Monthly Newsletter Updates Discussion

[Rotorhead]

If even considering an infinite amount of parallel realities, this is not possible.

 

Nate

 

:doh: Ah, stupid me, you're right. Simmers are never happy.

 

But maybe some of us will be at least a bit happier. ;)

[sobek]

If cars or any other physical product was sold with that many bugs it would get way more criticism than software products do. Its seams it is a standard to have bugs in games now days.

 

So you want to compare apples to cookoo birds? Go ahead.

 

Automotive software is tested on one BMU, that's right, ONE SET OF HARDWARE, not thousands of permutations of different products.

 

And you know what happens every time one of our customers discovers that a requirement he defined 4 years ago when the project started needs to be changed? We take them to the bank for it, big time, like you wouldn't believe.

 

When i test an ASIL B safety relevant software component, after defining my test cases i need to look at every damn flow control construct in the C code and see if i reached it with my tests, do you know how much time that takes? Our customers know that and they expect to pay a hefty sum for it (that's millions of €s). You are paying peanuts for software that is incredibly complex, so yeah, there are bugs in it.

 

There, that's a little reality check for you. ;)

[Silver_Dragon]

great bomb wing hard-point update. good to see a load of "nuts" on them

 

 

But, can be see the bomb bay with similar level of detail?

 

[Psyrixx]

With regards to the questions about ATC making it into 1.2.5, I don't recall Wags or anyone saying it was a planned feature for 1.2.5, only that they were in the process of revamping it for a future update.

 

I could be wrong, but I wasn't expecting it in this patch. Not expecting the wingtip vapor either. Or any of the new models. I think those have all been presented as things that they're working on but aren't ready yet.

[GGTharos]

I would like to know more about IR signature issues? What happened with the last goals that was mentioned 21 June?

 

Goals can move.

 

And if TWS autolock will be addressed since it makes TWS useless in Su-27 as it stand now.

 

What's wrong with it?

 

The gunpipper is jumping ridiculously as well if you compare to FC1 or FC2, need some attention long time now.

 

Is this on network only?

[Gary]

With regards to the questions about ATC making it into 1.2.5, I don't recall Wags or anyone saying it was a planned feature for 1.2.5, only that they were in the process of revamping it for a future update.

 

I could be wrong, but I wasn't expecting it in this patch. Not expecting the wingtip vapor either. Or any of the new models. I think those have all been presented as things that they're working on but aren't ready yet.

 

Sorry to say - but yes you are wrong...

 

Not posted the whole message but this is Wags update at the end of june.

 

 

Next Stop... DCS Version 1.2.5

 

After the release of DCS version 1.2.4, we released multiple updates using our automatic updater. We are now moving towards the next major update, version 1.2.5. Our primary focus will be on improving game performance, addressing game play issues, and setting the stage for further modules.

 

Key features planned for version 1.2.5 include:

 

DCS World

• Improvements to the ATC system.
  
• New Tu-22M3 model. Images attached.
  
• Further improvements to game stability.
  
• Correcting module installation issues.
  
• Resource manager: Corrected logistic links.
  
• Resource manager: The value, speed and periodicity have been adjusted. Default supply speed is now 60 km/h.
  
• Anti-radiation missiles: Added proximity fuses and adjusted accuracy.
  
• Visual detection of a target for AI units will now also be a function of time. The time of detection depends on target distance, aspect angle, and the presence of already detected targets nearby.
  
• When a target is no longer visible, the AI aircraft will use the target’s last known position and velocity to search for it.
  
• Added "STOP TRANSMISSION" trigger action.
  
• AI behavior option "DISPERCE UNDER FIRE" now has new parameter - dispersion delay.
  
• Added new AI behavior option - "RTB ON OUT OF AMMO".
  
• Added more tooltips to the Mission Editor.
  
• Message filter for Lock On aircraft: RShift+\.
  
• Added several new constants (AI) and functions (trigger, Controller) in the Simulator Scripting Engine (SSE).
  
• Detection of radars by RWR has been reworked to make player and AI systems equal.
  
• The parking spaces for Anapa and Krymsk airbases have been corrected.
  
• Su-25T: The gun funnel has been adjusted.
  
• Added new Su-27 skins.
  
• Several factors governing air to air missiles have been adjusted.
  
• Updated airbase charts from www.10thGunfighters.de and www.ariescon.com
  
• Fixed input deadlock.
  
• M256 HEAT ballistics corrected.
  
• Improved fire and smoke of aircraft fragments.
  
• Improved material of flares.
  
• Adjusted logbook data accounting. Especially in complex cases with multiple changes of aircrafts in one sortie.
  
• Mission Editor: Added briefing picture dialog. If file contain inappropriate symbols in the name, GUI Error appears.
  
• The broken input after exporting to HTML is fixed.
  

 

 

If you search the forum (better than I can) you will find a later update that didnt mention the ATC improvements. After questions were asked Wags came online to confirm they were still in 1.2.5

 

 

just asking the same question now as it does not appear in the change log posted...

 

 

Kind regards,

 

 

Gary

[Teknetinium]

So you want to compare apples to cookoo birds? Go ahead.

 

Automotive software is tested on one BMU, that's right, ONE SET OF HARDWARE, not thousands of permutations of different products.

 

And you know what happens every time one of our customers discovers that a requirement he defined 4 years ago when the project started needs to be changed? We take them to the bank for it, big time, like you wouldn't believe.

 

When i test an ASIL B safety relevant software component, after defining my test cases i need to look at every damn flow control construct in the C code and see if i reached it with my tests, do you know how much time that takes? Our customers know that and they expect to pay a hefty sum for it (that's millions of €s). You are paying peanuts for software that is incredibly complex, so yeah, there are bugs in it.

 

There, that's a little reality check for you. ;)

 

The reality is that FC3 is more broken then FC1 and CF2 was. I would assume you understand why.

[karambiatos]

G

 

 

Is this on network only?

 

indeed, but it only happens when both players pings are big, then the piper jumps around at times.

[Frostie]

What's wrong with it?

Russian TWS auto lock in FC3 is illogical, it doesn't allow you to see the aspect of several aircraft because when the nearest target is within 80% of launch parameters auto lock acquires the target.

 

In FC2/1 you could keep the target box away from any contacts so autolock wouldn't occur allowing you to use TWS as it is intended, now there is no snapping on to the target it just automatically locks.

 

In the su-27 manual it states that there is a choice of auto lock on and off and only then when it is on it requires the target gate over the target to autolock. FC3's version is nonsense.

 

Imagine if F-15 TWS auto locked on nearest target without your input it would totally screw up the whole concept of TWS.

Edited July 20, 2013 by Frostie

[Frostie]

indeed, but it only happens when both players pings are big, then the piper jumps around at times.

To be fair I am yet to see a piper that doesn't bounce in FC3 multiplayer, at least in FC2 it was only in extreme cases, now its worse than ever.

[Silver_Dragon]

Remember them:

 

Key features planned for version 1.2.5 include

 

Some old planned features has dropped on pass version:

Landing / Take off phisics update (1.2.4)

[Eihort]

I cannot understand the complaints about Nevada being 'outlandish' or whatever as a map. It's like people seem to believe there is this magical fairy that's going to come out of the sky and smite them if they build a mission that doesn't have a 'plausible' back story. Some of the missions mentioned by detractors and that I've played on other servers are pretty outlandish IMO.

 

The truth is, it doesn't matter. If you're at angels 22 with your RWR beeping at you and your primary concern is why you're there in the first place, I'm sorry, but you're doing it wrong.

 

Plop down some red and plop down some blue, and have at it. You don't *need* a reason. The only thing that has to make sense is the disposition of forces and how they're deployed. Not where in the world they're deployed. It's a new map with new terrain to fly around in. It's going to require a different approach to things than the original map. The NTTR is about as wide as the distance from Kutasi to Sochi. It's tiny by most standards that we're used to. The mental load is going to be higher as you'll have less time to react and think about things. The BVR game is going to be very different.

 

Look at it in 3D on Google Earth. It's ridge city out there. Great for avoiding SAMs, but the second you clear the ridge, you're a target for everything in the next valley. These aren't the gorges of the Caucasus' where your exposure is measured in seconds between ridges. Ka-50s are going to have a field day and live or die by pop-up attack.

 

There's a lot more than just Red Flag at Nellis. I was born and raised in Vegas and there's always aircraft taking off and flying north to go play.

Edited July 20, 2013 by Eihort

[eurofor]

I cannot understand the complaints about Nevada being 'outlandish' or whatever as a map. It's like people seem to believe there is this magical fairy that's going to come out of the sky and smite them if they build a mission that doesn't have a 'plausible' back story. Some of the missions mentioned by detractors and that I've played on other servers are pretty outlandish IMO.

 

The truth is, it doesn't matter. If you're at angels 22 with your RWR beeping at you and your primary concern is why you're there in the first place, I'm sorry, but you're doing it wrong.

 

(...)

 

There's no right and wrong. You play however you want to play it. For me personally the back story is very important. It's the reason for the mission, for being there in that situation. Without it I'm just "flying around killing shit" and that is not enough for me. I like simulating a realistic scenario even if that means I don't fire a shot.

 

The reason I voiced my concern was simply because I had made the assumption that EDGE would replace the current IG and since it was clarified that it will not then I have no problem with the Nevada map.

[Eihort]

I just don't understand the necessity of a plausible plot to the point that someone won't have anything to do with the map.

[GGTharos]

The F-15C TWS will auto-prioritize and designate a whole slew of stuff. But you're right, it won't automatically go to STT on things.

 

Imagine if F-15 TWS auto locked on nearest target without your input it would totally screw up the whole concept of TWS.

[SkateZilla]

Sorry to say - but yes you are wrong...

 

Not posted the whole message but this is Wags update at the end of june.

 

 

Next Stop... DCS Version 1.2.5

 

After the release of DCS version 1.2.4, we released multiple updates using our automatic updater. We are now moving towards the next major update, version 1.2.5. Our primary focus will be on improving game performance, addressing game play issues, and setting the stage for further modules.

 

Key features planned for version 1.2.5 include:

 

DCS World

• Improvements to the ATC system.
  
• New Tu-22M3 model. Images attached.
  
• Further improvements to game stability.
  
• Correcting module installation issues.
  
• Resource manager: Corrected logistic links.
  
• Resource manager: The value, speed and periodicity have been adjusted. Default supply speed is now 60 km/h.
  
• Anti-radiation missiles: Added proximity fuses and adjusted accuracy.
  
• Visual detection of a target for AI units will now also be a function of time. The time of detection depends on target distance, aspect angle, and the presence of already detected targets nearby.
  
• When a target is no longer visible, the AI aircraft will use the target’s last known position and velocity to search for it.
  
• Added "STOP TRANSMISSION" trigger action.
  
• AI behavior option "DISPERCE UNDER FIRE" now has new parameter - dispersion delay.
  
• Added new AI behavior option - "RTB ON OUT OF AMMO".
  
• Added more tooltips to the Mission Editor.
  
• Message filter for Lock On aircraft: RShift+\.
  
• Added several new constants (AI) and functions (trigger, Controller) in the Simulator Scripting Engine (SSE).
  
• Detection of radars by RWR has been reworked to make player and AI systems equal.
  
• The parking spaces for Anapa and Krymsk airbases have been corrected.
  
• Su-25T: The gun funnel has been adjusted.
  
• Added new Su-27 skins.
  
• Several factors governing air to air missiles have been adjusted.
  
• Updated airbase charts from www.10thGunfighters.de and www.ariescon.com
  
• Fixed input deadlock.
  
• M256 HEAT ballistics corrected.
  
• Improved fire and smoke of aircraft fragments.
  
• Improved material of flares.
  
• Adjusted logbook data accounting. Especially in complex cases with multiple changes of aircrafts in one sortie.
  
• Mission Editor: Added briefing picture dialog. If file contain inappropriate symbols in the name, GUI Error appears.
  
• The broken input after exporting to HTML is fixed.
  

 

 

If you search the forum (better than I can) you will find a later update that didnt mention the ATC improvements. After questions were asked Wags came online to confirm they were still in 1.2.5

 

 

just asking the same question now as it does not appear in the change log posted...

 

 

Kind regards,

 

 

Gary

 

 

These lists can change without notice.

[Teknetinium]

The F-15C TWS will auto-prioritize and designate a whole slew of stuff. But you're right, it won't automatically go to STT on things.

 

So plz acknowledge Su-27 TWS bugg crying out loud. The way it is not is just wrong. No need for a manual to confirm that, which was already done before. I have been pointing out Su-27 TWS problem since FC3 day one.

Edited July 20, 2013 by Teknetinium

[GGTharos]

From what I have been told (NOT my opinion) it is actually not a bug. According to the manual this is functioning as it should (note, I tried the tester version, so what I saw may be a little different from what you saw):

 

I go SNP

SNP determines priority target after a full scan and auto-bugs

I pull the gate off the target

The radar re-evaluates the priority target after a full scan and auto-bugs.

 

Note that I have been told that the manual switch for this mode is the exception in actual operation, not the default - thus, you have a radar operating in its default setting, correctly.

 

I did not test whether holding onto the gate-motion control would keep it off and prevent STT when the programmed range is reached.

 

So plz acknowledge the bugg crying out loud.

[Psyrixx]

Sorry to say - but yes you are wrong...

 

Kind regards,

 

Gary

 

I stand corrected!

 

But ultimately I don't care if the ATC updates are present in 1.2.5 or not. I'd rather have them done and done well than just pushed in for the sake of hitting a deadline. I can wait until 1.2.6 or 1.2.7 or even 2.0 for ATC updates if it came down to it.

 

To me, the pattern I think I've observed over the past several version updates has been one of trying to kill all of the large bugs that plague the core engine while slowly adding features as they can. I think this is a very smart strategy to follow as once they get rid of all of the 'show stopper' bugs, they can focus more dedicated resources on feature upgrades.

 

To re-state what a few people have already said, just because a feature is planned for a specific update doesn't mean it is promised. Plans can (and often do) change, as circumstances dictate. Wags' signature does include the "everything is subject to change" caveat, after all.

 

Besides, "improvements to the ATC system" may mean nothing more than "we made it so they reply 1/2 second quicker than they used to". I agree that it would be great to have more information on what improvements are coming, but I expect they'll tell us when they're ready.

 

:)

Edited July 20, 2013 by Psyrixx

[kk0425]

Wags' signature does include the "everything is subject to change" caveat, after all.

 

Beat me to it.

[LostOblivion]

Which airport is this?

[Ranger79]

Groom Lake

[71st_Mastiff]

Which airport is this?

 

groom Lake also known as Area 51.:thumbup:

 

https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl

Edited July 20, 2013 by Mastiff

[Teknetinium]

From what I have been told (NOT my opinion) it is actually not a bug. According to the manual this is functioning as it should (note, I tried the tester version, so what I saw may be a little different from what you saw):

 

I go SNP

SNP determines priority target after a full scan and auto-bugs

I pull the gate off the target

The radar re-evaluates the priority target after a full scan and auto-bugs.

 

Note that I have been told that the manual switch for this mode is the exception in actual operation, not the default - thus, you have a radar operating in its default setting, correctly.

 

I did not test whether holding onto the gate-motion control would keep it off and prevent STT when the programmed range is reached.

 

Then it would be better to get back to how it was in FC2, so you can simulate both options rather than default one only. This is not correct and can not be accepted since in default option downgrades a Su-27s situation awareness by 30% compared to FC2. Why not chose the other option instead since as experienced FC Su-27 pilot i can confirm that not having auto-lock is much more efficient.

 

Is the F-15 in default mode as well? since it does not auto-lock in TWS in FC3.

Su-27 main bugs:

EOS horizontal slewing is broken.

TWS is broken as described.

Adjust Semi-Active missiles chaff resistance.

 

Posted in FC3 bug thread as well.

Edited July 21, 2013 by Teknetinium

[PFunk1606688187]

The reaction to the Nevada images reminds me of some of the thoughts expressed by the Planetary Annihilation devs over at Uber some time ago when they were well before a playable Alpha. They showed some very VERY early development stuff that by their own admission wouldn't even be shown to a Publisher and people's reactions made them reconsider showing it until it was more polished.

 

Its so tragic. People complain and end up with nothing to complain about after a while, except that they're not showing them anything new that they can complain about. Its just so obnoxious.