Update on improved ATC?

[MAXsenna]

Modders don’t have budgets, that’s why comparing games isn’t relevant. Especially free games. 

It's not free.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[SharpeXB]

8 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

It's not free.

Oh I thought you were talking about a different sim. Comparisons are kinda pointless and verboten anyways…

[MAXsenna]

Oh I thought you were talking about a different sim. Comparisons are kinda pointless and verboten anyways…

The Viper sim isn't free even if that team works for free. It's 10 bucks, as you need the original exe for licensing.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[SharpeXB]

7 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

The Viper sim isn't free even if that team works for free. It's 10 bucks, as you need the original exe for licensing.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk
 

Ok so essentially “free” Not really a fair comparison. 

Edited October 28, 2024 by SharpeXB

[Gierasimov]

Bignewy said in another thread:

Quote

ATC is something for the future, again its a huge task.

 

[MAXsenna]

Ok so essentially “free” Not really a fair comparison. 

No, you post disinformation, and I corrected that.
And what Gunfreak meant was, imagine what that team could do if they decided to go pro!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[SharpeXB]

11 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

And what Gunfreak meant was, imagine what that team could do if they decided to go pro!

Yeah if they “went pro” they’d have to turn a profit. But such things are off topic and sorta irrelevant. 

11 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

No, you post disinformation, and I corrected that.

Noted but the game in question is essentially free, at little cost compared to a “for profit” game. Not very relevant for comparison and against the rules to keep mentioning. 

Edited October 28, 2024 by SharpeXB

[MAXsenna]

Yeah if they “went pro” they’d have to turn a profit. But such things are off topic and sorta irrelevant. 

Do you always need to start an argument when you're wrong and completely missed the point? It was just a comment on how well it can be done, even without a budget and on spare time. Jeez Louise!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[SharpeXB]

Just now, MAXsenna said:

Do you always need to start an argument when you're wrong and completely missed the point? It was just a comment on how well it can be done, even without a budget and on spare time. Jeez Louise!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk
 

Comparing games here is a dead end. No point in this discussion. 

[MAXsenna]

Comparing games here is a dead end. No point in this discussion. 

Yeah, and you never do that, EVER!
Busted, again. I rest my case.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Pikey]

I'm so torn about ATC, I can see some passionate viewpoints on each side, I just feel like this is a huge undertaking for the relative imapct which might be why the job keeps being pushed back (I don't know, so dont infer anything).

There's a critical peice that I feel slots in, before ATC, that anyone who writes missions for servers understands the impact of: The AI simply cannot handle airbase operations over time. Sure it works in principle and the ATC system is quite rudimentary but there are things people in this chat don't see, such as the way it breaks and the way departing aircraft are always stopping aircraft that are holding, and these can stop and casue airborne pile ups and complete stops of the airport to the extent where it simply becomes more important to fix that before any ATC system would reliably work instead. The other things that make no sense are the design of taxiing, which is always placed to the furthest point from the landing point to go through the longest routes, for reasons that are beyond my comprehension and serve to cause pile ups and issues. And also the AI is still holding its parking spot for its lifetime so I found, which leads to refusals to land.

For Single player play, to have an immersive ATC system relies on having an AI that behaves. There's no point in implementing new voices on the back of AI that can't behave. Complementary to that is that the terrain system that provides the taxiways and parking spots must support the AI, there's always a lower level.

So... lots more to do before ATC is even sensible in my understanding.

Edited October 29, 2024 by Pikey
sp

[MAXsenna]

28 minutes ago, Pikey said:

There's a critical peice that I feel slots in, before ATC, that anyone who writes missions for servers understands the impact of: The AI simply cannot handle airbase operations over time.

Dude! Are you serious? This IS EXACTLY the ATC system we are talking about. The issues you are describing must be part of the new ATC system! Track "a few" posts/pages back, and have a look at the video @Northstar98 linked. That's all AI ATC. You really should watch. Then you'll understand that it can be done, and what we're asking for. And of course it works with a mix of real players and AI too. 

[sirrah]

14 minutes ago, Pikey said:

I'm so torn about ATC, I can see some passionate viewpoints on each side, I just feel like this is a huge undertaking for the relative imapct which might be why the job keeps being pushed back (I don't know, so dont infer anything).

There's a critical peice that I feel slots in, before ATC, that anyone who writes missions for servers understands the impact of: The AI simply cannot handle airbase operations over time. Sure it works in principle and the ATC system is quite rudimentary but there are things people in this chat don't see, such as the way it breaks and the way departing aircraft are always stopping aircraft that are holding, and these can stop and casue airborne pile ups and complete stops of the airport to the extent where it simply becomes more important to fix that before any ATC system would reliably work instead. The other things that make no sense are the design of taxiing, which is always placed to the furthest point from the landing point to go through the longest routes, for reasons that are beyond my comprehension and serve to cause pile ups and issues. And also the AI is still holding its parking spot for its lifetime so I found, which leads to refusals to land.

For Single player play, to have an immersive ATC system relies on having an AI that behaves. There's no point in implementing new voices on the back of AI that can't behave. Complementary to that is that the terrain system that provides the taxiways and parking spots must support the AI, there's always a lower level.

So... lots more to do before ATC is even sensible in my understanding.

 

I completely agree (and don't think that anyone can deny) that AI behavior and ATC improvements can only go hand in hand. No point in having fancy ATC if AI is completely ignoring it.

Huge and complicated endeavor? Yes, I'm sure of it. But imho, it should be way up there on the priority list together with the DC. Flying missions without proper communications/procedures makes this sim feel "empty"/"not alive" (sorry, can't find the correct wording) and arcadish.

As an example: In the "Weasels over Syria" campaign from Ground Pounders, a large portion of the missions consists of handing the radios and communicating with other flights and airfields. Obviously these communications are completely scripted and tailor made for these missions and something like this would probably not be possible within our lifetime, but these communications are the main thing that make this particular campaign so brilliant and compelling. Without it, it would just be: Fly from A to B, drop a bomb, fly back from B to A and land. Again, I don't expect comms like in this campaign, but right now it's more realistic to not use the radios at all, because current ATC/comms in DCS are so bad.

I was kinda hoping/assuming, that ATC/AI improvements where in progress together with the new DC, but I am concerned now that I was wrong, as ATC seems to be low on the priority list for ED. At least, that's how I read this reply from BN:

Quote

ATC is something for the future, again its a huge task. 

 

But I think I'm repeating myself here, which isn't useful for anyone

I just hope, some day, I will be able to effectively use the radios in all those fancy modules I own, without having to only rely on scripted DLC campaigns.

[Pikey]

10 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Dude! Are you serious? This IS EXACTLY the ATC system we are talking about. The issues you are describing must be part of the new ATC system! Track "a few" posts/pages back, and have a look at the video @Northstar98 linked. That's all AI ATC. You really should watch. Then you'll understand that it can be done, and what we're asking for. And of course it works with a mix of real players and AI too. 

Well maybe there should be a better way to describe what the ATC feature is, since there's plenty of counter-points offered in this thread which no one corrected talking specifically about CTAF and the lack of need for air traffic control, from the player perspective. It's reasonable to assume, for some, that ATC is a player feature only, that projects the voices and requests in the in game radio menu. In reality, you and I are agreed that its so much more, that its principally the undelying way in whch both the player and the AI are deconflicted and scheduled around airbases, which I defintiely know to be required in order to have servers that run reasonably for more than a few sortie lengths. Possibly that message is lost to many people in communication when the acronym is used so freely. To quote Bernard Shaw,

"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place".

That man gets more right as the internet age progresses!

Back on topic, I'll have a look at the links and get up to speed. The ATC system (AI underlying system) I haven't discerned any change in for as long as DCS World has existed, its always had interesting quirks. The AI system has a couple of things added, like pairs landings, but not much I can see at least. The valu ein getting this system working is that players can fit into AI's schedule an dnot have collision or causes AI to just spin in the air until it runs out of fuel, which is important to servers.

 

[MAXsenna]

Well maybe there should be a better way to describe what the ATC feature is, since there's plenty of counter-points offered in this thread which no one corrected talking specifically about CTAF and the lack of need for air traffic control, from the player perspective. It's reasonable to assume, for some, that ATC is a player feature only, that projects the voices and requests in the in game radio menu. In reality, you and I are agreed that its so much more, that its principally the undelying way in whch both the player and the AI are deconflicted and scheduled around airbases, which I defintiely know to be required in order to have servers that run reasonably for more than a few sortie lengths. Possibly that message is lost to many people in communication when the acronym is used so freely. To quote Bernard Shaw,

"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place".

That man gets more right as the internet age progresses!

Back on topic, I'll have a look at the links and get up to speed. The ATC system (AI underlying system) I haven't discerned any change in for as long as DCS World has existed, its always had interesting quirks. The AI system has a couple of things added, like pairs landings, but not much I can see at least. The valu ein getting this system working is that players can fit into AI's schedule an dnot have collision or causes AI to just spin in the air until it runs out of fuel, which is important to servers.

 

Absolutely! Well spoken!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Gary]

Morning all,

I will admit that I know absolutely nothing about servers, scripting or the DCS AI oddities. However, to repeat what I have said before, I do understand that generic ATC for all sides, all airfields, across all maps and eras is a big task. Whilst that is the desire of course I am  actually advocating some improvements, at a more basic level in the meantime.

Firstly can the existing system be fixed please. Tower and AWACS spamming players is a big deal breaker for most players I would guess.

Secondly - local ground, tower, dep / app CAN be done and relatively easily - as mentioned above Ground Pounder has done an impressive job already - and this is a single guy producing excellent material on his own.

So heres an idea. What do others think?

I might advertise a little competition on the forum. For a clever content creator to come up with a basic mission template in Miz format (if such a competition is allowed of course) to design a basic sandbox mission with ATC elements (like those already available in DLC) which includes.

Ground Ops

Tower Ops

Dep / App

ATIS

RAT (to populate the air space and field locally - accept this might be hard to sequence?)

Non spamming AWACS

The abilty to change start airbase (with easy and appropriate edits to the miz)

The ability to change airframes easily

To do whatever mission the player wishes once cleared by departure control (say 20 miles out of the airbase)

For the App control to kick in once less than 20  miles from home and triggered

Anything else ATC related the clever content creator can add or think of

 

Now if such a competion was allowed I'd be very keen to sponsor such with the award of a free module to whichever miz I thought best suited my particular needs

Thoughts?

Gary

Edited October 29, 2024 by Gary
Typo's

[MAXsenna]

20 minutes ago, Gary said:

Thoughts?

Why? The point being it should already be in the sim without any scripting required, like in that other sim we love to mention. Making this mission specific makes no sense at all. I repeat. Watch the video @Northstar98 linked, and you'll get a clearer picture of how this should work. 

Open your DCS.log and look at all the "missing taxiways" errors that are thrown constantly whenever starting a mission on every map. No wonder why the AI is confused and everything gets constipated. 

[Gary]

Just now, MAXsenna said:

Why? The point being it should already be in the sim without any scripting required, like in that other sim we love to mention. Making this mission specific makes no sense at all. I repeat. Watch the video @Northstar98 linked, and you'll get a clearer picture of how this should work. 

Open your DCS.log and look at all the "missing taxiways" errors that are thrown constantly whenever starting a mission on every map. No wonder why the AI is confused and everything gets constipated. 

Max,

I am VERY familiar with the other sim and its ATC / Comms functions. I guess my "short term aim" is to get something vaugely similar (or frankly any form of working ATC / Comms) now because clearly the "proper" development is still years away!

[Gary]

Why has this been marked as solved (by me!) and yet not merged with the other thread?

I obviously don't have the ability to merge threads on the forum.

I'm confussed as to what has actually been done here?

[Pikey]

25 minutes ago, Gary said:

Max,

I am VERY familiar with the other sim and its ATC / Comms functions. I guess my "short term aim" is to get something vaugely similar (or frankly any form of working ATC / Comms) now because clearly the "proper" development is still years away!

Saying this with the full knowledge that an in game option is required and desired... but...
You can try Franks FLIGHTCONTROL class in Moose, its just a line of code that you can copy and paste from the link there. What it does is stop the AI from taxiing by literally blocking them with a static of your choice, then doing the same with in bound traffic and managing it all in script, allowing batches to cyclically revolve betweeen landing and takeoff better than the game does, which can get stuck in a cycle of allowing an AI to begin landing then a new plane spawns in and cancels it because the ATC engine rule always prioritizes departing traffic which can causes AI to stack up and then run out of fuel.
Ive used it successfully to keep traffic from not building up when using AI for things like intercepts which are on demand and unplanned.


BTW I watched the BMS demo, I thought it was great but it didnt handle DCS's use case whereby DCS also has a great demand oinline for cyclical ops reverting very frequently by players interfering and prioritizing themselves through traffic. And ATO system can plan ahead, much of online play in DCS is "Join in progress" and people aren't waiting for atakeoff slot, they are going now. There's simply no crossover for these two types of play. Unless DCS does get serious and actually land on misbehaving peoples heads. People gotta learn one way or another, but this is th emain issue catering for two types of play...those that will use an ATC system and those that will ignore it!
 

[BIGNEWY]

25 minutes ago, Gary said:

Why has this been marked as solved (by me!) and yet not merged with the other thread?

I obviously don't have the ability to merge threads on the forum.

I'm confussed as to what has actually been done here?

There has been no moderation here or a solution marked by us, not to worry I have removed the solved status and will merge the threads as requested

thanks

[Gary]

47 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

There has been no moderation here or a solution marked by us, not to worry I have removed the solved status and will merge the threads as requested

thanks

Thank you. Appreciated.

If it was not moderated by ED (and I believe you fully) then you might want to look into who did possibly.

[Gary]

55 minutes ago, Pikey said:

Saying this with the full knowledge that an in game option is required and desired... but...
You can try Franks FLIGHTCONTROL class in Moose, its just a line of code that you can copy and paste from the link there. What it does is stop the AI from taxiing by literally blocking them with a static of your choice, then doing the same with in bound traffic and managing it all in script, allowing batches to cyclically revolve betweeen landing and takeoff better than the game does, which can get stuck in a cycle of allowing an AI to begin landing then a new plane spawns in and cancels it because the ATC engine rule always prioritizes departing traffic which can causes AI to stack up and then run out of fuel.
Ive used it successfully to keep traffic from not building up when using AI for things like intercepts which are on demand and unplanned.


BTW I watched the BMS demo, I thought it was great but it didnt handle DCS's use case whereby DCS also has a great demand oinline for cyclical ops reverting very frequently by players interfering and prioritizing themselves through traffic. And ATO system can plan ahead, much of online play in DCS is "Join in progress" and people aren't waiting for atakeoff slot, they are going now. There's simply no crossover for these two types of play. Unless DCS does get serious and actually land on misbehaving peoples heads. People gotta learn one way or another, but this is th emain issue catering for two types of play...those that will use an ATC system and those that will ignore it!
 

Pikey,

The other sim can and does cater for player injections quiet well. If a player decides he is going to take off regardless of the AI being on final the programme will and does ask the AI to go around.

I do get though that on MP players doing their own thing when they want would be hugely problematical - hence the suggestion that proper ATC use implimented something akin to doing a full start up - or not - so the sever admin choose.

I also accept my request is very much largely for the benefit of SP ops and programme use.

I've seen the Moose script but honestly - no matter how easy it might be for some to impliment and understand - I sadly fall into the cat of those that can't get my head around it.

I'm also not entirely sure what it will give me from the list I added above for my personal enjoyment?

Regards,

Gary

[buceador]

2 hours ago, Pikey said:

Then you'll understand that it can be done

If you look back at what @Brainspiller said re. " It looks like they are deep in technical dept." leads me to the conclusion that the fact that "it can be done" does not mean DCS can do it (or is willing to do it).

[SharpeXB]

Declaring an emergency would be a great and necessary function. It’s my favorite thing to do! Although I guess you don’t need ATC to dead stick land on a road Bonus points there!