Mission design under valued by ED? - Page 3 - ED Forums


Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-10-2016, 10:29 PM   #21
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,492

Ehy it does not work online? Or should everyone has the same change? Usually this is a server issue.
ESAc_matador is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2016, 04:06 AM   #22
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 175

Originally Posted by ESAc_matador View Post
Ehy it does not work online? Or should everyone has the same change? Usually this is a server issue.
Yeah, it works in multiplayer as we tested it with our training mission - but the server host needs to change those boolean variables mentioned to true.
609_Relentov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2016, 10:21 AM   #23
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Finland, Kuopio
Posts: 1,277

Giving commands to AI units causes random server crashes, on average about once in a hour. If this would not happen, CA would be actually usable in this way livening up missions quite a bit. But now it can be only used for missions that are restarted soon after start (training) so that those crashes don't matter much. This is the main problem in CA. I have Steel Beasts for offline tank simming but the tip could provide some fun in MP coop though. Thanks.
DCS Finland: Suomalainen DCS yhteisö -- Finnish DCS community
SF Squadron
Bushmanni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2016, 11:14 AM   #24
Senior Member
Pikey's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Reading, UK (GMT)
Posts: 2,883

Familiar with that issue Busmanni, i reported the stack traces a few times, its one of many sat at the bottom of the pile that prevent server admins having a server up, unattended, with interesting complexities for ED's customers. It's a fantastic example of a tiny thing that blocks progress like all the niggles in the 'Grimes SSE bug list thread', almost impossible to reproduce on demand but completely fatal to multiplayer server admins.

For (one) example, I have a fantastic mission where we used AI in CTLD to ferry troops via helicopter and truck to the centre of a city and deliver under fire toa contested area. A script counted who was in sector control and printed out the owner of the sector to screen. Players can join a side and tip the balance one way or another and being involved in a complex mini conflict. Everything works, its a 'vanilla no mod' server and performance is fine but it just crashes due to troops movements (or something) around every half hour so I can't make it public after much sadness.

It's not about being upset with the game or anything Sith, I and thousands of others love it in its many states, but the OP is suggesting and I am saying also, that there needs to be a shift away from shiny stuff development to under the hood core stuff that enables the community to produce great MP server offerings and as a result keep the loyal fan base somewhat quieter. If ED need the community to extend the design effectively, they need to give them the nuts and bolts to work with. At my work there are generally two teams that develop, one called sustained engineering that focuses on the existing product that is live and producing fixes and the other that does the development of new features. I can't even begin to work out ED's development cycle it's like nothing I have ever seen, releasing three versions weekly of what are essentially still developmental pushes in different streams for the last 9 months is just ... Unusual. And to me, takes a lot of effort, especially in QA which is a community push and not even that strong, forgive me for saying that, it's not aimed at insulting the hard and thankless work of the testing team, but you will admit, you get little for it for the time when most other dev studios or companies have really stringent testing cycles (that pay their staff engineer wages).

I believe the effect of adding development cycles to the items that effect mission design, Multiplayer, and interesting mission development, plays a large part in the loyalty of the customer base through a small number of people that produce content for a large number of others. I believe that effort might seem hidden and small but its impact is far reaching. I understand that these things are being touched and that priorities are in place that may push them further away, but anything that reduces the effort by mission designers and virtual flying group leaders to keep interest in the game is what is really at stake. It's not just about new customers and capturing the market, it's about the existing market being loyal, retained and spreading word on the internet that DCS is now the go-to flying sim for multiplayer action.

I've personally seen and discussed with many other virtual organisations about the turmoil this year from the fast paced dev cycle. People are fickle, we know that. But long term players are also wandering off now because the mission designers who are trying to make the same game intersting are struggling to work around all the bizarre issues that are under the hood. And for what it's worth, from this side of the fence, DCS shows a lot of leg, but she doesn't put out. There seems to be placeholders for so many interesting features, but years later, there's nothing tangible to show for it. Of course you can talk about the future and we've all seen WIP development shots, but we should be honest, let's judge it on the delivery, not the promise. Saying 'but just wait, there so much on the horizon' doesn't cut it anymore for some, mission designers influence entire virtual squadrons with the product we have now.

Originally Posted by Bushmanni View Post
Giving commands to AI units causes random server crashes, on average about once in a hour. If this would not happen, CA would be actually usable in this way livening up missions quite a bit. But now it can be only used for missions that are restarted soon after start (training) so that those crashes don't matter much. This is the main problem in CA. I have Steel Beasts for offline tank simming but the tip could provide some fun in MP coop though. Thanks.
“Six better fuses and we would have lost.”
Pikey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2017, 05:02 PM   #25
Senior Member
Tyger's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 1,565

Good points in my view Pikey. I love DCS, always have done but the fact is that the constant bugs in mission design negate any mission depth or continuum - this has however, always been the case.

One thing fixed, next you know, something (that wasn't broken before) else breaks. I admit, to us 'norms' who are not programmers or dev's this just reaks of, dare i say it - 'incompetence', but we all know this cannot be farther from the truth.

The Devs are certainly not incompetent, I've met a fair few of them - super smart people - so why are we all, where we are? Why can't we have a mission design system that is stable, a constant, that works and is reliable? Simples...............because it is 'all' constantly moving forward, rather than a hub and spoke approach - the Hub was once going to be DCS World, with modules as the spokes but as we see, there are some elements of DCS world which need regular updating and bug fixing.

Many players and pilots have left out of sheer frustration - I know, I'm one of them. not only that, but I folded the 74th for what is now over 3 years ago to give the sim time to mature before a re-visit. My missions I spent weeks, months, 1000's of hrs compiling that were very popular, broken after every minor update. It was, in a couple of words, 'soul destroying'.

So why are we all here then? Why did I come back and why do many others come back each day?

'Faith', 'Belief' and 'Buy-in'. We know ED want the very best and will stop at nothing to deliver. Bugs, warts and awl. Gota give it to 'em for that and, that is why we all come back.


i7 7700K, EVGA GTX 1080, 32 gigs of DDR4, Samsung 960 M2 & Samsung Evo SSDs, TH Warthog, CH Pedals, Triple screen setup, Oculus Rift, Tobii 4C running on Win 10 Pro

Ground Mods - Which Ground Texture Mod is best? Vanilla, Starway, Mustang or Barthek? Watch and decide for yourselves, now with mountains HERE
Tyger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2017, 08:21 PM   #26
ENO's Avatar
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Okotoks, Alberta
Posts: 3,411

I remember back when you guys folded your tents. The Firehouse lasted awhile after but then I was running into the same problems you were with missions breaking constantly and not having the expertise to fix them without tearing them apart and redoing them.

I've been gone about two years... tried coming back in around November of last year but couldn't even get my server to run after trying every trick in the book. I got one flight in and bailed- memories of the frustration were overwhelming.

A few friends of mine in town started playing it in single player so that gave me the bug to go back at it again. Always loved the multiplayer aspect but it was so much more fun to run missions together.

I'd like to give it an honest try again, knowing full well that any effort I put into making missions is a letter of code from being a waste of time.
Type in anger and you will make the greatest post you will ever regret.

"Sweetest's" Military Aviation Art
ENO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2017, 02:00 AM   #27
Senior Member
FlightControl's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Antwerp, Belgium
Posts: 1,984

ENO, my friend. How are you! All okay?
I completely share your thoughts. Those who are (bug) fans of the game could get a bit more of attention, wouldn't you think? But unfortunately it is not done...

Anyway, don't loose your spirit man. Life had so much more to offer than this simulation. I advise you join back in and let the good times come.

FlightControl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2017, 02:16 AM   #28
Senior Member
FlightControl's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Antwerp, Belgium
Posts: 1,984

Originally Posted by FubarBundy View Post
Hi all,
This is, in some part, a reaction to FlightControl's decision to stop work on the wonderful Moose project and, in some part, a rant that's been a long time coming.

I have been running a server, (CoffinDodger) for some time now but it is presently down. Initially this was due to a hardware failure but it has stayed down because of the time it takes to find workarounds and fixes for long known bugs and problems within the scripting engine.

I have posted along these lines before but will state it again... DCS, no matter how fantastic the flight models and no matter how beautiful the aircraft models etc.. would be pretty much meaningless without the scenarios created by the mission making community.

I am no programmer but, thanks the the likes of FlightControl, Grimes, Ciribob et al and the frameworks and scripts they have created, even I have been able to produce some pretty decent missions which, (connection issues aside), have proved to be quite popular at times.

In truth, FlightControl's decision to leave the Moose project involves personal reasons but there is also a deep frustration with the way ED interacts with the mission building community.

This is not surprising as the interaction is little to none!. There are mission editor bugs which have been around for months, (if not years) and these cause all mission builders to tear their hair out regularly trying to find workarounds and fixes for things that just don't work as they should in the first place.

We all understand that any piece of software as big in scope as DCS will always have bugs and problems but it is the lack of communication, feedback and assistance from ED which is the problem.

I find this bizarre as I see mission design as fully 50% of DCS and, from where I'm standing, this 50% of DCS seems to be woefully under supported and under valued by ED.

Every week we get a newsletter telling us about the latest bundle offer or modules in development etc.. (not knocking that because its a good thing), but could ED not also put up news regarding features and plans for the scripting engine?.
Could ED staff and or 3rd party developers not post their own tips and pointers regarding how to get the most out of the mission editor or even have somebody respond to queries and maybe even give out little snippets of code in response to feature requests?

Please understand, I am not knocking DCS or ED but I am puzzled as to why the mission builders and server hosts get so little support and attention. I strongly believe this should change because DCS has the potential to be something truly amazing.

People like FlightCcontrol are an asset of untold value and should be recognised as such, not driven away by frustration.

Anyway, rant over. Hope somebody from ED reads this and understands what I'm getting at.
One year later..., not much has improved unfortunately. Try using lua to destroy a client (that is a unit started by a player) using Unit:destroy() in multi player... Not working. The multiple clients group bug is only partially resolved... Burning units still can't be destroyed, so they keep on blocking airbases and there is nothing than can be done about it... These kind of problems keep hiding in the system.. Although reported, it seems ED does not care fixing them. Communication is zero when it comes to lua scripting. I've even reached out a helping hand, but no avail.

I really hope that 2017 will bring some light to the team of ED. If there is anything that can be done from the community side to improve on things, we are happy to cooperate. Send multiple posts in this regards... Moderators know them.
I hope that some of the team members are looking into how the community can help or bring a structured message on which priorities can be set and communicated. Things just keep on to be broken for years in a release version. Cone on. We all paid lots of money, even funded the project when it started buying 50$ modules.
I understand the frustrations.

Haven't given up on the moose framework though... Slowly and steady this thing is reaching it's final goal. I hope fubarbundy will be back soon.

FlightControl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2017, 02:24 AM   #29
Community Manager
NineLine's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: BC, Canada
Posts: 21,009

Originally Posted by FlightControl View Post
it seems ED does not care fixing them.
We should be careful suggesting that ED doesnt care, the focus right now is on the core and getting us merged to 2.5. Its not what you want to hear, but its a simple fact that that is where the focus is right now and only blocking bugs that stop the sim from running would take them off task I would imagine.
Nick Grey - "I have had the privilege of flying most marks of Spit, the I, V, IX, XIV, XIX and enjoyed working with Eagle to make this simulation of the IX the 'mutt's nuts'."
Artist formerly known as SiThSpAwN
Forum RulesForum Rules Guidelines
ED Facebook PageED YouTube PageWags YouTubeMy YouTube
**How to Report a Bug**
NineLine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2017, 02:36 AM   #30
Senior Member
FlightControl's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Antwerp, Belgium
Posts: 1,984

The question is, what is blocking for who. How do we define when the simulator is not running. Where do we see a communication from ED about these things?
Multiplayer is a valued environment for many. People have invested a lot of time creating scripts and features that failed to work because of errors deep in the system. Fixing some critical bugs would do a lot of good to the simulator. I an sure I speak for many here. I would be really interested to see if ED knows which bugs are the issue.
FlightControl is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:11 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.