requested Why should exporting RWR and other viewports break integrity check?

[WRCRob]

@BIGNEWY 

As a community admin and former competitive player in other games when I was younger, I can understand the predicament that you are in with things like IC. While I understand the want to not have exploits for things by modifying the lua coding to make things that shouldn't really be possible happen (Hacking in an AESA radar refresh rate or changing weapons parameters), but not having a IC compliant way of exporting the screens from a cockpit unique to each aircraft in a "study level" simulator seems a bit counter to the goal of the sim. Now I am not someone who's going to build a full 1:1 replica of a particular planes cockpit (I fly too many different things to do that lol) but even at my level (a couple of switch boxes and touch screen monitor for MFDs and UFC's). It's highly frustrating that If I don't pre plan where I am going and more importantly remember that I have to disable the modified scripts for X server but I am fine to have it in Y server, when a friend says "hey hop on X server and lets go for a flight" then have to start, get kicked, close, fix the exports then restart DCS on my limited time budget is very frustrating. I am not going to lie, but it seems like a pretty no brainer fix to just grab the changes that Helios makes (which covers 95% of all the modules) in its default patches and just have them be in the base game Lua's. Doing that along with adding the ability to export the FC aircraft screens (the F-15C's weapons panel and RWR come to mind as long time frustrations) in the same manner would be huge helps to the simpit community (both the hard core and not so). 

[BIGNEWY]

Hi WRCRob, I continue to raise the matter with the team and we do have a report / request for a better way for integrity check and exports to work, but currently I have no news to share, my hope is when more dev time becomes available it will be addressed. 

thank you 

 

[MadKreator]

On 9/25/2024 at 8:29 AM, BIGNEWY said:

Hi WRCRob, I continue to raise the matter with the team and we do have a report / request for a better way for integrity check and exports to work, but currently I have no news to share, my hope is when more dev time becomes available it will be addressed. 

thank you 

 

As an added note here. The same function ( two lines of code ) just need added to each “viewport” file and a name given. The same as is done for ( RIGHT_MFCD, LEFT_MFCD, CENTER_MFCD). It literally takes a few seconds. Every module has those mentioned defaults, but none for say the rwr, ded, iefi etc. In the CH-47 they added many more  ( which aren’t activated or named yet) but not ALL of the available viewports are “exportable”. Some aircraft have more, some have less. I was just having this convo in another thread actually about the simplicity of it. There is no need to re-work the IC System or any of that. The solution is very simple. The devs just need to add the two lines of code and give each a name.
- As far a Helios is concerned, of course no one can expect the devs to conform and rework IC around Helios patches because all helios patches do ( for the most part) is add those same two lines of code that are built into the DCS Export API and gives the viewport a name ( for the ones that aren’t setup natively). 
- @WRCRob in a recent Helios update, the monitor configuration/ writing was re-worked  so that it now allows the default names ( right_mfcd, left_mfcd etc) to be used for each aircraft. The monitor config, now separates each aircraft instead of them all being lumped together. Helios has been changed to better conform with/ work with the DCS native exports and name. 
-This now makes the solution even more simple as now each module literally just needs each of its viewports to have the lines: 

dofile(LockOn_Options.commom_script_path..”ViewportHandling.lua”)
try_find_assigned_viewport(“Name”)

just as they are for the left, right, center mfd’s , TEDAC, etc. Again this is a native function to DCS, not a user-made-up process. Of course ED would be able to implement their modules and others like HB, RB, Aergis would need to follow suit with their, if they are willing to oblige.

-I mean I could/would send each file in a zip( for the aircraft I own) , already modified, that the devs could literally drag and drop in place and the export IC issues would be gone
-The continued frustration comes as external displays, simpits, MP etc are becoming ever more prevalent and the requested change would literally take a dev seconds to copy/paste into each file. Especially being something that is already part of the core that for whatever reason, is only applied to a select few viewports and not all of them.

We do appreciate your assistance in this BigNewey, as well as NL’s!

Edited November 14, 2024 by MadKreator

[MAXsenna]

@MadKreator Great convo indeed!

@WRCRob  I have been toying around thinking I should try a trick a learned a while back. It's now possible to declare the exports for FC modules in the same montitor file. Tested yesterday with Su-25T and Su-33. No more switching between monitor files and restarts of DCS. ONE SINGLE FILE without breaking IC like MadKreator says. 

I also discovered that the FC F-5E natively exports it's radar, but not the RWR.

The F-15C's weapon panel would be nice, while the RWR is exportable, isn't it? 

[WRCRob]

@MAXsenna I do not believe that the rwr is not exportable since there is no direct call out, but it has been a while since I have looked for it. 

I do hope that you can pass along what Madkreator said to the dev team @BIGNEWY as its a great explanation as to what is needed to make this all work for the better. There is no need to change the IC process for this to be solved, its just a matter of adding and documenting the names of the exports to the scripts files. Such that someone can go in and create there own monitor setup file with the exports, they would like to have shown on an aircraft by aircraft basis. @MadKreator I will also have to look back at the update notes for how the new helios functionality works regarding the mpcd call outs. that would at least get me to having 1/2 capacity in my cockpits on servers that have pure scripts enabled. 

Edited September 25, 2024 by WRCRob
forgot tag

[Alleluia]

@BIGNEWY

 

December 2022.....

Now we are closing to December 2024.

2 years to find a solution seems largely sufficient.
 

There is a solution, is it so hard to implement ? does it need to take 2 years ....

i understand that you have nothing to report but reporting nothing for 2 years has more than weared my patience on this subject.

[Raisuli]

On 9/11/2024 at 3:17 PM, Alleluia said:

Few weeks later still no new information.

 

vast majority of viewport exporter are still unable to join 95% of MP

 

so can the normal simpit people expect a solution or do we need to do something else.

 

it’s already been more than a year.

 

 

Best excuse to avoid the wretched hives of scum and villainy I've seen.  Once in a while I get feverish and think it might be fun to try a MP server, realize I can't, decide the poverty inducing mental illness is more important than the wretched thing, and go back to either running a canned mission or creating my own.

Of course the F-4 doesn't handle exports, so the RWR is this big green thing on the right side of the main screen.  That's actually not a bad place for it; doesn't really distract me in general, but contacts are hard to miss.

I did experiment with MP a long time ago and gave it up for Lent even before the IC started to fail and that decision was enforced for me.

If MP is a thing then there are decisions to make.  Everything is a compromise, and it all comes down to what's important to you.  Don't expect ED to do anything about it.

[Raisuli]

2 hours ago, MAXsenna said:

@MadKreator Great convo indeed!

@WRCRob  I have been toying around thinking I should try a trick a learned a while back. It's now possible to declare the exports for FC modules in the same montitor file. Tested yesterday with Su-25T and Su-33. No more switching between monitor files and restarts of DCS. ONE SINGLE FILE without breaking IC like MadKreator says. 

I also discovered that the FC F-5E natively exports it's radar, but not the RWR.

The F-15C's weapon panel would be nice, while the RWR is exportable, isn't it? 

The F-18 RWR export is arguably the hardest because you have to change a few other things.  The F-14/16/5 just need a line of code.  Sometimes the hardest part is nomenclature, because ED got 'consistency' confused with one of the myriad forms of clap and compulsively avoids it. 

I've pretty much got anything I fly exported more or less the way I want (except the F-4, but that's HBs fault), which makes updates a pain in the turkey feather.  Almost enough to make me think seriously about OBGYN or whatever that mod manager is called.  Some day I might even put the control manager mod in.

Typically mods get shunned, but I'm getting less and less concerned about it.

[Schmidtfire]

This is why I would not build a simpit with DCS World as the platform. Unless it's something like WWII or a very basic module without any sensors...
I can deal with the viewport system being a pain to set up, but not being able to play on certain servers because the RWR is being exported?
It's currently not worth the time (or money) in my opinion.
          

[MAXsenna]

The F-18 RWR export is arguably the hardest because you have to change a few other things.  The F-14/16/5 just need a line of code.  Sometimes the hardest part is nomenclature, because ED got 'consistency' confused with one of the myriad forms of clap and compulsively avoids it. 
I've pretty much got anything I fly exported more or less the way I want (except the F-4, but that's HBs fault), which makes updates a pain in the turkey feather.  Almost enough to make me think seriously about OBGYN or whatever that mod manager is called.  Some day I might even put the control manager mod in.
Typically mods get shunned, but I'm getting less and less concerned about it.

Helios can install files for you that will fix tbe F-4E, or do as I did. "Learned", (copy pasted), the two lines of code that will make displays that are already setup to be exported but hasn't been implemented, able to export. I've tinkered with the MB-339 today. And guess what, I can even export the gun camera. It's so cool!

Why can't we give this thread stars?
Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[MadKreator]

3 hours ago, WRCRob said:

@MAXsenna I do not believe that the rwr is not exportable since there is no direct call out, but it has been a while since I have looked for it. 

I do hope that you can pass along what Madkreator said to the dev team @BIGNEWY as its a great explanation as to what is needed to make this all work for the better. There is no need to change the IC process for this to be solved, its just a matter of adding and documenting the names of the exports to the scripts files. Such that someone can go in and create there own monitor setup file with the exports, they would like to have shown on an aircraft by aircraft basis. @MadKreator I will also have to look back at the update notes for how the new helios functionality works regarding the mpcd call outs. that would at least get me to having 1/2 capacity in my cockpits on servers that have pure scripts enabled. 

 

It’s in early stages. Right now, just the way the Monitor file is formatted has changed, to basically separate each aircraft by _vehicle name, instead of it just having a list of the “Helios named exports/ patches”.  If you want to use the default names right now, there is still a bit of a process.. you need to do a re-configure in monitor setup to get the new monitor file format written ( either placed in “Combined” or Separate if you like to manually edit it. Uninstall the patches, then disable the ones you are changing into the default names , so helios doesn’t write those files, then reinstall all the other patches. Then either go into the helios profile and change the name of the viewport in each profile you wish to change, or take the “Separate” monitor file and edit the names there. Although changing the viewport name in each profile then doing a monitor config is prob the best route.. DCS Monitor settings screen will give you a bunch of “conflicts” as the code is still WIP, but it will let you configure and the monitor file will work.

 

[AJ.eightFive]

Fingers crossed this topic isn't dead. Just picked up a Cubesim display for the RWR and discovered this IC issue while searching the forums for help setting it up. It's working great now with the .lua tweaks, but such a bummer to be locked out of MP because of it.

[Alleluia]

It's not dead, it's just 2 years old.....

 

Edited November 9, 2024 by Alleluia

[MAXsenna]

Fingers crossed this topic isn't dead. Just picked up a Cubesim display for the RWR and discovered this IC issue while searching the forums for help setting it up. It's working great now with the .lua tweaks, but such a bummer to be locked out of MP because of it.

It breaks IC until all modules have the correct export settings/files by default, so we don't have to edit them.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[ZuluThreeZero]

On 11/8/2024 at 5:24 AM, AJ.eightFive said:

Fingers crossed this topic isn't dead. Just picked up a Cubesim display for the RWR and discovered this IC issue while searching the forums for help setting it up. It's working great now with the .lua tweaks, but such a bummer to be locked out of MP because of it.

Not all multiplayer, some servers don't have the hard IC checks - works fine on GrayFlag on account of needing the Blackhawk and Hercules. Just don't be tempted to go using unauthorised mods like sticking weapons on the Blackhawk or missiles on planes that don't have them by default, else you'll very quickly lose access to one of the few MP servers you can use view exports on.

[MAXsenna]

31 minutes ago, ZuluThreeZero said:

Not all multiplayer, some servers don't have the hard IC checks

While this is true, it's not the answer to the OP. The answer is that ED and the 3rd parties include the scripts for exports as part of the modules so they won't break IC, or we are allowed to have them in Saved Games, like liveries. Right?  

[Bigity]

Hoping for a fix for this as well as setting default kneeboard location, crew indicators, and controls indicator still, maybe sometime in 2025.  For some pretty basic UI stuff.  Two monitors isn’t exactly rare now.

Edited November 14, 2024 by Bigity

[AJ.eightFive]

On 11/13/2024 at 10:31 PM, Bigity said:

Hoping for a fix for this as well as setting default kneeboard location, crew indicators, and controls indicator still, maybe sometime in 2025.  For some pretty basic UI stuff.  Two monitors isn’t exactly rare now.

Hopefully 2025 and not Beyond… 

[Harley]

I definitely need to dig deeper into the file structure to understand more of what's happening and how to edit/restore some of these files. I'm building a simpit, and I want to use it without the keyboard altogether, if possible. So, having every screen, knob, button, gauge, lever, valve, noisy thing, "boop sound generator" and cup holder must be accounted for.

It's an exciting time to have DCS! We have so many parts and options available, and it seems that the only real issue is incorporating it into a sim that otherwise seems really ready and primed for just such a venture. Adding a couple lines of code isn't a big deal. Not everything is drag and drop, or plug and play. But, it should at least be legal. Look at all these hardware manufacturers putting so much faith into the platform! Yikes! LockOn 20+ years ago couldn't accommodate this, but here we are now, right? I wish the dev team were more supportive of this venture, because it's an exciting process. But, so far, they are making good decisions to keep the right elements intact. But the logical question still does remain. If I can export all the MFDs and their controllers, why must something like the RWR put up such a fuss? It doesn't seem to me that this could be exploited, but I'm also not looking to cheat.

Just my late night's ramblings. I hope some progress can be made with the difficult parts. The hardware is becoming available faster than the ability to implement it.

Edited January 2 by Harley

[Harley]

On 11/7/2024 at 9:24 PM, AJ.eightFive said:

Fingers crossed this topic isn't dead. Just picked up a Cubesim display for the RWR and discovered this IC issue while searching the forums for help setting it up. It's working great now with the .lua tweaks, but such a bummer to be locked out of MP because of it.

I just checked out a review from the GrimmReapers about those screens. That looks to be a very simple solution to making the RWR and HSI displays work for simpit builders! Thank you for posting that! Another component issue solved! Now if it works for MP, I suppose we'll need to see if ED addresses it. Seems another comment up the thread had a pretty simple solution.

[abikns]

Yeah, this is getting ridicules, there are several threads about this since 2 years with zero progress. At this point I think the only conclusion is that ED does not care.

[Alleluia]

A reply fron BigN regarding the same complaint. He said that on MP.

 

 

Quote

 

I understand the situation, however we don't have a solution yet that will allow the export without the possibility for cheating at the moment. 

Servers can reduce the integrity check on the server to allow exports, this of course increases the risk for cheaters. 

 

I don’t understand how export the native viewport will help cheaters. The JF17 do that natively without modifying files and destroying the IC….

[skypickle]

Any progress? I realize that you have 170 employees and meeting annual payroll by selling $60 planes is hard. And certainly exporting instruments is not something new players would even think about. (Esp since that's where most of your money comes from) Maybe you could sell these mods for $5? like the navigation addon you offer? that way the common players and VR people who wouldnt use it would not have to pay for it. 

 

Think of us as an 'adaptive flight sim group' who 'need' special things so we can fly. Some of us have bad vision and benefit from real world displays up close since our computer monitors have issues. Others of us have neurologic issues that impair hand eye function which makes moving the mouse to hit a specific spot on the screen difficult. Remember that the hand eye coordination that gives humans their unique abilities on this planet are important - your 'game' is an exercise for the brain which supports humans in this world we created - a world that is increasingly divergent in the demands it requires from the abilities we evolved as a species.

[MAXsenna]

Maybe you could sell these mods for $5? like the navigation addon you offer? that way the common players and VR people who wouldnt use it would not have to pay for it. 

If that sped things up, I'd certainly pay. I do want Miles though!  

Not sure how 9L playes, while BN uses VR. I think some of the reasons this takes so long, or aren't acknowledged, is that no one in ED actually use it. Especially bad for us if none of the developers do. 9L is finally getting FFB, so that's something.
Cheers!

[Alleluia]

@BIGNEWY any updates ?