Supercarrier Package Clarification?

Well there is now the "mystery" module that bumped the F4E. It "might" be a Su or Mig, so it "might" be a SU-33.

 

At the end of the day, both the Kuz and the SU-33 seem to entering their end-of-life phases so, maybe the SU-33 will be obsolete enough soon. From the last things I've read the Russian MOD is debating just giving up on naval aviation after the latest issues and fires on the Kuz.

 

 

I know there is a QF-4 Drone MOD, but wouldn't it be nice if in our AI Aircraft mix, we could get an unarmed QF-4 Drone without a pilot in the cockpit and without the ability to launch offensive weapons? :pilotfly:

You still get to use the "Free" Kuz, is my understanding.

 

Gotcha :thumbup:

I think the cost will be manageable if ED keeps the price reasonable and considers tying in incentives for people who already own carrier-based Advanced/Professional Flight Models such as the Tomcat or the Hornet.

Hornet owners will get a discount, but only once the carrier module is out of EA. No additional discount "stacked" with pre-release price.

They did say pre-release discount would be extended into EA period instead of ending the day it becomes available. For those people on the fence or leary of it not meeting their expectations can sit back and monitor the initial airing of grievances on the forum before buying.

It's strange to me that they're revamping the Kuznetsov at all, it's kind of a dead end in DCS development.

 

Meh any updated naval asset gets my vote, we have an Su-33 (okay, not full fidelity, but hey I'll compromise).

Hornet owners will get a discount, but only once the carrier module is out of EA. No additional discount "stacked" with pre-release price.

They did say pre-release discount would be extended into EA period instead of ending the day it becomes available. For those people on the fence or leary of it not meeting their expectations can sit back and monitor the initial airing of grievances on the forum before buying.

 

 

You were saying?

 

Congrats to the Tomcat Only Owners. Not that $10 really matters but at least you know where you stand.

Is there a post or thread somewhere detailing EXACTLY how not having this module affects players in multiplayer?

Is there a post or thread somewhere detailing EXACTLY how not having this module affects players in multiplayer?

No.

It has been officially stated, that everybody will be able to connect and see the Carrier. Everything else is speculation at this point.

I would think that is pertinent information to release before putting a module like this up for sale... Unless I've completely missed something...

I would think that is pertinent information to release before putting a module like this up for sale... Unless I've completely missed something...

If you have it, you can do all the carrier stuff, if you don't, you can't do all of them. Servers might opt for running both the SC and the free Stennis, so everyone can do carrier ops. You'll be able to join a server that runs the SC if you don't own it yourself and you'll be able to see it (and possibly land). At least that's the current state, based on what I've read in the forums and on ED's Facebook page.

It would be nice to let people who typically RIO know how they will be impacted if their pilot lands on the carrier.

 

I have a buddy that is not interested in piloting a carrier based aircraft, but frequently RIO's. I suggested he didn't purchase it because it would be a waste, but if it ends up negatively impacting him and he has to purchase it later (after the sale has expired), that would suck.

You'll be able to join a server that runs the SC if you don't own it yourself and you'll be able to see it (and possibly land). At least that's the current state, based on what I've read in the forums and on ED's Facebook page.

 

Sorry, I have no hard proofs, but I remember reading just recently that ED is still unsure about that landing stuff for the non-owners.

 

The reason behind this is that non-owners won't be able to see the deck crew and follow their commands, effectively creating a mess.

Reading all this speculations, I tend to not pre-purchase it.

Having in mind what is going on with the F-16C brought my motivation for pre-purchases to zero. Early access simply takes far too long, and is far too buggy right from the start (see longest bug listing ..., and someone is not able to enter a new waypoint ... after months ... guys please :noexpression: ...).

 

IMHO:

ED should make 100% clear what the new super carrier can do and cannot do for the cases someone owns it or doesn't own it.

If ED don't know this by now, sorry, then something is wrong with the project management, which I can't really think of.

If ED knows all details though, why the hell don't the write a clear posting here, or simply: "we don't know this by now".

 

All this speculation is just :bored:

Edited January 17, 2020 by TOViper

Reading all this speculations, I tend to not pre-purchase it.

Having in mind what is going on with the F-16C brought my motivation for pre-purchases to zero. Early access simply takes far too long, and is far too buggy right from the start (see longest bug listing ..., and someone is not able to enter a new waypoint ... after months ... guys please :noexpression: ...).

 

IMHO:

ED should make 100% clear what the new super carrier can do and cannot do for the cases someone owns it or doesn't own it.

If ED don't know this by now, sorry, then something is wrong with the project management, which I can't really think of.

If ED knows all details though, why the hell don't the write a clear posting here, or simply: "we don't know this by now".

 

All this speculation is just :bored:

 

Great post.

 

There should not be a single question as to what we should expect in regards to the Supercarrier now that ED is asking for our money. Unfortunately, there is nothing but questions. No gameplay video, specific details, how it performs in regards to FPS, etc.

 

What happened with the F-16 release should make all of us a bit more cautious before jumping in on another Early Access release. I learned my lesson though and won't jump into another Early Access until ED is more open and informative.

Edited January 18, 2020 by =BJM=

Reading all this speculations, I tend to not pre-purchase it.

Having in mind what is going on with the F-16C brought my motivation for pre-purchases to zero. Early access simply takes far too long, and is far too buggy right from the start (see longest bug listing ..., and someone is not able to enter a new waypoint ... after months ... guys please :noexpression: ...).

 

IMHO:

ED should make 100% clear what the new super carrier can do and cannot do for the cases someone owns it or doesn't own it.

If ED don't know this by now, sorry, then something is wrong with the project management, which I can't really think of.

If ED knows all details though, why the hell don't the write a clear posting here, or simply: "we don't know this by now".

 

All this speculation is just :bored:

Great post.

 

There should not be a single question as to what we should expect in regards to the Supercarrier now that ED is asking for our money. Unfortunately, there is nothing but questions. No gameplay video, specific details, how it performs in regards to FPS, etc.

 

What happened with the F-16 release should make all of us a bit more cautious before jumping in on another Early Access release.

 

The F-16 is my first and only regrettable DCS purchase. I wish I could have a refund, but I have cut my losses and view the money spent as supporting ED and their efforts with core improvements. I learned my lessons though and won't jump into another Early Access until ED is more open and informative.

 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/other/supercarrier/

 

They have said, repeatedly, on Reddit, the forums, and Facebook that anyone who does not purchase it will be able to see it but not land on it.

 

Just like anyone who doesn't own the F-18C can see it but not fly it.

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/other/supercarrier/

 

They have said, repeatedly, on Reddit, the forums, and Facebook that anyone who does not purchase it will be able to see it but not land on it.

 

Just like anyone who doesn't own the F-18C can see it but not fly it.

 

Thanks for answering, can you link to the posting in the forum?

I don't use Reddit nor Facebook :noexpression:, just the forum.

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/other/supercarrier/

 

They have said, repeatedly, on Reddit, the forums, and Facebook that anyone who does not purchase it will be able to see it but not land on it.

 

Just like anyone who doesn't own the F-18C can see it but not fly it.

The problem is, this interacts with more things in more roles in more ways than a simple plane does. All of that really needs to be clarified as well.

 

How will it interact with the F-14, SA342, L-39, CE2, and Yak-52? How will it interact with CA controls? How will you not be able to land on it? Does it also apply to take-offs, and if so, how? Does this see-but-not-touch general description also apply to the static objects? How does it work for mission-making?

 

And, as others have mentioned, why do these answers not readily appear at the top of the dedicated subforum but are instead spread out over all kinds of third-party outlets that many might not frequent?

The problem is, this interacts with more things in more roles in more ways than a simple plane does. All of that really needs to be clarified as well.

 

It doesn't interact with anything any more than the current Kutz does... or the refuellers do with helicopters...

 

How will it interact with the F-14,

 

The same as it does with any other ship born fixed wing aircraft... what exactly are you asking?

 

 

SA342, L-39, CE2, and Yak-52?

 

It's going to be a floating hard object.

 

 

How will it interact with CA controls?

 

They have said CA interactions will be added later. Isn't it likely it will interact the same as any of the other units?

 

How will you not be able to land on it? Does it also apply to take-offs, and if so, how? Does this see-but-not-touch general description also apply to the static objects?

 

The same way you can land and take off of the Kutz now. It is a hard object in the water that you can crash into and touch... you cannot use it. You cannot use the cats, the wires, can't talk to it on radio...

 

Do own a ship born jet? Do you ever "interact" with the Stennis. I don't understand why this is not all completely obvious to you.

 

 

 

How does it work for mission-making?

 

If you want it in your mission you have to put it in. You will be able to put it in a mission even if you don't own it the same way you can put a F-18C into a mission even if you don't own it.

 

If you want people who don't own the module to have access to an aircraft carrier you're going to have to put the Stennis in.

 

Again is this not painfully obvious?

 

And, as others have mentioned, why do these answers not readily appear at the top of the dedicated subforum but are instead spread out over all kinds of third-party outlets that many might not frequent?

 

Because they are all answered by the simple statements they have already made and the fact that it is just a module.

 

If you don't own it you'll be able to bump into it but not control it.

See, that's the problem. None of that is official or explained or — for the most part — even answers the questions.

 

It doesn't interact with anything any more than the current Kutz does... or the refuellers do with helicopters...

I wasn't asking about the Kuz but about the Supercarrier module, and it does indeed interact with more things than any other module: it is a spawn point, a landing/refuel/rearm point, an air defence unit, an early-warning unit, an ATC unit, a controllable unit (to some unknown extent), and it interacts with and adds functionality to pretty much every single other module in the game except maybe the NS 430…

 

The same as it does with any other ship born fixed wing aircraft... what exactly are you asking?

There is a common trait in the planes listed: F-14, SA342, L-39, CE2, and Yak-52. Cross-reference that common trait with what has vaguely been said about who can interact with the Supercarrier module and in what ways, and I think you'll see the problem…

 

They have said CA interactions will be added later. Isn't it likely it will interact the same as any of the other units?

No, because no other unit offers the same functionality, nor do they have the same implied limitations as far as taking control of those functions (or indeed of the vehicles as a whole). Also, other units vary wildly in how you can interact with them through CA.

 

How much control is offered by just having one of the two modules? How much is locked behind a need to have both? What are the actual features of the added roles and how (if at all) do they overlap with, or are prioritised ahead of existing functionality?

 

The same way you can land and take off of the Kutz now.

That is pretty much completely at odds with how it has always been described. Hence why clarification from the actual developers is needed as opposed to some unsourced guesswork based on supposed statements made who-knows-where.

 

Do you ever "interact" with the Stennis. I don't understand why this is not all completely obvious to you.

Because I actually use the Stennis (and Kuz) pretty extensively, both for mission-making, in mission hosting, and for the modules I own, and I do the same with a number of other modules and even full mods that changes how people can access those missions. As such, it is very obvious that there are a ton of things about how the Supercarrier additions will interact have not been communicated.

 

The new carriers already break the mould with how, say, the WWII asset pack or similar added-object packs works, so it is not completely obvious how much of that will extend to the module content as a whole — especially not when the initial statements painted Supercarrier as having the same kind of restrictions as those other modules. This is of particular importance for mission-makers to know.

 

If you want it in your mission you have to put it in.

If you don't understand the question, please ask for clarification rather than these kinds of vapid and condescending non-answers.

 

Because they are all answered by the simple statements they have already made and the fact that it is just a module.

No. None of them are. That's why the questions are being asked here and now, on the official subforum where the answers should be collected and made public. And no, it is not “just a module” — it is something very different from what they have released before with a plethora of new interactions, restrictions, uses, and additions in functionality that may or may not vary depending on ownership in ways that do not apply to other modules.

 

This much they have said, which is why these questions arise: because the clarifications on what different combinations of ownership will mean to the players.

See, that's the problem. None of that is official or explained or — for the most part — even answers the questions.

 

 

I stopped reading there. You might as well wait for official word on if it will interact with the comms menu.

 

Have a nice day.

You might as well wait for official word on if it will interact with the comms menu.

Not really, no, since that's a well-known, built-in, core function of the game unlike pretty much all the things that the Supercarrier module is supposed to do — most of which is supposed interact with the rest of the game in ways that are at odds with how modules tend to interact.

 

At any rate, the answers to how the module will slot into the rest of DCS, and in particular the multiplayer parts, is something that should probably be listed on the official subforum for the module as opposed to being spread all over random nooks and crannies on other websites that people might not even be aware of.

 

Perhaps they could collect it into some kind of list of queries that appear with high frequency — maybe they could call it a QAF or something, although I'm sure some creative person can come up with a more catchy name. Maybe it could even be added on the forums using some fancy functionality where it doesn't move from the top, like it was “stapled” there or some such.

 

I stopped reading there.

That seems to have been a general problem with your previous post as well: you didn't quite bother reading through what you were responding to. That, along with the lack of information on the topics listed, would explain why none of the issues could be addressed in any meaningful way.

I dont know but for my $25.00 dollars I suspect it will be cool all the way around

That seems to have been a general problem with your previous post as well: you didn't quite bother reading through what you were responding to. That, along with the lack of information on the topics listed, would explain why none of the issues could be addressed in any meaningful way.

 

I don't know if this forum has a user block feature but congratulations, you have just inspired me to go find it.

Yes, asking the developers to collect and communicate clear and concise information about a much-anticipated product sure is such an outrageous and horrible request that it must never be seen again. :D

Everyone assumes (myself included) F-14 will work with Supercarrier from the get-go but it seems not to be the case:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=261054&page=2

Everyone assumes (myself included) F-14 will work with Supercarrier from the get-go but it seems not to be the case:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=261054&page=2

 

Why don't you post the whole story?

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4180326&postcount=54