A quick question about v1.12...

[Jason76]

Will the training tracks be updated to work properly?

 

Even though I've gone through all of them (they were all nicely done especially the A-10 with the voice over), I'd still like to review some of them every once in a while without uninstalling the patch.

[Olgerd]

Usually it takes many (too much) time. So do not expect it.

[Coffee999]

"IT takes too much time". For some reason I don't like that response. Listen, Everything takes time. The training tracks were broke with a patch. I think the time should be taken to fix these.

 

I understand that "fluff" things can't be done because to time contraints, but an important part of the learning process was broke after the last patch. This sim is hard enough to learn for the new guy coming in. And don't make it difficult for him by saying they worked in 1.02. Just uninstall the patch to play them. That's too much dinking around on the consumers part.

[Gazehound]

"IT takes too much time". For some reason I don't like that response. Listen, Everything takes time. The training tracks were broke with a patch. I think the time should be taken to fix these.

 

I understand that "fluff" things can't be done because to time contraints, but an important part of the learning process was broke after the last patch. This sim is hard enough to learn for the new guy coming in. And don't make it difficult for him by saying they worked in 1.02. Just uninstall the patch to play them. That's too much dinking around on the consumers part.

 

This has been posted before but what you need to do is use th 1.11 uninstaller to roll back to 1.02, watch the tracks, then re-apply the patch. The uninstaller was configured tis way for this very reason. So take the time to do that, or take the time to make a track yourself, or make an AVI version for the community.

[Guru]

I know i don't like that response.

 

Listen, Olgerd

 

If it was a question of improving or updating anything (that already worked!), i would agree..

 

But recovering something that worked in the first place, that is part of a software that you sold, should be one of your main concerns, or else, remove them entirely (the training tracks) of the software.

 

for some reason that doesn't sound good as an option, does it!

[VapoR]

The current way training tracks are done is a horrible mess. Every time they make a patch they have to either fix the tracks or leave them broken. If they fix the tracks there will be a big delay (remember the 1.02 wait??). If they don't, then people that need the training get mad (as well they should). The tracks themselves don't need to be fixed IMO, the whole training system needs to be fixed.

[Coffee999]

VapoR you are right. The tracks have always been porked in one way or another. The track system in not that stable.

 

I still think they should take the time and fix and/or improve this. Maybe the next patch will pork the summer season terrain. All well, if we want to fly in the summer we can spend the time to roll back everything, and not make use of FC that I just bought during training.

 

Listen, I love this Sim. Never bad mouth it. But I believe the core of the game should work. There are a lot of things that aren't right with the code, AI for instance. I take it in stride and make the best of things. But to break the training with a patch and put a bandaid on it and not come back to fix it isn't right.

 

I bought this sim when it first came out. I still want to use the training system. I still need to :-) But I want to use it all FC'ed up and patched up to get the most out of it.

 

I won't beat a dead horse though. I've said my peace.

[britgliderpilot]

The current way training tracks are done is a horrible mess. Every time they make a patch they have to either fix the tracks or leave them broken. If they fix the tracks there will be a big delay (remember the 1.02 wait??). If they don't, then people that need the training get mad (as well they should). The tracks themselves don't need to be fixed IMO, the whole training system needs to be fixed.

 

To understand why you can't do that, you need to understand how the track system works.

 

A track does not record the aircraft's position in 3D space - it records a small number of inputs and events and makes the game engine reconstruct them.

 

This works fine, allows for small recorded flights (compared to, say, avi files . . . which are huge), and on the same version of Lomac is fine.

 

If you change the game engine, even slightly . . . . then the same inputs do not result in the track playing back the same way.

 

 

It's not fixable without spending some serious time doing so - I'm not even sure if anyone's suggested a way to do it.

 

It sucks that they don't have time to record the tracks themselves, but IMO I'd rather ED spent their time introducing new features. The tracks work with v1.1 and they provide a rollback utility - that is more than we've ever had with any ED patch to a sim.

And if they're working on a new patch again, which will break the tracks again . . . . . why re-record for v1.11 when you need to do it all over again for v1.12?

 

 

What ideally needs to be done is a number of generous-minded and competent community members and a download site to band together and create voiceover packs for the new patches. If one community member good at one thing re-records the original tracks with voiceover and emails them in, in a week or so you have a new, voiceover, training pack.

 

Job done.

 

VVS504, S77th and the 169th would seem the right places to start asking for competent training officers.

[Jason76]

To understand why you can't do that, you need to understand how the track system works.

 

A track does not record the aircraft's position in 3D space - it records a small number of inputs and events and makes the game engine reconstruct them.

 

This works fine, allows for small recorded flights (compared to, say, avi files . . . which are huge), and on the same version of Lomac is fine.

 

If you change the game engine, even slightly . . . . then the same inputs do not result in the track playing back the same way.

 

 

It's not fixable without spending some serious time doing so - I'm not even sure if anyone's suggested a way to do it.

 

It sucks that they don't have time to record the tracks themselves, but IMO I'd rather ED spent their time introducing new features. The tracks work with v1.1 and they provide a rollback utility - that is more than we've ever had with any ED patch to a sim.

And if they're working on a new patch again, which will break the tracks again . . . . . why re-record for v1.11 when you need to do it all over again for v1.12?

 

 

What ideally needs to be done is a number of generous-minded and competent community members and a download site to band together and create voiceover packs for the new patches. If one community member good at one thing re-records the original tracks with voiceover and emails them in, in a week or so you have a new, voiceover, training pack.

 

Job done.

 

VVS504, S77th and the 169th would seem the right places to start asking for competent training officers.

 

 

Very well stated (I understand better how the tracks work now)... and yes, I too, would like ED to focus on bigger bugs and bigger issues.

[Coffee999]

Even though I agree with most, I don't agree that it should be a third party that fixes and makes training tracks work. It should be ED. They broke it. Please fix it.

[504MrWolf]

and Lockonskins would obviously host them all !

[Sinner6]

I understand the original posters point of view, but let's face facts. ED is a small team with limited resources in terms of time and manpower. I for one would rather see these resources applied to the issues that affect actual gameplay.

 

Number one priority in this regard would be adding "random" elements and "triggers" to the mission builder. Next, the AI could use some tuning.

 

If fixing these two issues meant we had to forego track capability altogether, it would be a sacrifice I would gladly make.

 

Just one guys opinion,

 

nick

[S77th-GOYA]

I'm of a somewhat mixed opinion on this subject. I would rather see ED spend time on other things, but ultimately it is their responsibilty, not the community's. Many of us in the community go out of our way at times to help new pilots, but many times help is refused because it is obvious that the noobs haven't done the training. Didn't ED hire Ironhand to make training tracks?

[Brit_Radar_Dude]

In an ideal world, ED would indeed spend a lot of resources fixing the training tracks each patch/addon so that they work. However in the real world we have to accept that they are a tiny company and just can't afford the time/money to do it. Coffee999 said not unreasonably "They broke it. Please fix it." but then again if ED end up broke themselves, then we are all the losers.

 

Lockon was my first Sim, but I quickly got used to the fact that this was a different ballgame to playing MoH/CoD and you need to develop a different mindset. You have to invest time in reading the F***ing Manual, running through the training tracks several times until happy you understand it and ONLY THEN to apply the patch.

[Olgerd]

I am sorry guys. We are trying to find any ways to modify tracks recording system in such manner that to allow to make changes in some code parts and do not edit a track each time as changes was applied. As it shoud delay a patch release and always takes a time, now we do not support full compatibility of traning tracks with following patches. As a partial solution there was introduced quick rollback possibility to a previous version of the game. We are trying to find more affordable solutions to this problem, but it takes some time as well.

[Shepski]

It's very simple to run 2 installs... one of v1.1 and one of v1.1x so when you want to watch training tracks, watch them in the unpatched version.

[Prophet_169th]

It's very simple to run 2 installs... one of v1.1 and one of v1.1x so when you want to watch training tracks, watch them in the unpatched version.

 

When you say "its very simple to...", you could also provide the way to do so. The way you state it, is like teasing.

[Guest EVIL-SCOTSMAN]

tracks, we dont need no stinking tracks. ;)

 

concentrate on the actual gameplay is what i say, newbies, read the manual like everyone else had to do. or download some tracks from websites that are compatible with your particular version of lockon.

[Coffee999]

Evil, I understand you don't use the track system, but many do. The training tracks are PART of the training process along with reading the manual. Don't confuse wanting to play the training tracks with not reading the manual. They are BOTH part of the learning process.

[Brit_Radar_Dude]

tracks, we dont need no stinking tracks.

 

 

http://www.darryl.com/badges/badges1.wav

[DayGlow]

I guess ED could record the tracks as .avi and we lose the ability to interact with it.

[Shepski]

When you say "its very simple to...", you could also provide the way to do so. The way you state it, is like teasing.

 

Sure enough...

 

1. Install Lock On v1.1

2. Copy Lock On v1.1 directory and rename it v1.1x

3. Use regedit to open registry and set Lock On path to v1.1x

4. Install v1.1x patch to v1.1x directory.

 

"x" being the current patch.

 

5. Watch training tracks by running the Lockon.exe from v1.1 directory.

6. Play current patched version by running Lockon.exe from v1.1x directory.

[Shepski]

I guess ED could record the tracks as .avi and we lose the ability to interact with it.

 

This was suggested for Lock On v1.0 but it was determined that the AVIs would have to be presented in a large resolution and thus a very large file size in order to see the detail and this would have caused the entire training syllabus to be too large for 1 CD. UBI decided shipping 2 CDs was not going to happen.

[Attila]

It's not fixable without spending some serious time doing so - I'm not even sure if anyone's suggested a way to do it.

 

Well, this is a long standing and difficult problem. I did post about it, years ago on the Flanker forum, but that archive is no longer available. Anyway, track compatibility is hard and involves the core design of the simulator.

 

As you stated, the simulator itself recreates the action depending on input events stored in the track. Hence the outcome depends on every minute detail of the simulator. A very small change in the simulator can change the outcome totally.

 

The technical solution goes like this:

 

• Separate the parts of the simulator that affects virtual world state from all other parts, such as UI, visual effects, camera system, etc.
   
  
• Make sure that this core, let's call it the simulator engine, is deterministic, i.e. that it reproduces the same results given the same start state and input events. It must be indifferent to the particular hardware, operating system, drivers and libraries it runs on. Special care must be taken with "random" events. And so on.
   
  
• Design a versioning-capable API between the simulator engine, the visual system, the UI, etc. By that I mean a module interface that enables different versions of the simulator engine to be plugged in, and still have the whole thing work.
   
  
• Ship all earlier published versions of the simulator engine with the product, and use dynamic loading (DLLs) to select the correct version of the simulator engine needed to replay a track.
   
  
• Do the same for the object database (needed because even a minor change to the theatre may affect outcome — a more detailed body of an aircraft may make a bullet miss, a more detailed mountain top make an aircraft crash, a changed skin may make a comment in the track meaningless, etc.)
   
  
• Do the same for the camera system (not necessary to ensure consistent outcomes, but needed to ensure the cameras replay correctly, so that you see the same thing, voice-over makes sense, etc.).
   
  
• Make track loading version aware.
  

In conclusion, though not technically impossible, track compatibility is complicated. And even if achieved, an old track would still present an outdated version of the simulator — tactics presented may no longer work, flight models and systems/avionics may no longer be the same, and so on. On the other hand, the track would at least play, and would possibly look and play better by virtue of running on an updated graphics engine. If that is worth the effort is the question. Personally, I would like to say 'yes' to that, but looking at the techical challenges I'm doubtful.

[Guest EVIL-SCOTSMAN]

 

http://www.darryl.com/badges/badges1.wav

 

 

alas, at least somebody knew wtf i was on about.