[Need your suggestion] JF-17 IFF in MP

Regarding the IFF, the int/trs with configured codes works in MP for player controlled JF-17 only.For other aircraft or AI, it will tell you friend or foe regardless the M code.

Our current IFF design is quite simple and due to the limitation, we only enable one mode activated at the same time, and we will improve it later or wait for ED's design.

Now, for M1-M3, if either INT/TRS mode mismatches, it will return UNKNOWN, only when both modes matches, it will check the code: match? friend; otherwise enemy.

For M6, current design is that when mode or code mismatches, no response (UNKNOWN). So you can only check whether a contact is friend, but cannot figure out whether it's enemy or not (We are still thinking to improve the M6).

I've already got some comments that this IFF would not quite fit current MP environment due to TK kick/ban, many individuals may not know the planned code etc. So i need your suggestions that to make IFF works in MP but not ruin the game or experience.

***** updated 09/30 ******

Hi guys,

Thanks for your insightful comments and invaluable suggestions!

I have below rough idea of improvement to share with you:

1. Module cannot add a global option set by server admin in missions, and simple IFF option in mission editor for each jf-17 is not practical that mission maker could miss one or two when there're lots of jf-17 in mission.
   
2. So the simplest way is to put a string "SimpleIFF ON" (or similar) in mission description, then we can extract that info to determine the simulation level of the IFF.
   
3. i'm not quite sure whether you need a toggle between simple IFF and custom IFF (when admin doesn't turn on Simple IFF). I think not all like custom IFF. So in MP, even admin doesn't force to use simple IFF, players can still determine which to use by themselves
   
4. priority: admin "Simple IFF On/Off" > player "Simple IFF toggle" > custom IFF
   
5. In MP, if admin turns on "Simple IFF", player still has to select M6 for both INT/TRS in UFCP, otherwise IFF will returns UNKNOWN (to simulation IFF on/off). But if you turn M6 on, then it's coalition based and simplest.
   

Regarding custom IFF:

1. M6 (like M4) is coalition based, and you can use A/B codes for further identification. (cannot be hacked by other side)
   
2. M2 is simple code matching for both INT/TRS, and code not time-varying (so can be hacked by other side)
   
3. M1 and M3 codes change periodically (red/blue has different change strategy), so even a blue hacked red code, he can mimic a friend of red only for a very short time (due to DCS's relatively short combat duration, i think the period should be about 10 min?)
   

Look forward to your "next round" feedback. :)

****************************************

I think its fine to have it the way it is setup, provided the codes are well receivable (not difficult to find what code is needed where). I dont agree with the enemy team being able to mimic IFF friendly returns though, as its a game, someone would share them to an opposite team eventually and that would create problems.

The only other option I would say is, have it where if your codes are correct, all the aircraft you IFF will return the correct designation that way you are at fault for team killing vs both parties needing to be correct.

IE - the first option is as it is now

Second option- all aircraft IFF the same way as option 1, except enemy aircraft never provide a friendly return even if their code is correct.

Third option- If your inputted code is correct, all aircraft will return the correct indication including improperly setup JF-17s. Enemy team will never show as friendly.

Third option enables less team killing but still requires you to setup the aircraft in order for it to work.

Fourth option (if possible) allow it to be server set it in the mission editor, give the server an option to force correct IFF vs using the system as it is currently.

Thanks for your great work!

With regards to teamkilling in MP, it has always been a problem for hornets even though the implement system is significantly simplified and only requires a flip of a switch, the fact is noobs and reckless players are always going to tk and that is a part of the MP environment, so I'd suggest keep it close to reality and have an "unrealistic" option (like the no-alignment INS option for mirage) available so server owners can have that choice available. But if by any chance there is a code limitation and we can't have both then I'd definitely prefer realism.

IMO M6 should be coalition based, such that it's assumed all JF17 in the same coalition share the same code. That way, using M6, friendly will always be friendly, and unknown always unknown.

M1 to 3 should be customizable and allow displaying "friendly" regardless of coalition.

Simplest solution would be to make it so its a settable option in the ME so that the mission maker can set it. Also keep as is even if you can't do this imo.

IMO M6 should be coalition based, such that it's assumed all JF17 in the same coalition share the same code. That way, using M6, friendly will always be friendly, and unknown always unknown.

 

M1 to 3 should be customizable and allow displaying "friendly" regardless of coalition.

I share this opinion as well

IMO M6 should be coalition based, such that it's assumed all JF17 in the same coalition share the same code. That way, using M6, friendly will always be friendly, and unknown always unknown.

 

M1 to 3 should be customizable and allow displaying "friendly" regardless of coalition.

that's our current one, but for m6, in the same coalition, if some flight choose code b while others choose a, then still unknown.

Considering that the game gets significantly worse when people cannot IFF correctly, and that it's way too easy for anyone to share "secret codes", you have my one vote to do coalition based IFF

that's our current one, but for m6, in the same coalition, if some flight choose code b while others choose a, then still unknown.

Remove code B (or give mission editor option to disable it), it's useless for DCS context.

Id do a coalition based IFF.

Although i think it is awesome that you have modelled an IFF system, due to the fact that the base DCS is so simple, it will just create problems.

The M6 also is a fine idea, kind of like turning the hornet and Mirage IFF on/off- but as above, no code B.

I'd just keep your system instead of ED's., since many times (at least on realism MP servers), planes are often side locked anyway.

Also, for realism's sake and since it's supposed to be a simulation

Keep it as realistic as possible and maybe add a 'simple IFF' option enforcible by server admins.

Someone has to take the first steps towards improving IFF, one of the most gamey aspects of DCS at the moment. People being too lazy to apply it correctly should not be an argument.

Go Deka!

I think there should be Mission Editor option to enable coalition based or code based IFF, that way the full code based system is left for full mil sim, but coalition based can be enable to reduce TK on more populous but less mil sim servers.

easy, make it up to EDs standard:

if ED implements realistic IFF-Code based systems do it as well.

in the meantime keep the simply coalition based IFF that is present in every other aircraft

Keep it as realistic as possible and maybe add a 'simple IFF' option enforcible by server admins.

 

Someone has to take the first steps towards improving IFF, one of the most gamey aspects of DCS at the moment. People being too lazy to apply it correctly should not be an argument.

 

Go Deka!

I agree.

Uboats, I am seriously impressed, Deka has done incredible work with this module.

In terms of the IFF, I would leave it as it is but give mission editors the ability to set IFF codes per slot so people don't have to do anything when they spawn in MP inside of certain slots which would share the same IFF codes. The ability to have dynamic IFF is an extremely powerful tool for interoperability. You've made leaps and bounds above the competition with this video, alone. Congratulations

Keep it how it is. The simulator should be able to adapt to the real world, not the developer's adapting to the sim engine's limits.

I love the complex IFF. I am fine whatever happens, however I’m sure a simple coalition option would prevent a few team kills in the first week of war. If JF-17 is on one side there is no reason to be secret about the code

I love the complex IFF. I am fine whatever happens, however I’m sure a simple coalition option would prevent a few team kills in the first week of war. If JF-17 is on one side there is no reason to be secret about the code

I liking the suggestion others had about keeping it as is, BUT giving server owners the option to use the ED coalition system. I believe this would satisfy everyone as it gives server owners more freedom.

Yes I agree would be best if possible

Remove code B (or give mission editor option to disable it), it's useless for DCS context.

+1

The problem with "as realistic as possible" is that DCS is not very realistic itself, esp. in multiplayer and how combat works.

There will be no secret codes whatsoever. If someone runs a public multiplayer server for x amount of hours people will figure out the codes and they will be public. Since this is a game it is save to assume that people will abuse the codes for either powergaming or trolling.

DCS already has a problem regarding IFF in multiplayer, there are enough people flying purposfully with IFF off to provoke friendly fire just for the joy of getting people kicked / banned.

I like your way of IFF and it will be great for scenario based multiplayer withing closed groups or with your friends, but I dont see it working in public multiplayer.

Also arguments like "the JF-17 will only be used on one side anyways" make no sense at all, since this is entirely up to the server admin or the dude making the mission.

I dont want to see the effort go to waste so a selectable option during mission editor that locks IFF would be nice, so server admins and mission builders can decide :)

IMO M6 should be coalition based, such that it's assumed all JF17 in the same coalition share the same code. That way, using M6, friendly will always be friendly, and unknown always unknown.

 

M1 to 3 should be customizable and allow displaying "friendly" regardless of coalition.

+1 :thumbup:

I have to admit, I haven't had much interest in the JF-17 so far, but the fact that you guys are actually going forward to implement the first proper IFF system in DCS that actually takes the targets aircraft transponder setting into account impresses me. I'm pretty disappointed by ED in this regard, that after all those years DCS exists, they still haven't gotten around to implement a realistic IFF system. So kudos to you guys at Deka!

In that sense, I would like to keep it as realistic as possible, even in MP. I'm playing DCS pretty much exclusively in MP and I think players will be able to work around it, sharing codes in chat or something like this (similar to A-10C data link IDs).

I really hope ED will implement such IFF functionality for DCS in general sooner than later.

Please leave the IFF as is. I don't have issue with it in MiG-21 (similar thing) and I wouldn't want to see this changed in JF-17, just because some people want to play airquake rather than a simulator.

There's nothing similar about the MiG-21. The MiG-21 has none of this functionality implemented. No aircraft in DCS has working transponder functionality so far.