The fact that people treat Open Beta like it's the Stable release seems the be the core issue here.

 

This of course would require for stable to not get this change but I think one has seen often enough that... ahem... features... get handed down to stable without any changes. This kinda negates the sentiment that stable vs. open beta would be the 'core issue'.

[Cab]

4 minutes ago, ams999 said:

 

This of course would require for stable to not get this change but I think one has seen often enough that... ahem... features... get handed down to stable without any changes. This kinda negates the sentiment that stable vs. open beta would be the 'core issue'.

 

Agreed. If problems identified in OB are carried over into Stable then that is a real problem.

[BIGNEWY]

As mentioned we have already taken a lot of feedback and made many reports regarding mods and edits that now fail IC. 

 

When we have news of any progress we will let you all know. 

 

thanks