Jump to content
Gibsonm

4.167 Breach flags not seen - resumed game

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

For the last few weeks BG ANZAC has been running an ongoing mission (play, save, resume next session).

 

Tonight we got to do the Breaching component.

 

I was hosting and commanded the breaching assets (MICLIC, Plough and Engineer M113).

 

To me the breach went well (suitable oohs and aahs as the MICLIC detonated).

 

However the follow on forces got caught up in the minefield and didn't stick to the lane. When I asked why they weren't staying between the flags all the other players indicated that they didn't see any.

 

My frustration was amplified when I showed them this screenshot after the game:

 

SS_21_36_30.thumb.jpg.d701fe4afadcfb8bb71f855ff355a3de.jpg

 

None of the other players saw the orange flags in this screen shot in their respective 3D views.

 

In addition the usual "breach" graphic did not appear on the map after the breach was made.

 

Happy to provide the original scenario as well as the various saved versions and the various AARs if required.

 

 

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've been reworking a good part of that code lately, so

a. expect improvements in the next (4.2) update

b. probably the network related bugs that may have cause it are going to be addressed/found in the associated beta testing

 

That being said, our testers will keep an eye open for the possibility of such desynchronizations. They may ask for the files, so if you could keep them for a bit longer?

 

debugLogs of clients and host from that session would be more useful however to rule out that this is simply a result of packet loss (=network overload messages at the time when the flags were being planted).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Good news as I am sure we frustrated our CO with our cannot see anything skipper replies  😀  At the time I saw no packet loss on Teamspeak and no overload text in game

Edited by chrisreb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Ssnake said:

We've been reworking a good part of that code lately, so

a. expect improvements in the next (4.2) update

b. probably the network related bugs that may have cause it are going to be addressed/found in the associated beta testing

 

That being said, our testers will keep an eye open for the possibility of such desynchronizations. They may ask for the files, so if you could keep them for a bit longer?

 

debugLogs of clients and host from that session would be more useful however to rule out that this is simply a result of packet loss (=network overload messages at the time when the flags were being planted).

There you are (from the host):

 

DebugLog_0.txt

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. Looks like this was a bug that we discovered earlier on our own, so it's probably not a matter of packet loss, and the log file doesn't seem to have anything like this recorded.

 

 

Note however that the scenario has duplicate unit IDs among the infantry. This is something for which to keep your eyes open because this can cause all kinds of nasty side effects (flags synchronization along breach routes in network session is not one of them however). The Mission debugger would tell you which units specifically (you may need to unload them).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

Thanks. Looks like this was a bug that we discovered earlier on our own, so it's probably not a matter of packet loss, and the log file doesn't seem to have anything like this recorded.

 

 

Note however that the scenario has duplicate unit IDs among the infantry. This is something for which to keep your eyes open because this can cause all kinds of nasty side effects (flags synchronization along breach routes in network session is not one of them however). The Mission debugger would tell you which units specifically (you may need to unload them).

 

Ssnake,

 

Yes the next version of the base scenario should have that fixed - its been an iterative QA process, fixing things as we go forward. :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I looked into the log I thought "See something, say something". 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to hear a fix is on the way - it was only incredibly good tank driving that got my callsigns through the minefield breach so they could be destroyed by the baddies soon afterward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...