Where are the Multiplayer players?

[Wrecking Crew]

Enough talk -

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1919693#post1919693

 

WC

[Crescendo]

Three server crashes in two hours.

 

I started on 51st which promptly crashed within 30 seconds of me taking off. I then joined 159th which crashed after half an hour. Subsequently I tried =WAR=, but all aircraft on that server were inexplicably warping so I quit. Finally, I joined S77th which crashed after flying for 20 minutes.

 

All in all, a thoroughly dissatisfying chain of events. Bad luck and timing may have something to do with it, but this sort of user experience is not uncommon.

[xaoslaad]

I don't see any of you guys flying online.

I fly all the time.

 

Everyone who claims to be constantly crashing is exaggerating!

Or their system is not on par with DCS, or needs tuning.

After you met the requirements, get an SSD and disable DEP.

These are the two things that will have the most effect on DCS performance.

:)

 

Why are you having to turn off DEP? DEP only prevents areas of memory not marked as executable from being executed. It's a security feature meant to prevent stuff like buffer overflow attacks. That wreaks of a bug in serious need of fixing if true.

 

And while not hard to turn off people should not have to expose their system to more risk to play and I bet most wouldn't. Even know where to find the setting...

[xaoslaad]

The application should still be fixed. It running better without DEP enabled is indicative of a problem. Disabling it is an OK temporary solution, but not a good permanent answer.

[BRooDJeRo]

And DEP stands for?

[xaoslaad]

Read 5 or so posts back. Data Execution Prevention...

[BRooDJeRo]

Read 5 or so posts back. Data Execution Prevention...

 

Awesome thx.

[Grinch]

Here's my take on why MP is stagnant.

 

Without any stats or figures, there appears to be plenty of new players giving DCSW a try. Steam--love it or hate it--is a great method of introducing DCSW to new players. Poor flight instructions and tutorials (supposedly there's a new interactive Su-25T tutorial, but that's a few days late and a couple dollars short), poor server stability, and poor choice of modules has caused the Steam ship to sail away without new players sticking around the online community.

 

If they have stuck around, there are certainly members of this forum--whom I shall not name--which I have seen ridiculing and speaking to newer players in a demeaning manner in game. I have even heard the complaints on our TS3 server. Sure, this isn't representative of the entire community, but it only takes a few bad apples.

 

I've heard several players who gave the F2P DCSW a shot, that they would consider buying a module or two, but because of the number of bugs and faults that there's no way they're going to pay $40-50 USD for the product.

 

As far as modules to entice new players, we all understand that the combat simulator genre is a very small gaming niche. My opinion is that newer content such as the Mi-8--regardless of whether it's a great and accurate simulator or not--makes that niche of ours even smaller. Why the Mi-8? Why a Vietnam-era UH-1H? Why not something that would draw more players into the game such as Mi-24s, or UH-1N or Y, or even AH-1W/Z? The module outlook resembles shotgun shot throughout decades of platforms with little that tie them all together for a DCS "World" other than the simple fact that the aircraft modeled produce lift and take off.

 

Stale missions are certainly another reason. It's a huge pain to make missions, especially with an utterly inefficient mission editor. Anything you produce is a balance between realism, entertainment, and more importantly: MP stability.

 

The F18 module(s) will hopefully be a great addition to the series, but it will all be for nothing if the underlying reasons as to why the MP community has grown stagnant are not corrected and this ship is put back on course. Now, it would be great if the Russians had some sort of multirole, DCS-level fighter to contend with the F18 in MP. That would be the next logical step.

 

Sorry for the wall of text, it's the result of a slow day at work. Thoughts?

[ENO]

Stale missions are certainly another reason. It's a huge pain to make missions, especially with an utterly inefficient mission editor. Anything you produce is a balance between realism, entertainment, and more importantly: MP stability.

 

This is about where my thoughts begin and end... Not a bad rant overall, actually.

[Wrecking Crew]

Stale missions are certainly another reason. It's a huge pain to make missions, especially with an utterly inefficient mission editor. Anything you produce is a balance between realism, entertainment, and more importantly: MP stability.

 

Sorry for the wall of text, it's the result of a slow day at work. Thoughts?

 

 

Gosh. Soo much talk is expended on what is coming, this is next and that! and this. Bla bla bla

 

Why the dig at the editor? The MP stability is the issue.

 

Hmm, maybe the mission designer could set the available a/c for the mission, like setting the View options -- but it should prevent folks from joining if they don't own the module/mod.

 

 

 

Hollo Pointe will host an H2H campaign from Friday November 15 through Saturday night - gosh I hope it is stable, Fridays especially, but if we get kicked off we will get right back up again, right boys?!

http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3856869/SimHQ_DCS_World_Fly_In_Novembe#Post3856869

 

 

Wrecking Crew

Edited November 6, 2013 by Wrecking Crew
wrong thing to say

[sobek]

No profanity please, gents. This forum is rated for everyone.

[theOden]

Well put Grinch, and I'm all with you on every single point. What I'd like to add though is this diversity of modules should be seen as "growing pains" and the set of air vehicles is most probably a "first try" from all 3rd party teams before they makes an attempt at other "block buster" names. Still there is a risk that DCS name will take hits for all these not connected modules while the product is getting more mature/coherent. Meanwhile I guess efforts put into this, such as by eno/WC, are rather important to keep the mp folks interested (even though I think many non-mission-creators miss what experience is behind what they do and might focus on what is percieved as missing - but I guess that's how life usually goes). edit: firefox scriptblocker made this well formatted text look like it does :)

[taps]

The application should still be fixed. It running better without DEP enabled is indicative of a problem. Disabling it is an OK temporary solution, but not a good permanent answer.

 

DEP is be default only enabled for "essential windows programs and services" and therefore doesn't affect DCS anyway. So there is no need to disable it for ordinary users.

[taps]

Actually, the default DEP setting depends on the operating system

 

No.

 

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-vista/data-execution-prevention-frequently-asked-questions

Which programs does DEP monitor?

 

DEP automatically monitors essential Windows programs and services. You can increase your protection by having DEP monitor all programs. To increase DEP protection, see Change Data Execution Prevention settings.

[Wrecking Crew]

No profanity please, gents. This forum is rated for everyone.

 

I apologize.

 

WC

[ENO]

With Grimes' help, we have come up with the code to get rid of the AI aircraft spawned by people selecting an aircraft they do not own. Must be using/have loaded mist prior to this script and it should not interfere with any other scripts in place.

 

local function removeclientAI()
   for unitName, unitData in pairs(mist.DBs.humansByName) do
       if Unit.getByName(unitName) and not Unit.getByName(unitName):getPlayerName() then
           Unit.getByName(unitName):getGroup():destroy()
       elseif Unit.getByName(unitName) and Unit.getByName(unitName):getPlayerName() == '' then
           Unit.getByName(unitName):getGroup():destroy()
       elseif Unit.getByName(unitName) and Unit.getByName(unitName):getPlayerName() then

       else

       end
       --trigger.action.outText(totaltxt, 5)
   end
end

   local AIHandler = function(event)
       if event.id ~= nil then
                   timer.scheduleFunction(removeclientAI, nil, timer.getTime() + 0.1)
       end
   end
mist.addEventHandler(AIHandler)

 

That being said, we are still having a fair number of crashes due to other stability issues. Has this code helped any? still to early to say, it has eliminated the ATC spamming the client created AI does so that in itself is worth it.

 

 

Does this have to be run on a continuous- or just run "once" on a time more (10) or something?

[Shahdoh]

Run once, any time after Mist has loaded. The script has worked great on the VA server keeping the client spawned AI cleaned up. Just remember it wont remove the AI right away, an event, any event (take offs/landing, shooting, crashes, etc... ) must trigger and it will look for the AI and remove them.

[Grinch]

Nothing scientific here, but a map I have created can run for 15-16 hours with a dozen players no problem, but as soon as people jump in to CA positions, the trouble ensues. There are no built in scripts to the mission such as CTTS or anything. It's purely game triggers and way points. The server crashes, and the CA commanders jump back in upon reboot and numerous hiccups ensue. Vehicles falling through the world, ground crews fail to respond, and the train wreck happens.

 

Like I said, nothing scientific and certainly no data, but it's at least something to go on.

[ENO]

I've seen the same behavior on my server too. CA is a warp fest for many as soon as someone takes on the GC role. Jtac doesn't cause problems, however.

[Shahdoh]

Yet, on the Virtual Aerobatic Server, we once removed ALL triggers, scripts, AI aircraft and just had aircraft for people to fly where ever they wish. No CA capabilities and yet the server still crashed about as often as before. So we put the scripts and tankers back in, built a script to restart the server when it crashed and have left it at that.

[Risk]

Bottom line people have just lost interest. Their seems to be a lot of multiplayer stability issues. The only people talking about this elusive F/A-18C is the players, and their is really no proof that ED is evening working on it. I stopped flying over a year ago. The last two squads I belonged to disbanded. Personally I did not come to DCS for WWII aircraft. Flamming Cliffs is to simplified for the realistic systems that we were all introduced to by the A-10C. I could be wrong, but I believe a lot of players are still waiting for the Nevada terrain that I believe we paid for over two years ago. I will always be grateful for the fine work done on the A-10C, it raised the bar for all future hardcore flight sims to come. But I believe at some point ED has to take responsibility for the reason why so many players have lost interest and hope that someday they really do begin work on the F/A-18C and give the player community what they have been asking for all along.

Edited November 15, 2013 by Risk

[aaron886]

Personally I did not come to DCS for WWII aircraft.

 

This. There's no cohesive changes being made to multiplayer for combat afficionados. The only growing aspect of MP that I've seen is the goof-around kind of flying. (Not that it can't be fun occasionally, too!) The DCS platform has some great potential change on the horizon, it's just not taking any direction.

[ENO]

There's a direction... but in watching the excrement flying from the rooftops every time ED talks about it there's no wonder it isn't better advertised.

 

Common responses to the tune of:

 

1) MY WAY IS BETTER, WHY DON'T THEY SMARTEN UP YO!

2) THIS IS STUPID, I'M NOT BUYING ANYMORE OF THEIR CARP.

3) THAT'S IT, I'M GOING TO GO KILL MYSELF UNLESS ED DOES IT MY WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

It's idiotic.

 

Anyway- we're all suffering a bit of a lull here and ambitious plans are creating many different issues. Not the least of which is some instability in MP which is, as mentioned, killing it for many, many people. I know a guy who, with no carpentry background, built his own pit (I think based on deadman's) with nothing but splinters and passion and then within a month took a leave of absence from DCS altogether... I mean, I'm not trying to fanboy up here because I know it really is hitting some people hard.

 

It'll come around eventually... we just have to pace ourselves. Submit your crash files... try to give info... Help them help us. Sitting around here b1tching about everything isn't going to help.

[Midnight]

Well said ENO, bottom line is that this is still the best COMBAT SIM out there!

[Dutchy93]

true, but unlike what some tell me here, I think the clientside bugs aren't ironed out yet.

I noticed this first hand on the WAR server amongst others.

 

First of all I fly the F15 mostly, since I don't really have the patience to fly all the way to the front. Most of the online guys I see are A-10C's and KA50's. So not much of a challenge there.

But this time I decided not to smoke that A10 flying just 400m in front of my nose so I tried to fly next to him. BAM: game freeze, sound stuck etc. I could navigate my pc but my game just gave up.

I rebooted and tried again. This time I had a merge with a Su27. Finaly a challenge! Happilly I go in. Just getting in close, he turns and launches: BAM game freeze (the missile just left the rail).

Reboot:

new scenario: I get close to a plane and my game freezes.

Don't know what is going on here. I don't think it is my pc itself. My rig isn't the best but it sure as hell should be able to run this.

 

And on a sidenote: ED might want to take a look at performance. When I fly online and encounter some moderate to heavy clouds my fps just drops to a crawl. It drops so much that it just isn't playable anymore. And in offline mode I have no problems like this.