Developer Diary 201 - Discussion

[smink1701]

4 hours ago, Jason_Williams said:

The DED team worked hard to give players something fun and interesting. Please respect their hard work and give them encouragement instead of insults. Same goes to anyone else who works hard to support our product such as Pat Wilson and many others. This attitude that if we do not show pics of new aircraft every week is somehow a downer is very off putting for anyone who wants to help you have a better simming experience. We enjoy highlighting community members and teams who go the extra mile for you. Be nice or don't be here or post in such threads.

 

Jason

 I have been consistently praising the development team for the last several years. I consider myself a good customer having purchased everything you have put out. Was not a fan of this update and said so.  I normally would have kept my opinion to myself [edited]

 

 

Edited August 31, 2018 by SYN_Haashashin

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

I really think someday we should have a paid online war server with tons of details. 

IL2 no free lunch war server. 

 

It makes me want to learn the mission editor again.  Any links to mission editor manuals or tutorials??? Thanks.

[Thad]

Pranksters Mission Building Guide

 

Mission Editor and Multiplayer Server Manual

 

Edited September 1, 2018 by Thad

[stupor-mundi]

Quote

You can already play the working campaign on their server.

 

I'm confused by the news. I gather that, what they've been working on, is not within 'Multiplayer' but separate category alltogether. Hence it's not within either 'Cooperative' nor 'Dogfight'

-DED- have a page on IL-2Stats, but obviously that's not 'their server'.

So where (in the menu) do I go to have a look?

 

[Urra]

20 hours ago, Jason_Williams said:

 

Swoop,

 

DED is a Russian team so my interaction with them is minimal. Han and the boys handle those communications so I don't have much insight at the moment as to what will come out of this, but I am always for community involvement in MP. I'm going to be focused on helping Pat Wilson realize his idea for a COOP Campaign system for PWCG which he is beginning to work on with my encouragement and input. Between DED's work and Pat's work and other's there should be some more interesting MP options out there in the coming months.

We're well aware users want a chat lobby etc. In time we will work to have that, but we have other things to get to first. I only have so many people and so big a budget. The same old story as usual. But as is obvious over time we keep adding new things.

 

Thanks for checking in Swoop. 

 

Jason

Appreciate the DD and turning peoples eyeballs over to MP once in a while. Looking forward to any updates from the team in the future.

[EAF19_Marsh]

Well, 2 interesting things from the DD and discussion:

 

1. How the [mildly complicated] mission builder is evolving to realise the hopes of all those that recall the Il-2 Coops / online wars

 

2. This forum specifically will not tolerate drug propaganda. Who knew?

[EAF19_Swoop]

Sounds really promising, thanks Jason. S!

[DeadMeat0383]

I am still waiting for a response regarding why there is an NDA required for the required tools for this?

Also a campaign is all well and good, but what good is a multiplayer campaign if the dserver.exe is too unstable for me to make it viable?

[Hoots]

20 minutes ago, DeadMeat0383 said:

I am still waiting for a response regarding why there is an NDA required for the required tools for this?

Also a campaign is all well and good, but what good is a multiplayer campaign if the dserver.exe is too unstable for me to make it viable?

Think you'll be waiting a while, what makes you think they have to give you an answer? It's not relevant to anything after all. 

 

[DeadMeat0383]

2 minutes ago, Hoots said:

Think you'll be waiting a while, what makes you think they have to give you an answer? It's not relevant to anything after all. 

 

It's perfectly relevant, They are showing off some great work by the community but stating that to use it requires you to sign an NDA, It is perfectly reasonable to expect a response even if its a "The software we supply gives you access to our copyrighted codebase so we need you to sign the NDA to legally bind you from sharing this code".
As for them having to give me an answer, nothing says they have to give me an answer, however why do you think its unreasonable for me to want an answer?

[-TBC-AeroAce]

56 minutes ago, DeadMeat0383 said:

It's perfectly relevant, They are showing off some great work by the community but stating that to use it requires you to sign an NDA, It is perfectly reasonable to expect a response even if its a "The software we supply gives you access to our copyrighted codebase so we need you to sign the NDA to legally bind you from sharing this code".
As for them having to give me an answer, nothing says they have to give me an answer, however why do you think its unreasonable for me to want an answer?

 

If you want that kind of information I suggest asking by PM not on a public forum. 

[Jade_Monkey]

1 hour ago, AeroAce said:

 

If you want that kind of information I suggest asking by PM not on a public forum. 

 

 

"I want a public disclosure of why an NDA is required"

 

Hmmmm ?

[Hoots]

3 hours ago, DeadMeat0383 said:

It's perfectly relevant, They are showing off some great work by the community but stating that to use it requires you to sign an NDA, It is perfectly reasonable to expect a response even if its a "The software we supply gives you access to our copyrighted codebase so we need you to sign the NDA to legally bind you from sharing this code".
As for them having to give me an answer, nothing says they have to give me an answer, however why do you think its unreasonable for me to want an answer?

Because they have absolutely no requirement to answer you but you seem to think they do, hence the use of "I'm still waiting for an answer". It's not reasonable to expect an answer, no. Hope by all means, expect and nag, not so much. 

[-TBC-AeroAce]

1 hour ago, Hoots said:

Because they have absolutely no requirement to answer you but you seem to think they do, hence the use of "I'm still waiting for an answer". It's not reasonable to expect an answer, no. Hope by all means, expect and nag, not so much. 

 

I think it is reasonable to ask why an NDA is in place or what can  or can not be disclosed. You would get that answer really in the terms of an NDA but asking for it publicly is just stupid.

Edited September 2, 2018 by AeroAce

[IckyATLAS]

On 8/31/2018 at 7:57 PM, Jason_Williams said:

The DED team worked hard to give players something fun and interesting. Please respect their hard work and give them encouragement instead of insults. Same goes to anyone else who works hard to support our product such as Pat Wilson and many others. This attitude that if we do not show pics of new aircraft every week is somehow a downer is very off putting for anyone who wants to help you have a better simming experience. We enjoy highlighting community members and teams who go the extra mile for you. Be nice or don't be here or post in such threads.

 

Jason

It could not be better said. I completely support this position..

DD is a communication channel from the Project Team to us. They decide what they think is worth telling us. We can comment in a decent manner, but in any case all those who work hard for this sim that we appreciate so much, and for many years now,  deserve grateful thanks and recognition from us.

[DeadMeat0383]

6 hours ago, Hoss said:

 

Proprietary information...............  Non disclosure agreement............  so if you share stuff yer not supposed to you can be prosecuted under the terms of the NDA. 

 

Hoss

 

Is this a guess? or is it confirmed by the devs/staff?

9 hours ago, Hoots said:

Because they have absolutely no requirement to answer you but you seem to think they do, hence the use of "I'm still waiting for an answer". It's not reasonable to expect an answer, no. Hope by all means, expect and nag, not so much. 

2 posts asking for clarification on why an NDA must be signed to be able to use tools developed by the community is not "nagging", this is an active thread so some posts and replies may be missed. Yes I expect an answer, it is not unreasonable although it does baffle me why you think it is?

8 hours ago, AeroAce said:

 

I think it is reasonable to ask why an NDA is in place or what can  or can not be disclosed. You would get that answer really in the terms of an NDA but asking for it publicly is just stupid.

Why is asking for public clarification on a post they made publically stupid? This just seems like a personal attack, just because you don't agree with me on the method does not mean you should stoop to name calling.

11 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

 

"I want a public disclosure of why an NDA is required"

 

Hmmmm ?

Exactly, its not really an unreasonable request in my opinion...
"Here are some awesome tools developed by the community for you to look at and use, oh to use them you have to have to sign an NDA"
"Why?"

 

It's not like I expect a very wordy answer, I just want an official response to confirm what I suspect and others have suggested.

[DeadMeat0383]

14 hours ago, SCG_Hoss said:

Well Frack me Runnin...................

 

A unilateral NDA (sometimes referred to as a one-way NDA) involves two parties where only one party (i.e., the disclosing party) anticipates disclosing certain information to the other party (i.e., the receiving party) and requires that the information be protected from further disclosure for some reason (^] or legal protection for trade secrets, limiting disclosure of information prior to issuing a press release for a major announcement, or simply ensuring that a receiving party does not use or disclose information without compensating the disclosing party).

 

Proprietary information, also known as a trade secret, is information a company wishes to keep confidential. Proprietary information can include secret formulas, processes, and methods used in production. It can also include a company's business and marketing plans, salary structure, customer lists, contracts, and details of its computer systems. Information that is not public knowledge and that is viewed as the property of the holder. The recipient of proprietary information, such as a contractor in the procurement process, is generally duty bound to refrain from making unauthorized use of the information.

 

All this concern over a Non-Disclosure Agreement by people who are not even going to use the information in the first place.  Those that have the grey matter to figure it out will either agree to the NDA and use this information to benefit the community or they will bow out. 

 

Sometimes this crap drives me a bit Nuckin Futz................... 

 

Cheers

 

Hoss

[edited]

Once again another personal insult, I don't appreciate being called a moron.
Secondly you describe what an NDA is, however that is not the question, I know what an NDA is.

My question is WHY there needs to be an NDA, if it is for "Proprietry Information" all I am looking for is for an official post stating just that, all it would take is 5 seconds to say just that.

You are assuming I wont be using the information as well, if I wasn't looking at using the information why would I be asking?
 

You know what, I no longer care, if asking questions just brings this kind of response I am no longer going to bother.

[SAS_Storebror]

From the worm's-eye view of a software developer working for a not-so-small company in real life, let me say:

• We're using NDAs all across the place as well
• There (usually, almost certainly) is a reason for an NDA to exist
• It is neither stupid nor uncommon for a signatory to ask for the reason of an NDA in advance
• The answer is always given and we would give it in public as well since the reason for an NDA - in an abstract form - almost certainly doesn't fall within disclosure limitations.

The replies to @DeadMeat0383 concerning this matter make me feel sorry and I can't help it but to get the feeling that there's a certain anticipatory obedience being involved here.

 

Mike

[sevenless]

3 hours ago, DeadMeat0383 said:

 

You know what, I no longer care, if asking questions just brings this kind of response I am no longer going to bother.

 

You know, that is the price we have to pay for increasing popularity of the game. It is a statistical effect. The number of fanboys also increases. Simply don´t bother and move on. Ignore the trolls once identified.

[Ribbon]

Can next DD be about NDA?

Please?

[TP_Silk]

The way I understood it, the NDA isn't for access to community-developed tools, but to the proprietary tools that the developers have come up with to generate missions. I would say that (provided I am correct of course) that is a perfectly reasonable approach.

 

Two different parts of the equation appear to be in the DD - the community-developed tools and methods that use the proprietary generator tools to come up with a campaign? Am I wrong?

56 minutes ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

Can next DD be about NDA?

Please?

 

I vote that it's about the NBA instead....  or the NHL..........  or even the NFL  ?

Edited September 3, 2018 by TP_Silk

[SAS_Storebror]

I read the DD in exactly the same way, however we could both be wrong and whether or not it is reasonable to cover the proprietary tools by an NDA has not been questioned by @DeadMeat0383, he has just been asking for the reason of the NDA itself, i.e. why the proprietary tools have to be put under NDA.

That's a completely valid question to ask, publically as much as in private, and it's not supposed to give reason for others to pounce on the questioner me thinks.

 

Mike

Edited September 3, 2018 by SAS_Storebror

[AndyJWest]

The question ("why an NDA is required") has been asked. The developers will do one of two things:

 

(a) Answer it.

(b) Not answer it.

 

Personally, I'd be surprised if they answer with anything much more than "We require an NDA to be signed because we will be disclosing information we don't want made public", but that is up to them. They aren't required to provide access to these tools. They aren't required to explain what they do with them. If they chose to make them available, they can do so on their terms. Asking questions is valid. Expecting long-winded answers isn't. Particularly on a forum when every comment by a developer is nit-picked over endlessly, spun to mean something it clearly didn't, and then dragged up three years later as 'proof' that they haven't done something or other that they supposedly 'promised'.

 

We aren't shareholders. We are customers. When I buy a can of baked beans from Sainsbury's, I don't expect them to provide full access to their canning factory, copies of their contracts with suppliers, and a full DNA analysis of the bean plants. Even with an NDA.

 

 

[SAS_Storebror]

Totally agree.

Only thing I'd like to add is that the type of response to such questions (or the absence of) is a matter of whether or not you take customer relationship serious.

If you are serious about customer relationship, and you are serious about NDAs, then there'll be a good reason why you put something under NDA and consequently you'll be stating that reason because you have nothing to lose from doing so, whereas the other way around, if you ignore (or in any other way don't respond to) such questions, you are thereby neglecting mutual trust with your customers, which would be something you'd be sorry for sooner or later from a company's point of view.

 

Of course as a customer you can't expect anything you didn't pay for.

It's just that if, as a company, you want to continuously make business with the same customers, being talkative and accomodating where you can (or where it doesn't harm you) is a matter of reason.

 

Mike

[TP_Silk]

OK - looking a little more specifically, the question is asked in the linked thread

 

 

He is specifically asking about the two portions of the process for the Mission Templates Editor and the Mission Generator that I take as being Developer produced rather than community produced. I would say that the answer in that case is always going to be 'because the way we generate missions is proprietary and we don't want our competitors getting that information'

 

[SAS_Storebror]

There could be many reasons for the NDA and yours would certainly cut it, albeit thinking about it twice, the attempt of covering a business secret like that would be futile as it takes just one single BoS user who's living in a part of the world where you cannot get hold of him legally, and who's got connections to the competitors you want to keep at distance, in order to hand all of your secrets straight to them.

Other possible reasons would include e.g. satisfaction of patent laws or simply T&Cs of 3rd party components being used within these tools, either case of which 777 studios themselves won't really care whether or not the signatory abides the NDA as in such cases it's just important for them to have fulfilled the (external) requirement to get such NDA from him.

 

We can guess until Jesus comes, the only ones to really answer the (valid) question are the ones who issue the NDA.

 

Mike

[coconut]

Anybody who can write code really doesn't need any of the parts covered by the NDA, IMHO.

 

The mission format is textual, so it's not too hard to write a parser, map the result to a datastructure of your choice, manipulate this datastructure to connect groups, removed/add parts, then write to text again. It's still a lot of work to implement all that, but instantiating blocks using the general-purpose programming language of your choice is likely both easier and more powerful than the devs' tools.

 

If you can't write code, then I don't think you'll manage to build an online campaign regardless of the tools anyway.

[Psyrion]

Why exactly do people now need to jump at Deadmeat and call him a moron for asking a simple, normal question? Wierd. 

[SYN_Haashashin]

Hi all,

 

Be civil or do not post.

 

@DeadMeat0383: That kind of question should be asked via PM to the devs if you are interested in using the tools. Otherwise if you do not express your interest in using the tools, do not expect a public explanation of why you have to sign a NDA, out of good will they may answer but they are not obligated in anyway.

 

Haash

[Night0wl]

awesome content comijg up! gj to the team. Do you guys think we will get the 50mm cannon on the me262 also? maybe as a ground strike plane or was it only used for bombers?

[LukeFF]

9 minutes ago, jann3man said:

awesome content comijg up! gj to the team. Do you guys think we will get the 50mm cannon on the me262 also? maybe as a ground strike plane or was it only used for bombers?

 

A grand total of...

 

...2 prototypes were ever fitted with said weapon, so nope.

[Zooropa_Fly]

Yet in virtual WW1 Spad pilots get to pound away with balloon guns all day long, so you never know !

[Haza]

Just now, LukeFF said:

 

A grand total of...

 

...2 prototypes were ever fitted with said weapon, so nope.

 

Just now, jann3man said:

awesome content comijg up! gj to the team. Do you guys think we will get the 50mm cannon on the me262 also? maybe as a ground strike plane or was it only used for bombers?

 

jann3man,

 

The Lagg-3 with the 37mm in another game, springs to mind as I believe that was a prototype also, although I'm not sure if anything greater than 2 makes it OK.  However, I'm not sure if that actually went into full production, but it certainly is in game.

 

Therefore, I would wait and see what the developers have planned, as you never know what might happen.

 

Regards

 

UPDATE: According to this, the 37mm was fitted and went into production!

https://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/lagg3/lagg3-37/lagg3-37.htm

Edited September 4, 2018 by Haza

[Garven]

6 hours ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

Yet in virtual WW1 Spad pilots get to pound away with balloon guns all day long, so you never know !

Which actually seen service and were way more common than 50mm guns on Me-262.  Now the 20mm on the Albatross D.II would be a better apples to apples comparison with the 50mm Me-262.

Edited September 4, 2018 by Garven_Dreis

[The-Doctor]

I’d like to thank -DED- for their massive efforts 

 

very useful DD , i’m an intermediate level mission designer and a server owner ,  one day i’ll try to use this improvement to provide a good campaign for my squad and the rest of community 

 

thank you all , Producer,dev and 3rd party dev 

 

 

[[N.O.G.F]_Cathal_Brugha]

On 9/1/2018 at 8:41 AM, stupor-mundi said:

You can already play the working campaign on their server.

Seconded, what is "their Server" the working campaign is on?

[DeadMeat0383]

On 9/4/2018 at 4:07 AM, SYN_Haashashin said:

That kind of question should be asked via PM to the devs if you are interested in using the tools. Otherwise if you do not express your interest in using the tools, do not expect a public explanation of why you have to sign a NDA, out of good will they may answer but they are not obligated in anyway.

 

That's all well and good to tell me to PM them, however I didn't see who the dev's of these tools are listed in the dev blog beyond saying they were from -Ded- which doesnt really give me a specific person to contact beyond pm'ing all of their squadron.

I assume it was you who cleaned up the posts in here and I thank you for that, but the damage has already been done, this experience has soured me to the forums and I think I will just stick to the bug reports section from now on.

[SAS_Storebror]

I did assume that the ones I need to sign an NDA with would be the 777 devs, so I PM'ed Han and Jason.

Hope I didn't just lamppost my message now... confusing. 

 

Mike

[SYN_Haashashin]

1 hour ago, SAS_Storebror said:

I did assume that the ones I need to sign an NDA with would be the 777 devs, so I PM'ed Han and Jason.

You did right.

 

When I speak about the devs I am allways talking about 1CGS devs, not 777 Studios, DED Squadron or any other squadron/member developing stuff for Il2 Great Battles. Sorry if I caused some misunderstanding.

 

Haash