Disable autostart sequence in a mission

[Tom Kazansky]

Beeing a member of this community for years, I have learned that there is an immense amount of different opinions how DCS should be.

If DCS were just exactly like one single of them and not more it would lose a lot of users.

So, options make a wider and bigger group of users.

That beeing said, I have no problem with OP's request, although I would not join his server. Let the people decide whether they like it or not.

It shouldn't be hard to disable the auto start keybinds by an option.

[cfrag]

2 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

It actually takes about 21 repetitions to get to the point he is at when learning a new airplane. After that it is just doing it often enough to keep the muscle memory.

In DCS, yes. In RL, when your life depends on it, it takes years and years of training. The trick is not being fast. The trick is to not only know what you are doing, but also why. Trust your life with this, each time. Over the years, confidence and efficiency builds until you can consciously and reliably do this impressively fast without compromising safety. I remember when I was type-converting and for the first time added a new item to my approach list: "gear down, three green lights". On my third landing, my Instructor admonished me that I simply called out 'gear down, three green' without making sure that they were actually lit. That opened my eyes to the importance of being thorough and training against rote-doing a check list.  

And that was my point, apologies for being unclear. When you see one of the best pilots there are (carrier fighter pilots) do something that fast, that is because they can do that due to rigorous training and years of experience. We can ape that in similar fashion, and be as quick. But we should not sucker ourselves into believing that we are starting a plane. We are simply going through the motions, we don't understand why we are doing it except that the end product is a running plane. Indeed, we may as well macro it, the only added benefit is that we happily push buttons like a well-trained monkey. And that can be fun (I'm a happy monkey too  ). The guy in the clip? He's a pro, and one of the best. He knows what he's doing, leans into years of experience and instinctively, during the procedure, knows if something's off. He's not going for a speed record. He's merely doing his job, fully knowing that his life depends on doing everything right. Unlike him, we can re-slot. That's a big sifference.

[Exorcet]

38 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I would say that every phase of flight and operating the aircraft is the game. It’s a sim after all. Arcade flying games tend to just feature flying. Sims feature every aspect.

They don't actually. Sims choose what to simulate and what not to. DCS does not simulate pilot training or physical conditioning. It doesn't simulate aircraft variation based on maintenance. It does not simulate aircraft reliability rates. Why those things don't matter yet starting up the aircraft does seems like a contradiction to me.

 

We players have the choice to define what the game is and it's better that way. Not everyone does things for the same reason. Skipping a minor feature also isn't a win button. You can try to win a mission by using autostart or some auto refuel workaround, but you won't get very far unless the only goal for the mission was starting up or refueling. This also isn't unique to DCS:

 

38 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I think some players are too used to arcade games.

No, players are used to choice, which is a good thing.

38 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Starting a mission in the air or hot on the runway thought makes more sense than auto-start, just watching it go by itself.

Why? Autostart at least approximates start up time, can also help players learn the manual start up, and doesn't force them into rushing the setup of the aircraft since it's on the ground rather than in the air. It's a feature that perfectly lines up with what a simulator aims to do along with the other start options.

[shagrat]

vor 16 Stunden schrieb SharpeXB:

See the contradiction? ED builds full systems modules. Wags makes videos. But the game itself only includes one mission with a cold start. Sure users can make macros but it’s silly for the devs to defeat their own work.

 

We had this argument multiple times, already.

You make assumptions of EDs intentions that support your narrative, instead of acknowledging that in the very basic description(!) that is advertising "DCS World" as an experience you (as in each individual) can customize from arcade game to a hardcore study simulation, ED says differently.

So despite your personal goals and implications, ED is very clear, why they have ways to enable newcomers, casual players and flight sim nerds, alike, to enjoy their products.

There simply is no contradiction.

By the way, most if not all missions for the AH-64D module currently are cold start, just saying.

The reason, why most "missions" start with a plane hot on the ramp, etc. is because of the limitations of the Mission Editor. To trigger actions, setup environment, or have convoys in the right place in the past, there was mostly "time since" in use, so there was a tendency to make sure players could actually take off in time...

Edited September 13, 2022 by shagrat

[=475FG= Dawger]

6 hours ago, cfrag said:

In DCS, yes. In RL, when your life depends on it, it takes years and years of training. The trick is not being fast. The trick is to not only know what you are doing, but also why. Trust your life with this, each time. Over the years, confidence and efficiency builds until you can consciously and reliably do this impressively fast without compromising safety. I remember when I was type-converting and for the first time added a new item to my approach list: "gear down, three green lights". On my third landing, my Instructor admonished me that I simply called out 'gear down, three green' without making sure that they were actually lit. That opened my eyes to the importance of being thorough and training against rote-doing a check list.  

And that was my point, apologies for being unclear. When you see one of the best pilots there are (carrier fighter pilots) do something that fast, that is because they can do that due to rigorous training and years of experience. We can ape that in similar fashion, and be as quick. But we should not sucker ourselves into believing that we are starting a plane. We are simply going through the motions, we don't understand why we are doing it except that the end product is a running plane. Indeed, we may as well macro it, the only added benefit is that we happily push buttons like a well-trained monkey. And that can be fun (I'm a happy monkey too  ). The guy in the clip? He's a pro, and one of the best. He knows what he's doing, leans into years of experience and instinctively, during the procedure, knows if something's off. He's not going for a speed record. He's merely doing his job, fully knowing that his life depends on doing everything right. Unlike him, we can re-slot. That's a big sifference.

I was talking about real life. 7 type ratings, 15,000 hours in several dozen different aircraft types and several thousand hours teaching in Level D simulators. 21 repetitions and its an easy, fast flow to start any airplane you like.

We expected every student to absorb the full pre-start flow in one 2 hour procedures session.

After that, you did the full start on the first flying session and the next time you did it was for the check ride and the FAA examiner isn't going to look too kindly on a slow as molasses pre-start.

At $1000 per hour (probably double that now) for the simulator, as little as possible training time is spent on what is considered a very basic skill.

It is more a demonstration of competency than training. The pilot is expected to have a base of knowledge that enables him to study the specific aircraft systems, practice in his hotel room with a paper cockpit poster and be able to demonstrate the procedure reasonably competently the very first time.

If he can't do that, he has no business training for that aircraft type.

Edited September 13, 2022 by =475FG= Dawger

[shagrat]

vor 6 Stunden schrieb cfrag:

In DCS, yes. In RL, when your life depends on it, it takes years and years of training. The trick is not being fast. The trick is to not only know what you are doing, but also why. Trust your life with this, each time. Over the years, confidence and efficiency builds until you can consciously and reliably do this impressively fast without compromising safety. I remember when I was type-converting and for the first time added a new item to my approach list: "gear down, three green lights". On my third landing, my Instructor admonished me that I simply called out 'gear down, three green' without making sure that they were actually lit. That opened my eyes to the importance of being thorough and training against rote-doing a check list.  

And that was my point, apologies for being unclear. When you see one of the best pilots there are (carrier fighter pilots) do something that fast, that is because they can do that due to rigorous training and years of experience. We can ape that in similar fashion, and be as quick. But we should not sucker ourselves into believing that we are starting a plane. We are simply going through the motions, we don't understand why we are doing it except that the end product is a running plane. Indeed, we may as well macro it, the only added benefit is that we happily push buttons like a well-trained monkey. And that can be fun (I'm a happy monkey too  ). The guy in the clip? He's a pro, and one of the best. He knows what he's doing, leans into years of experience and instinctively, during the procedure, knows if something's off. He's not going for a speed record. He's merely doing his job, fully knowing that his life depends on doing everything right. Unlike him, we can re-slot. That's a big sifference.

Well said. And that's one of the elements many DCS players actually enjoy, learning the plane and not the button sequence. The cool thing in a simulator is, you can adapt to enjoying the thorough start-up, setting up routes manually, etc., but there is also the option to skip that if necessary, check the equipment, connect and set Jetseat, Headtracker and stuff, if your time is limited and you just had to take care about real life, before joining the buddies for a DCS session.

Sure I do miss out on some of the fun, if I do an autostart, right away. Worse, I often miss some setting, configuration in the complex modules that I would set different than the auto sequence.

Still if I have gone through the startup two times, already, because of a disconnect or crash, I find it comforting to have that robot monkey press the buttons and take a leak instead.

So options are fine, though I don't understand the impact that would have on the other players, as I for the life of it, wouldn't know if my buddy used autostart or did it manually...

 

[SharpeXB]

59 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

the FAA examiner isn't going to look too kindly on a slow as molasses pre-start.

I don’t imagine the military looks too kindly on slow as molasses in combat either…

[Dangerzone]

15 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Every game (or interactive entertainment software) by definition offers an enforced challenge. The “interactive” challenge part is what makes it engaging. Even if that requires some effort. Bypassing this and just watching the game play itself takes away the interactive part and just turns it into a movie. DCS must be the only game I’ve seen where players ask for the game to just play itself while they watch. Like Auto Start or the idea that there should be auto easy AAR. Sure you can cheat at solitaire but the solitaire game maker probably didn’t put a “win game” button right there on the screen for you. Plus for many modules the startup is just about most of what there even is to do with them given the lack of MP missions or campaigns etc. But I consider the $49 I spent on the P-51D a good entertainment value because I used everything it could do at the time. 

There has been a number of different reasons already given to justify having auto-start beyond "people just watching the game play itself and takes away the interactive reason turning it into a movie", so I'm not even going to bother re-raising these because there's no point repeating what you've already chosen to ignore.  

14 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

The feature makes little sense for a game and even less for a sim.  

No - it just that it makes no sense to you. Your inability to (or unwillingness?) to expand your thoughts to situations beyond your own doesn't mean it makes no sense to the rest of the community (including at least 2 RL pilots that I count here) - and that options like these are good and benefit the whole community (even you - even though you fail to recognize it). 

Edited September 14, 2022 by Dangerzone

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, Dangerzone said:

No - it just that it makes no sense to you.

Indeed it doesn’t because you guys seem to think of this as some insurmountable obstacle instead of just a few pages and a few minutes in the game. Going back to the original point, if it was possible, which it’s probably not, I can see many mission designs where this requirement would make sense. Like the Maple Flag A-10C Qualification Course that times and grades your start up and shut down in every mission. 

Edited September 14, 2022 by SharpeXB

[Dangerzone]

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Going back to the original point, if it was possible, which it’s probably not, I can see many mission designs where this requirement would make sense. Like the Maple Flag A-10C Qualification Course that times and grades your start up and shut down in every mission. 

So if you implement the course qualifications and do gradings - and someone does an external macro - how would you suggest that is dealt with?

If you say that's not a problem - because cheats will be cheats and they're only cheating themselves - then why are you so worried about people who benefit from auto-start in DCS? 

Having auto-start available in game makes absolutely no difference to you, is helpful to others, (even though you choose to be condescending and belittle them), and is also not stopping you in any way from achieving the above that you've suggested and is no different to external macro's except ED has decided to be more accommodating and inviting to people that have a wider range of priorities, circumstances, etc.

Edited September 14, 2022 by Dangerzone

[SharpeXB]

6 hours ago, Dangerzone said:

So if you implement the course qualifications and do gradings - and someone does an external macro - how would you suggest that is dealt with?

Well it’s not possible to control. But if it was that’s an example of where it would be applicable. I agree with the OP even if there is probably no way to implement what they asked for.

Edited September 14, 2022 by SharpeXB

[shagrat]

vor 10 Stunden schrieb Dangerzone:

So if you implement the course qualifications and do gradings - and someone does an external macro - how would you suggest that is dealt with?

If you say that's not a problem - because cheats will be cheats and they're only cheating themselves - then why are you so worried about people who benefit from auto-start in DCS? 

Having auto-start available in game makes absolutely no difference to you, is helpful to others, (even though you choose to be condescending and belittle them), and is also not stopping you in any way from achieving the above that you've suggested and is no different to external macro's except ED has decided to be more accommodating and inviting to people that have a wider range of priorities, circumstances, etc.

 

It's an ego problem with him. He does this all the time DCS diverts from his personal view on "how it should be done".

Then he claims "it is because ED goes for full realism", claiming ED's goals and intentions, blatantly ignoring the actual statements from ED about the targeted customer groups, intended ways to customize DCS for your personal enjoyment.

For example this advertising for DCS World: (...)"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."(...)

Source: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/downloads/world/stable/

[Tom Kazansky]

Weil it seems odd anyways that a topic which asks for more options gets to a discussion about whether existing options should be terminated.

[SharpeXB]

2 hours ago, shagrat said:

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.

Sure I get that part. But what happens when 90% of the players never use the advanced stuff in the game? If there is a Modern Air Combat/ Flaming Cliffs 4 game with all these modules as simplified versions, who’s to say 90% of the current DCS buyers migrate over to that? From this discussion it sure seems like that’s the case. I hope it’s not.  

2 hours ago, shagrat said:

The ambition is to hand hold users from novice pilot all the way to the most advanced and sophisticated operator

The level of hand holding* some people seem to need in DCS is beyond anything I’ve ever seen in schooling, career, sports etc. This whole topic is about just a couple of pages in a manual after all…

And I don’t figure the auto-start is of any instructional value for learning it. What would encourage people to learn it? Some actual gameplay reason to use it, such as it being required in certain missions. 
 

*the term “hand holding” in US English is actually not a positive connotation. It’s like something a child would need. Maybe an odd choice of words here for ED

Edited September 14, 2022 by SharpeXB

[Dangerzone]

6 hours ago, shagrat said:

It's an ego problem with him. He does this all the time DCS diverts from his personal view on "how it should be done".

Then he claims "it is because ED goes for full realism", claiming ED's goals and intentions, blatantly ignoring the actual statements from ED about the targeted customer groups, intended ways to customize DCS for your personal enjoyment.

For example this advertising for DCS World: (...)"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."(...)

Source: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/downloads/world/stable/

Thanks Shagrat. Going back and re-reading this thread after your posts I see what you mean now. I won't bother about continuing the discussion as I see it's only going to serve to do damage or encourage more derogative responses, and either way it's not likely to produce anything positive. (Took me a while to wake up - I'm a bit slow these days, so thanks for the virtual elbow ). 

[shagrat]

Am 14.9.2022 um 19:42 schrieb SharpeXB:

Sure I get that part. But what happens when 90% of the players never use the advanced stuff in the game?

Well, then they don't use it? Who cares?

What if 90% of Assetto Corsa Players had never raced on the Nürburgring?

It's up to them to decide if they want to miss out... Or maybe they don't like it, or want to save it for later. Anyway the only part relevant to me is, if I (!) can do a complete cold start, from a dark pit, with the original manual as close as possible to the real thing. As long as I can chose, whenever I want, to enjoy the full realism study part of the brilliant DCS modules, I am a happy man. But at times even though I enjoy to go through the cold start and configure the navigation system, setup my route, etc. I enjoy the option to just plug in the Jetseat, sip a coffee, while letting the autostart work it's magic. I never, ever heard a complaint from my fellow players over the comms, when I did that.

The argument "Autostart is faster" is only true, when you are really new to the aircraft and hadn't had time yet to train the procedure  a couple of times.

As soon as you've memorized the switch positions in the cockpit and understand what you are doing, you usually are faster than the script, especially if alignment is involved.

So what else would a server based option to block "Autostart" achieve, other than enforcing something, that does not affect other players, does not affect the gameplay (aka provide an advantage) or is even noticable, at all?

It's like asking for an option to enforce "correct environmental controls settings" to ensure realism...

I mean if server admins really see a need to micromanage every remote aspect of the personal experience for other players and think they get a crowd of masochistic fans, happy to get micromanaged by someone else, why not. But my guess is, most Jetpilots and most DCS players are mature and more alpha personalities that won't react favorably to this and just omit public servers who enforce this... As for private servers in closed groups, there should not be the need to enforce anything, as you play with friends that share the same mindset and if you set the rules by asking nicely, just play along.

[SharpeXB]

39 minutes ago, shagrat said:

Well, then they don't use it? Who cares?

Use it or lose it? I can think of 3 other sims which became arcade games at one point. Two were major flight sim titles we all know. 

[cfrag]

11 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Use it or lose it?

Who or what is preventing you from using it? Perhaps you may find life better when you stop to bother about what other people are doing in their cockpit that has no consequence for you.

Startup procs won't vanish from DCS, because they are a major showing-off opportunity for the accuracy of the sim, hence a selling point. Another selling point is that it's entirely optional, so win-win.

[shagrat]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb cfrag:

Who or what is preventing you from using it? Perhaps you may find life better when you stop to bother about what other people are doing in their cockpit that has no consequence for you.

Startup procs won't vanish from DCS, because they are a major showing-off opportunity for the accuracy of the sim, hence a selling point. Another selling point is that it's entirely optional, so win-win.

Actually the whole "hand holding" and being "adjustable for newcomers", rather than intimidating, is a selling point.

That's why ED is putting that into the description.

As for "OMG if we don't force everyone to play iron man mode in ultra realism, with no quality of life 'cheats' available, they may turn it into an arcade game", just look at the server browser and try to find the ones who have game mode/arcade avionics and flight model enabled... I really doubt the few optional quality of life cheats, like auto rudder, take off assist, autostart/stop or easy comms are a threat to us flying hardcore simulation mode with all of them deactivated, especially as I would not know to figure out, if one or more of the other guys use them or not. For me it has no impact, at all. I would need them to tell me, that they just used take off assist or autostart... 

[Mr. Big.Biggs]

The new Merriam Webster definition of freedom. “I have the freedom to tell you what I think you should do” 

True freedom, “If you don’t like what others choose to do, find another server or make your own”. 
 

[cfrag]

5 minutes ago, shagrat said:

"OMG if we don't force everyone to play iron man mode in ultra realism, with no quality of life 'cheats' available, they may turn it into an arcade game"

Agreed. TBH, I feel that people who use the "Arcade vs. Sim" or "cheat because unrealistic" argument are often expressing their (somewhat pathetic) need to validate their bruised ego with an imagined feat of gaming "prowess". Kind of sad, really.   

[shagrat]

vor 14 Stunden schrieb SharpeXB:

Use it or lose it? I can think of 3 other sims which became arcade games at one point. Two were major flight sim titles we all know. 

I can't. The last two actual milsims I know of were Falcon 4.0 and IL-2 for WWII settings. Then came LOMAC with the Flaming Cliffs updates, FC2 and DCS: Ka-50 Blackshark, then FC3 and DCS: A-10C Warthog, which all more or less merged into DCS World. The only other actual flight simulators were the civilian focused stuff. Everything else I noticed was a flight combat game with some options to set a more "realistic controls feel", but focused by design on accessible and balanced PvP gameplay and not flight simulation.

What did I miss here?

 

[Mr. Big.Biggs]

2 minutes ago, cfrag said:

Agreed. TBH, I feel that people who use the "Arcade vs. Sim" or "cheat because unrealistic" argument are often expressing their (somewhat pathetic) need to validate their bruised ego with an imagined feat of gaming "prowess". Kind of sad, really.   

This!
There is a big difference between “fun” and “cool”. 
This certainly can be fun, but if you think it makes you “cool” you really need to rethink things….

[Zeagle]

First of all, the "hand holding" and accommodating of newbies and shallow gamers is not there because ED wants to be "nice" and make everyone feel better. They may want that. But I believe it's there because it gets them more customers and more $. It's their business.

Secondly, I would welcome the ability to disable autostart on the server.  Having to go through the process of startup makes people fly differently. It's just like limiting resources at a base. It encourages self-preservation rather than the kamikaze behavior that is all too common on any public server.  It's not about ego or "coolness". It actually affects how the mission progresses. 

As a pilot, I find it laughable that people cannot be bothered to do a short startup procedure. These people probably wouldn't be too happy in real-world flying.

[Mr. Big.Biggs]

7 minutes ago, Zeagle said:

First of all, the "hand holding" and accommodating of newbies and shallow gamers is not there because ED wants to be "nice" and make everyone feel better. They may want that. But I believe it's there because it gets them more customers and more $. It's their business.

Secondly, I would welcome the ability to disable autostart on the server.  Having to go through the process of startup makes people fly differently. It's just like limiting resources at a base. It encourages self-preservation rather than the kamikaze behavior that is all too common on any public server.  It's not about ego or "coolness". It actually affects how the mission progresses. 

As a pilot, I find it laughable that people cannot be bothered to do a short startup procedure. These people probably wouldn't be too happy in real-world flying.

“As a pilot”…. I find it laughable that you get bent over a game.  Start a group and fly your way. Let others do the same. 
I fly because I enjoy it and NEVER have started a statement with “as a pilot “. Equally as “needy”. 
That said, anyone that has the gumption to build a server or mission should have the option to create as real or fictitious a scenario as THEY want.  This I agree…