TeamSpeak Question and Answer Event Sunday Nov. 19 at 15:00 GMT

[Brano]

Jade Monkey,

thanks for the mp3 record. I listened to the Q&A session while flying back from my exploration trip to Heart and Soul nebulas in ED (7500ly from Sol) 

 

Jason,

thanks for handling all the users questions very professionaly (some of them were really ). Being responsible for new projects myself in real life job, I completly understand your reasoning and restrictions you have to fight with . Resources are limited and hard to come by. As for me it was reassuring to hear you talking as I know you are a true kind of program manager. Lots of folks just dont get it what it means to be one in real life.

Changes in roadmap will come,projects will be delayed,thats the life. You have a vision and you are sticking to it. And you have balls to make decissions (for some folks unpopluar) if you see that risk is too high. Thats very important. 

 

Andrey,

It was nice to hear you in Q&A session. I can imagine the workload you have to face every day and I appreciate your dedication to our hobby. I wish you all the best. And dont work too hard,we need you in good health and shape. Otherewise we will need to really start the "Clone Andrey" project 

Удачи! 

[Danziger]

Here is a good reply from AnPetrovich from this same thread on the Russian forum. Google translated of course.

 

According to the code code, I already answered recently on the forum - we have so far (I hope that for now) there is no networker for this task. In this work there is a share of my participation, but only a share, as an associate. Perhaps from the timespeak session, it might have been a mistaken impression that this task was mainly mine (it was often Petrovich who sounded painful), but that's not true. First of all, it is necessary to audit the core of the network code (written about ten years ago by a programmer who has not been on the team for a long time), and only then to deal with the optimization of working with these protocols, where I have my participation. This is a big and time-consuming task, which will take months of work, and if you give it to the lidprogu or me, that will turn us off for these months from other tasks. I, of course, can do this, too, even though the sound engine or interface, but as Jason said, we do not have anyone else in the team who would be involved in modeling development. This is a serious problem for us, because we are practically permanent, during all the years of development, we are in a state of shortage of hands, so for this reason I have to periodically engage in content engineering tasks, because each new project requires a certain minimum set of new aircraft that are available the composition of engineers must be completed in time. We have to leave the culmination and go to the shop, stand up for the lathe. We have no other way out in a state-limited budget. For example, now I'm doing Yak-7B, which is very necessary for the Kuban, and which many players are waiting for. I try to spend this time working on content with benefit, seeking opportunities to implement new features or enhancements. For example, this aircraft will receive improved logic of the landing flaps and the sliding part of the cockpit lantern, small structural changes in the board's operation, a little more detailed DM. Then these two new technologies, our two other engineers, Roma and Sasha, engaged in fulltime content work, will gradually spread to other machines. So slowly the skeleton becomes overgrown with meat, and we have to prioritize based on the resources that we have. This is what Jason is saying, that we are looking for opportunities to improve each direction, but we'll maneuver between the constraints. We need programmers, we need engineers. We need money to pay them a salary. I hope that the Kuban will bring them to us, and we will finally be able to tackle the network as well.

[II/JG11_ATLAN_VR]

thx for Translation !

[Ribbon]

From other MP games i saw, rewriting network code is really time consuming and demanding even for a guy that knkws game tools, engine and tech very well.

[Danziger]

Another good quote from AnPetrovich regarding work on the list of tasks from DD120.

 

 

All of the items listed are what to do to me. I do not want to make excuses, but it's not about money. It's about time. "Givi can do everything, but can not do everything at once." This year I was on vacation for only a week, and worked on New Year and May holidays, if only I had time to shove the unintended. Yes, it took almost 2 years from 120 "epic" diaries, I agree. However, for the sake of fairness, I note that over the past two years, too, there has been done a lot - all this is also in the diaries and on your computers. And these plans have not gone anywhere. The road will be mastered by the going, and we go without stopping. Patience, guys, we work! ..

[Jade_Monkey]

Thanks for sharing the quote Borys

Edited November 21, 2017 by Jade_Monkey

[I./JG1_Deschain]

Anything about more complex radio system ? (calling base, ground crew, rearm refuel maybe ?) 

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

AnPetrovich deserves some holiday. And a partner to help him with all the work he does. It feels like too much to do for a single person. 

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

No, the majority of questions concerned multiplayer bugs, Pe-2 gunners and requests for more planes. I was quite surprised that there was maybe less than half a dozen questions put to Jason regarding the new titles, and nothing really concerning the new campaign.

That is true of the second hour but Jason covered a lot of ground on the upcoming releases in the first hour. Probably answered the majority of questions before they needed to be asked.

[Jade_Monkey]

Personally I found the Q&A a missed opportunity. The questions were mostly focused on bugs and requests that have been around forever.

There should have been a bigger focus on the new announcements, but that's not Jason's fault. The audience was pretty unprepared or shocked with the news.

Maybe it was because there was not much notice and it caught people by surprise, or perhaps the new announcement was detailed enough that did not generate as many questions as anticipated.

 

I found myself not having any questions until the very last minute when Jason closed the session when a question came to mind:

 

• Any comments on the Odessa and rumored Leningrad map? They are not official maps but I would love to hear what Jason has to say about them.

 

Either way, thanks to Jason and An Petrovich for being there and answering all questions.

[LLv34_Untamo]

Personally I found the Q&A a missed opportunity. The questions were mostly focused on bugs and requests that have been around forever....

 

Which is exactly why we should keep asking them, again and again and again, until they get fixed. Because they bug us constantly. They aren't a mild inconvenience, they are a constant annoyance and stop us fully enjoying the game. I'm now speaking about the DServer bugs and the lacking netcode of course. "Squeaky wheel gets the grease".

 

I would eagerly pay full price for the next Battle of X even with couple of planes missing. Use that time and money to fix the core of the game. Hell, I'd pay full price just to get the fixes without the planes or a new map!

 

I want to have 60 vs. 60 human air battles in BoX like we have in old IL-2's SEOW campaigns.

Edited November 22, 2017 by LLv34_Untamo

[Brano]

Which is exactly why we should keep asking them, again and again and again, until they get fixed. Because they bug us constantly. They aren't a mild inconvenience, they are a constant annoyance and stop us fully enjoying the game. I'm now speaking about the DServer bugs and the lacking netcode of course. "Squeaky wheel gets the grease".

 

I would eagerly pay full price for the next Battle of X even with couple of planes missing. Use that time and money to fix the core of the game. Hell, I'd pay full price just to get the fixes without the planes or a new map!

 

I want to have 60 vs. 60 human air battles in BoX like we have in old IL-2's SEOW campaigns.

Thats what you and other PvP guys want as priority. The vast majority of users = PvE players wants new maps and planes. Devs allready spent considerable amount of time implementing VR for a small group of user of this technology. These users are the most vocal on the forum but do not represent the largest pool of user who dont play MP nor posess VR device. Think about your request again. Isnt it a bit selfish?

[Aap]

 

 

Thats what you and other PvP guys want as priority. The vast majority of users = PvE players wants new maps and planes. Devs allready spent considerable amount of time implementing VR for a small group of user of this technology. These users are the most vocal on the forum but do not represent the largest pool of user who dont play MP nor posess VR device. Think about your request again. Isnt it a bit selfish?

 

So is there some reference that single players vastly outnumber online players?

Anyway, during our current "social media" century it would be  a great blunder to overlook the needs of online players.

[Feathered_IV]

So is there some reference that single players vastly outnumber online players?

 

About three quarters of the way through the livechat, Jason did say that 90% of the customer base were singleplayers.

[LLv34_Untamo]

Thats what you and other PvP guys want as priority. The vast majority of users = PvE players wants new maps and planes. Devs allready spent considerable amount of time implementing VR for a small group of user of this technology. These users are the most vocal on the forum but do not represent the largest pool of user who dont play MP nor posess VR device. Think about your request again. Isnt it a bit selfish?

 

About three quarters of the way through the livechat, Jason did say that 90% of the customer base were singleplayers.

 

Honestly didn't know there are so many single players. Well, I personally know only people who play multiplayer.

 

Okay then, the devs should make us vote with our wallets. Give us the next Battle of X with all the planes and the map, AND a fix package to purchase. I would pay for both, everyone doesn't have to. Any money gotten from the fix package would be put to fixing the game. You can invent other schemes as necessary. This isn't "rocket surgery"

[Dakpilot]

It isn't rocket surgery... If you listen to the livestream Jason explains why throwing money at the problem will not help, you cannot magic someone out of nowhere to do the job, and their situation does not allow the programmer to spend the necessary 6 months + needed to address the issues, however much you and I (and I am sure Jason and the team) wish the situation was different, it isn't.

 

Sometimes the squeaky wheel gets the grease, but when there is none, it is just very irritating.

 

There is hope that the co-op work may provide some more insight to the possible solving of issues

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Voidhunger]

We need 1c to put more money into IL2 so Jason can hire more people.

Imagine two BOX titles together with Flying circus and Tank crew volume 2 released in one year .

[Herne]

About three quarters of the way through the livechat, Jason did say that 90% of the customer base were singleplayers.

 

I do wonder just how much time they put in though. I've played through all campaigns but only once. re-playability of the stock campaign is low I think, but I guess the scripted campaigns, including player made content must be quite popular.

 

The new career mode I think will be a big winner for the single player guys. I look forward to playing through the career mode myself. 

[Brano]

Devs are not neglecting MP crowd. It was clearly stated by Jason that they know about the problems and are looking for working solution with Danil and Andrey. As Andrey said,netcode of the game is 10 years old and the person who did it (presumably for RoF) is not working with them anymore. And no money will solve this. It is all proprietary software,not some big time SW company stuff for which you have thousands of experts on job market. On top of it,the choice narrows down to someone who must speak Russian and be available at their Moscow studio to learn things from Andrey and others. This job can't be done overseas via Skype or such.

[LLv34_Temuri]

Devs are not neglecting MP crowd.

True. If they were, we wouldn't be getting coop.

[216th_Jordan]

AnPetrovich deserves some holiday. And a partner to help him with all the work he does. It feels like too much to do for a single person. 

 

This. Thats a lot of burden for one person, stuff like that can quickly lead to a burnout.

[Ribbon]

Honestly didn't know there are so many single players. Well, I personally know only people who play multiplayer.

 

Okay then, the devs should make us vote with our wallets. Give us the next Battle of X with all the planes and the map, AND a fix package to purchase. I would pay for both, everyone doesn't have to. Any money gotten from the fix package would be put to fixing the game. You can invent other schemes as necessary. This isn't "rocket surgery"

New networking code is high on my wishlist too, but since funds are limited and minority of us fly MP i say let them do what ever will grant more money.

When there is enough money than it's easy to address fix for problem, i mean if upcoming planeset shows to be popular as i hope so, than team could expand and work on many different areas to improve overall experience.

Than PTO nor networking code won't be problem.

Also it's not just problem in money, problem is manpower and time to train new personel, if Petrovich train someone new than project he's working on will suffer and be delayed.

Jason and Petrovich explained this during the TS session!

Edited November 22, 2017 by EAF_Ribbon

[Herne]

New networking code is high on my wishlist too, but since funds are limited and minority of us fly MP i say let them do what ever will grant more money.

When there is enough money than it's easy to address fix for problem, i mean if upcoming planeset shows to be popular as i hope so, than team could expand and work on many different areas to improve overall experience.

Than PTO nor networking code won't be problem.

Also it's not just problem in money, problem is manpower and time to train new personel, if Petrovich train someone new than project he's working on will suffer and be delayed.

Jason and Petrovich explained this during the TS session!

 

I honestly think that MP will become more popular (than it currently is, not singleplayer). I already think its more popular now than in the short period of time I've been consistently playing IL2, since Apr I think.

 

From what I've seen, Server performance can be pretty good up to around 74 players but servers still seem to get the odd crash here and there though. 

 

My point is that I expect the popularity of IL2 in general to grow with new theatres and plane sets, and I also expect the already popular online servers, to become even more popular. I waited 10 minutes to grab a slot for TAW last night, as soon as one appeared it was gone. I gave up and watched TV until Mission reset. I think IL2 BoX, when you take into account, the FM's, the Maps, the performance of the netcode in general, the damage models, and the inclusion of a really quite impressive VR implementation, is absolutely hands down one of, if not the best MP combat sims available today. BoX has an impressive lead, I just really hope it can stay ahead of the competition.

[dburne]

I honestly think that MP will become more popular (than it currently is, not singleplayer). I already think its more popular now than in the short period of time I've been consistently playing IL2, since Apr I think.

 

 

I think it also will become a lot more popular for SP as well with the new upcoming career mode.

[Ribbon]

I honestly think that MP will become more popular (than it currently is, not singleplayer). I already think its more popular now than in the short period of time I've been consistently playing IL2, since Apr I think.

 

From what I've seen, Server performance can be pretty good up to around 74 players but servers still seem to get the odd crash here and there though.

 

My point is that I expect the popularity of IL2 in general to grow with new theatres and plane sets, and I also expect the already popular online servers, to become even more popular. I waited 10 minutes to grab a slot for TAW last night, as soon as one appeared it was gone. I gave up and watched TV until Mission reset. I think IL2 BoX, when you take into account, the FM's, the Maps, the performance of the netcode in general, the damage models, and the inclusion of a really quite impressive VR implementation, is absolutely hands down one of, if not the best MP combat sims available today. BoX has an impressive lead, I just really hope it can stay ahead of the competition.

I think problem is not amount of players on server, many of them work flawless with 80players online, regarding that performance is excelent.

Problem appear when more complex missions are made, i mean background simulation and amount of AI.

On "finnish dynamic war" everything is connected and each objective affect on other objectives.

There is huge amount of AAA and ground units defending objectives, tanks attacking each other, if you destroy depot or factory than front lines, airfields and tankbases won't be supplied.

Guys running server made well thought and genious dynamic war.

So at the end of the mission/map even with 2players online constant stutters,crashes and lagging appear.

On other servers where there are simple objectives not dependant of each other and with small amount of ground units runs perfectly with maximum players online.

[Herne]

I think it also will become a lot more popular for SP as well with the new upcoming career mode.

 

yes for sure ! Career mode will have tons of re-playability. I already want to have a career on both sides, with various squadrons and roles. 

 

The ratios that Jason gave on the TS I think will stay largely the same, so 90% will still be playing SP. My point was that the popularity of the product in general, will also see a larger population of MP, gravitating toward the same popular servers.

[Ribbon]

Same thing is in arma where cpu single core usage is limitation.

Petrovich said they are using old networking code adjusted to BoX but overall it can stand good amount of players with very good performance.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Has anybody been able to transcribe the Q/A yet?

[Juri_JS]

I had hoped we would get some information on the AI rework. I've put two half finished campaign projects on hold till the numerous AI issues are fixed (formation flying, collisions, take-off problems, etc.). Finding workarounds for AI problems makes missions building very time-consuming at the moment. Which is probably another reason for the lack of user-made missions/campaigns Jason mentioned.

[Ribbon]

I had hoped we would get some information on the AI rework. I've put two half finished campaign projects on hold till the numerous AI issues are fixed (formation flying, collisions, take-off problems, etc.). Finding workarounds for AI problems makes missions building very time-consuming at the moment. Which is probably another reason for the lack of user-made missions/campaigns Jason mentioned.

I repeated that question in the chat multiple times in hope Jasond will answer it but every time someone jumbed before with another question about cooling, new 110, VR optimization and such.

I was a bit annoyed with questions asked, same few ppl with same subject.

[Brano]

I was a bit annoyed with questions asked, same few ppl with same subject.

...and dont forget the "jumo slam-the-throttle burning phenomenon". That was a facepalm for me 

[Herne]

I repeated that question in the chat multiple times in hope Jasond will answer it but every time someone jumbed before with another question about cooling, new 110, VR optimization and such.

I was a bit annoyed with questions asked, same few ppl with same subject.

 

Only one question was asked about VR IIRC. I asked it because I felt it was a valid question. The VR implementation really is very good, but it could be better, if you take into account things like VRworks. 

 

I think Jason was right when he said, that it should be down to the VR providers to solve some of these problems though. I know right now Trackir is probably far more popular, but once the next gen headsets come out with even higher res and probably FoV, I think the dynamic will drastically change, if not in VR's favour, then pretty close to 50/50.

 

Jump ahead 10 years down the line, and I think for games such as these, VR will be mainstream. Where flight sims are concerned, it's the future, and I just want IL2 to stay ahead of the curve.

[Ribbon]

Only one question was asked about VR IIRC. I asked it because I felt it was a valid question. The VR implementation really is very good, but it could be better, if you take into account things like VRworks. 

I think Jason was right when he said, that it should be down to the VR providers to solve some of these problems though. I know right now Trackir is probably far more popular, but once the next gen headsets come out with even higher res and probably FoV, I think the dynamic will drastically change, if not in VR's favour, then pretty close to 50/50.

Jump ahead 10 years down the line, and I think for games such as these, VR will be mainstream. Where flight sims are concerned, it's the future, and I just want IL2 to stay ahead of the curve.

As i'm aware VR implementation is already very good, now it's up to gfx cards to improve along with VR devices as Jason said.

VR is just recemtly implemented so asking about it wasn't so neccessary, i think we should ask better questions regarding il2 future even i aim for VR next month.

AI regarding Kuban hills, gfx improvements, PTO materials problem, BoBP details and such should be asked in my opinion.

Hearing about another 109, 110, cooling and fuel system developed into details while rest of it not and few other questions wasted good opportunity informing us what subjects are discussed among devs, more info about things that changed their decision.

We all have our wishlist but i still think it should be used better regarding overall project not going into end details about AC systems.

[kendo]

Agree with the comments about the questions asked.

 

I think for future TeamSpeak sessions Jason should ensure the question list is more focused - probably by having people contribute their questions to a thread beforehand, from which he can pick the most relevant and weed out the dross.

 

Really didn't need to hear people advocating for another 110 variant and their other personal pet topics when the recent BIG announcements and the future direction should have been to the forefront

Edited November 22, 2017 by kendo

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

The Q/A needs a moderator who is not the person answering questions. If only to monitor the que. I've offered for the next one.

 

I think for future TeamSpeak sessions Jason should ensure the question list is more focused - probably by having people contribute their questions to a thread beforehand, from which he can pick the most relevant and weed out the dross.

 

Like minds:

 

This is exactly part of what I offered.

 

I think starting with a forum list is the right thing but the free format/spontaneity of the live stream also has merit.

Edited November 22, 2017 by II/JG17_HerrMurf

[Jade_Monkey]

Which is exactly why we should keep asking them, again and again and again, until they get fixed. Because they bug us constantly. They aren't a mild inconvenience, they are a constant annoyance and stop us fully enjoying the game. I'm now speaking about the DServer bugs and the lacking netcode of course. "Squeaky wheel gets the grease".

 

I would eagerly pay full price for the next Battle of X even with couple of planes missing. Use that time and money to fix the core of the game. Hell, I'd pay full price just to get the fixes without the planes or a new map!

 

I want to have 60 vs. 60 human air battles in BoX like we have in old IL-2's SEOW campaigns.

I'm not saying these questions shouldn't be asked, I'm saying they were old questions that the devs are mostly aware of that were taking time from the Q&A.

 

Hopefully they open another thread like "Questions for developers" or hold a Q&A for feedback like this.

[Herne]

I like the idea someone suggested where questions are posted in a thread Jason picks the ones that he feels are relevant, and answers them on TS, if he has time he can take a few from the listeners. I know this may be less personal than what we are used to, but with good turnouts on TS, its hard to keep track of who has a question, and I think pre - prepared questions, and answers, would be a better way to manage all of our time.

[=EXPEND=Tripwire]

As i'm aware VR implementation is already very good, now it's up to gfx cards to improve along with VR devices as Jason said.

VR is just recemtly implemented so asking about it wasn't so neccessary, i think we should ask better questions regarding il2 future even i aim for VR next month.

I don't understand how VR manufacturers are able to help here? Sure there are technologies like foveated rendering on the way, but it very likely needs the game developers to implement the capability using the graphics API. It's not all one way.

 

Currently IL2 is very single thread dependent and CPU bound. Just take a look at the numerous benchmarks conducted by VR players. Improvement on this area won't just help VR, it will benefit all.

 

Technology like VRWorks is the graphics vendors helping, but it still requires developers to implement the features.

 

None of this helps things like random frame drops due to the engine bogging down processing something else of priority which could only really be fixed internally.

 

Valve has helped steamvr indy developers using more common engines used by those developers like unity by providing a rendering plugin they developed. I'm not sure that expecting something like that for a custom engine is realistic?

 

Overall I'm very impressed with the current VR implementation, but I'm keen as well to not see VR development sit still as there will be a large portion of the simulation market using VR in the next 5+ years. Just take a look at how many continue to use VR regardless of current visual limitations. The market is only going to get bigger.

[Ribbon]

I don't understand how VR manufacturers are able to help here? Sure there are technologies like foveated rendering on the way, but it very likely needs the game developers to implement the capability using the graphics API. It's not all one way.

Currently IL2 is very single thread dependent and CPU bound. Just take a look at the numerous benchmarks conducted by VR players. Improvement on this area won't just help VR, it will benefit all.

Technology like VRWorks is the graphics vendors helping, but it still requires developers to implement the features.

None of this helps things like random frame drops due to the engine bogging down processing something else of priority which could only really be fixed internally.

Valve has helped steamvr indy developers using more common engines used by those developers like unity by providing a rendering plugin they developed. I'm not sure that expecting something like that for a custom engine is realistic?

Overall I'm very impressed with the current VR implementation, but I'm keen as well to not see VR development sit still as there will be a large portion of the simulation market using VR in the next 5+ years. Just take a look at how many continue to use VR regardless of current visual limitations. The market is only going to get bigger.

I'm not expert in that area but doesn't that demand rewriting game engine (from single to multithreading)? Starting all over again!

That would sink money and time and they just implemented VR meaning it was for nothing.

My point was on improving performance on gfx cards and cpu while vr devices improving resolution.

In a year or two maybe team expand and after some time they dedicate their time toward VR again, which would be normal proccess.

Anyway i don't want to talk about things i'm not familiar with, it's their job and their income depends on it so i guess they know the best.

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

Yes, decreasing the reliance on the single thread is far from easy. It would likely require rewriting significant parts of the game engine. 

 

This is something that even large organizations find difficult. You can think of it as untangling a bunch of interdependent things to allow them to be done simultaneously. It's a real puzzle.