Sea Dragon Campaign

This is a really good campaign to learn the Su-33. The missions range from easy to difficult and are fairly immersive. There are some minor problems that can be corrected in the mission planner, mostly loadouts that are too heavy for taking off since the max on the forward position is 64,000. Some takeoff and landing times are bad as well because of the new lighting problems. It's impossible to see the carrier or airfields in the dark and no night vision on FC3 birds. It would be really nice to see some of these original campaigns with updated voice overs. The original ones are really out of place compared to recent campaigns.

The biggest problem is that the final mission is pretty much impossible to complete. The Vinson carrier group shoots down every missile that are sent at it. The mission is dependent on the SEAD being completed and then the Tu-22 bombers actually sinking the Stennis. I had to edit the mission and make the carrier group hold fire after they were hit with SEAD missiles which still kept it within the spirit of the campaign but I would like to have completed without having to edit a mission.

If someone has come up with a different solution to finish the campaign I would like to know what that is. The newer ship modeling in DCS World is probably making it too hard to actually attack and destroy ships now so I couldn't figure out a better solution.

EDIT: By the way for anyone interested, MadDog-IC has a zip file on the users section of the digitalcombatsimulator.com website that apparently fixes a lot of the mission issues. I was not aware of this when I did the campaign but it might be worthwhile to download them and try instead of the default versions. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.c...files/3303252/

I tried this in Feb and had to give up. The last mission is just not possible.

Yes, it is impossible the way it's currently designed. I would really like to see ED fix the minor problems and redo the VO if possible.

Just loaded a few missions for a quick check.

Indeed getting visuals on the carrier in the night is quite a task (of course with the lights on). Case III or worse even if clear - if you use the systems correctly and stay on the glide slope you can do it.

Sometime too heavy for launch - true.

I would not count on the new VOs for the FC3 campaigns. If they lack a few, some of them may get the computer generated voice at least.

Keep in mind the missions were created years ago in DCS v1.x then from time to time get fixes if anything breaks. That does not necessarily mean they get updates after anything in DCS gets updated. So you definitely should not expect the missions to be realistic as they are atm. Don't push yourself for the impossible task.

btw: It's not Stennis you attack - it's USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70).

Just loaded a few missions for a quick check.

 

Indeed getting visuals on the carrier in the night is quite a task (of course with the lights on). Case III or worse even if clear - if you use the systems correctly and stay on the glide slope you can do it.

 

Sometime too heavy for launch - true.

 

I would not count on the new VOs for the FC3 campaigns. If they lack a few, some of them may get the computer generated voice at least.

 

Keep in mind the missions were created years ago in DCS v1.x then from time to time get fixes if anything breaks. That does not necessarily mean they get updates after anything in DCS gets updated. So you definitely should not expect the missions to be realistic as they are atm. Don't push yourself for the impossible task.

 

btw: It's not Stennis you attack - it's USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70).

I am aware of everything you stated and yes, I know that these are very old campaigns and I know how to use GS. I'm just posting my reviews for anyone new that has never tried them before. Also, they have been updating some of the very old campaigns so the VO was just a suggestion if they do anything to this one. Stennis was just a goofy mistake on my end. I know it's the Vinson so I corrected that.

By the way for anyone interested, MadDog-IC has a zip file on the users section of the digitalcombatsimulator.com website that apparently fixes a lot of the mission issues. I was not aware of this when I did the campaign but it might be worthwhile to download them and try instead of the default versions. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3303252/

I always thought Maddogs changes were implemented by ED

I always thought Maddogs changes were implemented by ED

OK, good to know.

After probably 6-8 tries, I finally managed to beat the last mission!

Enough of the anti ship missiles went through to sink the US CV. I would still say the mission is totally borked since you have zero control over the success of the mission. Its just random luck whether enough missiles get through to the CV.

I would still say the mission is totally borked since you have zero control over the success of the mission. Its just random luck whether enough missiles get through to the CV.

Yup, my thoughts exactly.

Most missions are like this. You rely on the success of the SEAD, strike or just your wingmen. It makes it more realistic than 1 vs 4 Rambo style.

DCS campaign missions have absolutely nothing to do with realism or "Ramboing" as you put it. In fact they couldn't be any further from anything bearing anything close to real. They are meant to be fun and a learning experience. When the AI constantly fail to do their job you lose all sense of any accomplishment. The mission should function in a way that requires the player to have a certain level of proficiency to complete the task at hand while relying on the AI to accomplish their job with their built in level of proficiency. When they fail to do that it becomes an exercise in beating your head against a wall and forces players to give up thinking that they are not doing something right.

I played the mission close to a dozen times and the AI FAILED to do their job every time. I had to change the conditions slightly to get them to complete their task. What Panthera is saying is that it was a complete fluke that they were actually able to complete their task. My point from the get go is that for this to be a fun exercise you should not have to do a mission a dozen times hoping that the AI are able to finish the job. It should work the first time as constructed as long as the human player does their job right within some narrow conditions like not calling in the SEAD or the Strike package too late or too early.

I know for a fact (self included in the past before I really understood the DCS mission construction) that people have given up on campaigns because of a missions failure to function correctly. I also know that some of these are very old campaigns and I was only posting this to give people some perspective on what it is like to go back and do some of them for the first time. I want others to understand that it's not their fault when they fail under circumstances like this, nothing more. I wasn't bashing the campaign in general and I know that they will probably never get changed or at least not soon. But if they are going to continue to distribute them with stuff like FC3 or however they're distributed or provided then people should know that there are some downsides to them. That's the only point I was trying to get across.

In other words, it's one thing if you are failing the mission, but a whole other problem if the mission is failing you.

You say nothing new. We know the problems that come with these missions.

Users rarely come here for help but when they do - they get helped. How many just read the forum - we don't know.

I am all into fixing them - as a player you should do your tasks well and expect the mission to be successful.

Want to really help - send your notes to MadDog-IC about particular missions and what exactly should be changed for them to work and offer your time to exhaustively test the missions.

Yes, it is impossible the way it's currently designed. I would really like to see ED fix the minor problems and redo the VO if possible.

I feel I need to comment, but will try to keep it brief, but I vary rarely do.

When I corrected this campaign along with some others, they had no voice overs what so ever.

I have a crap voice and choose to do them with computer voice overs (I dislike them as much as anyone and would like them re-done) but I would rather have them than nothing at all. They were more of a placeholder than anything and I hoped that ED might re-do the voice overs with voice actors at a later stage, after all it is very easy to implement new sounds with the infrastructure all ready there in the mission editor to play the sounds.

As for downing the USA carrier, it use to all work perfectly in DCS 1.2, 1.5 and then with 2.5 a few things changed:

1. The ships seemed a whole lot stronger and impervious to missile damage.
   
2. The ships Anti-Aircraft and missile defenses become much more efficient at taking out incoming SEAD and Anti-Ship missiles.
   
3. SEAD and Anti-Ship missiles themselves inflicted less damage and would track off target and miss the boats altogether for no perceivable reason.
   
4. There is always a element of luck when doing most missions, it doesn't always go to plan, timing and having all SEAD and Anti-Ship aircraft attack at same time to over whelm the enemy ship, if one aircraft is lost you can't win (Not saying you don't have some valid points), it is always difficult to gauge the hardness of a mission, quite often some flyers will say it is impossible, others will say they found it to easy.
   

Considering the amount of time I had already spend fixing the whole campaign once in DCS 1.2, 1.5 and now in DCS 2.5, with the last two missions particulary and then constantly doing work arounds to contend with all the issues that keep creeping into the missions, I got to the point of it working fairly consistently, but the SEAD and Anti-Ship were so in accurate, the even if they did make it through the ships defenses, they veered off the target a few meters from impact.

I left it at that state under the assumption that ED would fix the SEAD and Anti-ship missiles eventually and the missions would work even more reliably, I haven't re-tested wether they have or not.

Re: My versions on USER Files and ED DCS released versions of missions

Whilst ED have used quite a lot of my revisions of campaigns and missions, it has never been a sure thing they will. Also due to recent events, they may be using them less in DCS and even removing some of my versions currently in DCS altogether and replacing with updates from else where.

Regards, Ian.

Whilst ED have used quite a lot of my revisions of campaigns and missions, it has never been a sure thing they will. Also due to recent events, they may be using them less in DCS and even removing some of my versions currently in DCS altogether and replacing with updates from else where.

What events?

What events?

It became apparent here that change is on the horizon, but there is much more to it, which I am not going into, it is more of a disappointment that some of the missions I did weren't expanded on.

"Sorry about the link - can't show you that one, I thought it was an announcement thread, but it wasn't"

Other author has said he will be trying to implement some of my work if he can in the future, I am sure his missions and alterations will be much better in general.

I wish ED and all the team all the best as always.

Regards, Ian.

Thx Ian for clarification and news.

You say nothing new.............

Maybe not, but I say it for the new.

Want to really help - send your notes to MadDog-IC about particular missions and what exactly should be changed for them to work and offer your time to exhaustively test the missions.

I will say as I please, when and where I please to say it.

I feel I need to comment, but will try to keep it brief, but I vary rarely do.

Thank you for your response and description of the problems. I knew it was changes to the AI since previous versions. And I know under the circumstances that it's very difficult to keep everything working as advertised but please do what you can because it is a very good campaign.

Hi,

I have a problem in mission 7 (I think it's 7 ; it's the one in which I have to destroy a convoy of 4 transport vehicles near the train station).

I had several times the "good work you can RTB" message (either with damages on my plane or 100% intact), but each time I land on the Kuznetsov I don't get the "glad to have you back" message and my score is only 50. So I can't do the next mission.

Any idea ?

Thank you !

question: did you send the strike package when the guy on the radio suggests to or is there a certain timing to launching the strike that gets the missiles through the defense net?

Hi,

 

I have a problem in mission 7 (I think it's 7 ; it's the one in which I have to destroy a convoy of 4 transport vehicles near the train station).

 

I had several times the "good work you can RTB" message (either with damages on my plane or 100% intact), but each time I land on the Kuznetsov I don't get the "glad to have you back" message and my score is only 50. So I can't do the next mission.

Tested the mission, still works as intended logic wise, only thing I noticed is that the hold statement doen't seem to be working, so convoys will move away from their initial target area.

Regards, Ian.

Thank you for your response and description of the problems. I knew it was changes to the AI since previous versions. And I know under the circumstances that it's very difficult to keep everything working as advertised but please do what you can because it is a very good campaign.

Here is a further fixed up version where I have changed Mission 9 and 10 only, mission 10 should be more doable now, let me know how it plays for you.

Changelog v1.4 for DCS v2.56 (14-07-2020)

==============

------------------------

Campaign - SU-33-Sea Dragon.cmp

------------------------

- Mission 9

- Fixed - RU Su-33 (Player) flight incorrectly starting at Batumi instead of the RU Carrier.

- Fixed - CN translations in Mission 9.

- Mission 10

- Fixed - RU Su-33 (Player) Flight incorrectly starting at Batumi instead of the RU Carrier.

- Changed - RU-SEAD1 and RU-SEAD2 Flight to 4 ship from 2 ship for extra fire power.

- Added - Onboard explosions to US-CVBG ships when hit by SEAD or Anti-Ship missiles.

- Changed - US-CAP3 Flight takeoff to be delayed slightly.

- Changed - RU-Tanker flight plan to get on station quicker.

Download Here:

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3303252/

Regards, Ian.

:thumbup:

Hi @MadDog-IC and thank you for your work on the updates to the default FC aircraft campaigns.

I am now with the Sea Dragon campaign and as I own the Super Carrier module, naturally I downloaded your fixes for the Super Carrier owners:

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3311803/

However, I noticed the new Admiral Kuznetsov (labeled as 2017 in the Mission Editor) is actually not there. The missions start on the old one.

From your experience, is swapping the ships in the Mission Editor OK to do the trick? (I can do that myself, of course) Or is the swapping more complicated matter in order not to brake the missions?

Thanks,

Milan

3 hours ago, apollon01 said:

Hi @MadDog-IC and thank you for your work on the updates to the default FC aircraft campaigns.

 

I am now with the Sea Dragon campaign and as I own the Super Carrier module, naturally I downloaded your fixes for the Super Carrier owners:

 

However, I noticed the new Admiral Kuznetsov (labeled as 2017 in the Mission Editor) is actually not there. The missions start on the old one.

 

From your experience, is swapping the ships in the Mission Editor OK to do the trick? (I can do that myself, of course) Or is the swapping more complicated matter in order not to brake the missions?

Hi there, glad you are getting some use from my work.

Not sure why your having that issue, works here with new KUZNETSOV (2017) model:

1. I know that some mods interfered with the supercarriers module, can't remember what their names or issues were (one issue was either the Supercarriers wouldn't display at all or may only show the older models), you should check the DCS.log for errors or post to me and I can have a look at it.
2. Check that you don't have the little clock icon enabled at the bottom of the Mission editor screen (Only shows Units based on time Period, so as missions are in 2011, the 2017 version of KUZNETSOV may not show).

Why supercarrier may be missing

Re: Mission Editing

1. In general you can change the ships with little to no issues, you will need to re-snap the flights to their respective take off positions on the deck.
2. You may have to change the ships speed back to 59kph.
3. Can't see any reason that it would break any triggers.

Regards, Ian.