DCS Carrier Discussion

[heat1099]

PRE-ORDERED!!!

 

obviously....

[Beirut]

Still waiting for it to show up on Steam.

 

 

Sorry to repeat the question, but does anyone know if the carrier will interact with any plane or just the F-14 and F-18?

 

 

I have the F5E, which can land on a carrier, and the Harrier, but I'm not planning on buying the F-14 or F-18.

[KlarSnow]

If you dont have a carrier plane I wouldnt get the Carrier. While yes the F-5 has a hook, you wont be able to do a cat shot, and almost zero scenarios this will ever get used in online will have any reason for you to land an F-5 on a carrier. the Case 3 and all the landing stuff won't apply, since the F-5 isn't designed to land at the correct AOA's and everything for the carrier.

 

If all you want to do is land an F-5 on a boat, the default Stennis is plenty, unless you really like looking at all their animations and stuff.

[Tusker]

Pre-ordered. Now the wait begins.

[Porkchopper]

Purchased, literally within minutes of learning it's available. Can't wait to fly my Hornet out to it.

 

 

I do have one complaint though, it's not "my" boat. Spent several years on the Eisenhower and was hoping she'd be one of the hull numbers.

[stalhuth]

any videos?

 

I want to pre purchase, but first will be great to see some videos of the Supercarrier, mechanism functions, graphics, crew team motion, etc.

[IceFire]

Check the ED youtube buddy :)

[stalhuth]

Check the ED youtube buddy :)

 

yes but only video promotions of the carrier

[RichardG]

What is the file size of just the carrier? My SSD is getting full.

[Beirut]

If you dont have a carrier plane I wouldnt get the Carrier. While yes the F-5 has a hook, you wont be able to do a cat shot, and almost zero scenarios this will ever get used in online will have any reason for you to land an F-5 on a carrier. the Case 3 and all the landing stuff won't apply, since the F-5 isn't designed to land at the correct AOA's and everything for the carrier.

 

If all you want to do is land an F-5 on a boat, the default Stennis is plenty, unless you really like looking at all their animations and stuff.

 

 

 

Now I'm sad.

 

 

I don't fly online (yet). I fly very informally, sandbox style. I have all the maps and I use the mission editor and half the time I'm just flying around for the fun of it, barely blowing anything up at all.

 

 

Hell, if the guy with the paddles would come out and help me land my Yak-52, I'd buy the carrier tonight.

 

 

Thank you for the reply though.

[KlarSnow]

I mean, if you are attempting to land an F-5 on a carrier, than other than the challenge, it doesnt really sound like you have much of an interest in actual carrier ops. In which case, understand that the Supercarrier is supposed to be a highly accurate representation of carrier ops, which the F-5 doesnt participate in IRL, isn't designed for, and cant access a lot of the systems that are specific to carriers and carrier landings (ACLS/ICLS, aformentioned incorrect AOA, will always be too fast for the LSO if he even recognizes you as trying to land on the boat).

 

Thats all stuff that this module brings that will most likely be useless to you in the F-5.

 

If however you have an interest in carrier ops, consider picking up something that can actually make use of it, the Hornet and tomcat are both great modules. You can even pick up the hornet and the carrier in a bundle they are offering right now, for significantly cheaper than both separate.

 

If thats not something you are interested in, then again if you are interested in seeing all the work they put in like the animations in single player, then nobody will knock you if you think its worth it, you have to decide.

 

Just based on what it sounds like you are doing, you probly will not derive much extra fun out of the carrier over what you can already do, just due to the module you are flying, so if that is true and your intent I definitely wouldn't recommend it.

 

no judgement, at all just making sure you don't expect something that you wont be able to make use of.

[dawgie79]

What is the file size of just the carrier? My SSD is getting full.

Well, I guess you'll just have to buy a new SSD then. :D

[Beirut]

I mean, if you are attempting to land an F-5 on a carrier, than other than the challenge, it doesnt really sound like you have much of an interest in actual carrier ops. In which case, understand that the Supercarrier is supposed to be a highly accurate representation of carrier ops, which the F-5 doesnt participate in IRL, isn't designed for, and cant access a lot of the systems that are specific to carriers and carrier landings (ACLS/ICLS, aformentioned incorrect AOA, will always be too fast for the LSO if he even recognizes you as trying to land on the boat).

 

Thats all stuff that this module brings that will most likely be useless to you in the F-5.

 

If however you have an interest in carrier ops, consider picking up something that can actually make use of it, the Hornet and tomcat are both great modules. You can even pick up the hornet and the carrier in a bundle they are offering right now, for significantly cheaper than both separate.

 

If thats not something you are interested in, then again if you are interested in seeing all the work they put in like the animations in single player, then nobody will knock you if you think its worth it, you have to decide.

 

Just based on what it sounds like you are doing, you probly will not derive much extra fun out of the carrier over what you can already do, just due to the module you are flying, so if that is true and your intent I definitely wouldn't recommend it.

 

no judgement, at all just making sure you don't expect something that you wont be able to make use of.

 

 

I appreciate that. And thanks for taking to time to explain it so well.

 

 

As stated, I'm a sandbox flyer. I really enjoy the eye candy and the fun of the planes (I have eight of them) , but I am by no means a hardcore mission flyer like many of you. I would get the carrier - if I got it - just for the fun and challenge of takeoffs and landings. Especially at night with the thing all lit up. The eye candy looks like it would be great.

 

 

But with the low fidelity Su-33, would I get the interactivity? That would make it work for me.

[tekrc]

there is 1 promo for the us carrier from recently.

if you want to see the kuz then go look at the su33 fm update trailer video from 2017 and the 2018 and beyond video. its updated since then so that and the screenshots from the newsletter should give a good idea.

[KlarSnow]

With the low fidelity SU-33 you would only get "full interactivity" on the russian carrier, the kuznetsov. It is not going to be modelled at the same level of detail systems wise as you are used to. It will really functionally be exactly the same as the F-5 if you tried to put it on a US carrier, no Instrument landing stuff, the ball and LSO will be innacurate, really all of the same problems.

 

Russian jets use different systems that arent compatible with US stuff to begin with, and the FC3 jet that the SU-33 is will not have fully clickable systems like the ones you are used to.

 

However you can take off and land from the russian carrier with the SU-33 (it doesnt use a catapult but rather a ski jump and the SU-33 has enough thrust to take off that way)

[crisk73]

Purchased with no hesitation! You guys at ED are devils, great commercial move.

[Mars Exulte]

I appreciate that. And thanks for taking to time to explain it so well.

 

 

As stated, I'm a sandbox flyer. I really enjoy the eye candy and the fun of the planes (I have eight of them) , but I am by no means a hardcore mission flyer like many of you. I would get the carrier - if I got it - just for the fun and challenge of takeoffs and landings. Especially at night with the thing all lit up. The eye candy looks like it would be great.

 

 

But with the low fidelity Su-33, would I get the interactivity? That would make it work for me.

 

33 can't use a catapult so would be difficult/impossible to takeoff with. The Kuznetsov (what the 33 is designed for) is a ski jump ship. They're verrrrry different design philosophies and the aircraft that fly from them are very different, too.

 

Also... BOUGHT :p

[-0303-]

Sorry to repeat the question, but does anyone know if the carrier will interact with any plane or just the F-14 and F-18?

 

The current Stennis does give optical landing system (OLS) lights (green, red, yellow) for Spitfire, I-16, Bf109 and P-51 (just checked). Probably all planes.

 

I'd like deck crew to help out push/pulling on deck. Pilots will screw up, without a reverse gear, in real life crew would help out. How to make that? F8 -> Fxx

-A magic instant "put me in nearest parking spot"?

-Or, two commands "push me +- x meter" and "rotate me +- x degrees"?

Possibly a "line me up with ships axis" command.

~

 

If we don't have the Super Carrier could we still land "manually" in MP?

No radio, no advanced ILS, just manually. This for hooked and non hooked (Su-33, F-5) planes.

Edited January 18, 2020 by -0303-

[BonerCat]

As far as i remember, it'll be going out into EA with 14 spawn locations, and ED will try to fit 18 spawn location by release

[RAF_JAGUAR]

What is the file size of just the carrier? My SSD is getting full.

 

I had the same issue. My DCS takes up 154 GB and with each update gets bigger. I read somewhere the way it was coded originally is the reason it is as big as it is. The Carrier (I know it's an assumption) will not be a small download. DCS now lives on a HD, I can't justify buying a larger SSD for a game.

[hanab]

Why i didn't buy supercarrier module ?

 

hi,

 

I will not buy the module for several reasons:

- it's an EA; I have the F18 and I suffered the bad experience of the slowness of the devellopement. I'm afraid the supercarrier module won't be finished for several months. So I don't want to renew that moment.

- $25 is not very expensive indeed. But I think it's expensive enough to spend only 10 minutes per mission. Of course there is also the Kutznesov and the SU33, but it is useless if you play with NATO aircraft. There is also the burke class frigate but what more does it do than the OH Perry or the ticonderonga?

- We don't know much about this module other than ED words. There is only one promotional video and I know that advertising videos do not reflect the IG experience. How are the men on the deck going to work? will they have to be placed in the edition before ? Are they going to leave for the landing? In short, I need more review, test and video to better know what's in it.

 

For now, I prefer to wait to have the answers to my questions before thinking about the purchase. Maybe I'll miss the sales but I know ED will do more later.

 

I know a lot of people won't agree with me but thank you for respecting my will.

Edited January 18, 2020 by hanab

[bart86pl]

Vote with your wallet is the best option as usual.

Personally, I bought it, with all the discounts I`m fairly sure its well worth it.

[tintifaxl]

All valid points by the OP. That being said, I still preordered it for 25 USD, because I spend a lot of time with the carrier capable planes lately and am confident I'll get my money worth out of it.

[Smokin Hole]

I get it. But I also got it. Every purchase and every update comes with a bit of hope. In my multiple decades as an ED customer the initial reality has sometimes fallen short of the hope. But after some time they always pull it off. The EA thing torques almost everyone. It happens to be the business model we as customers a forced to exist in. ED probably isn’t thrilled with it either. But how else do you fund the years of development needed to make something great. I made the exact same calculus with the F-16 that you have made here. It wasn’t important enough to me to pay for the risk of early frustration. The carrier is. For me it was easy money just for the more accurate Case 2 and 3 approach integration.

[Northstar98]

hi,

 

I will not buy the module for several reasons:

- it's an EA; I have the F18 and I suffered the bad experience of the slowness of the devellopement. I'm afraid the supercarrier module won't be finished for several months. So I don't want to renew that moment.

Fair enough, I understand this position, I only bought the F/A-18C once it got the Litening II TGP, but I'm pretty happy with the development pace, yes it's slow but it's still making progress which is good enough for me. The Viper though was a whole other kettle of fish...

- $25 is not very expensive indeed. But I think it's expensive enough to spend only 10 minutes per mission. Of course there is also the Kutznesov and the SU33, but it is useless if you play with NATO aircraft. There is also the burke class frigate but what more does it do than the OH Perry or the ticonderonga?

 

This I disagree with, I'm going to spend far more than 10 minutes per mission with this given it's features, but I'd pay that price just for improvements to the naval environment as a whole, and I'd hope the sales from the Supercarrier will provide an incentive to develop the naval environment further.

 

As for the Arleigh Burke, the main advantage is more about having the comprehensive units for a typical US CBG consisting of US units, which consists of a few CGs (Ticonderoga), many DDGs (Arleigh Burkes), an SSN (Virginia/Sea Wolf/Los Angeles) and a replenishment ship (Henry J. Kaiser/Supply class). I'm hoping that as a a paid asset, ED would consider modelling the RIM-156 SM-2ER, RIM-174 SM-6 ERAM, RIM-162 ESSM, RUM-139 VL-ASROC (once torpedoes are a thing) and RIM-161 SM-3 - though the last one is a whole different kettle of fish, and it only makes sense once the SCUD-B is fully implemented. I'm going to hope that ED will model these weapons as well as remodelling the current RIM-66C/D SM-2MR. Plus it will be the first modern naval asset with up-to-date graphics (the Chinese asset pack ships come close, but still have a fair few issues). I'm also hoping that we'll get some control over the loadouts of the Mk41 VLS as well as the limited AShM mode for the SM-2MR and SM-2ER (seeing as otherwise the Arleigh Burke Flight IIA doesn't have any AShMs).

 

- We don't know much about this module other than ED words. There is only one promotional video and I know that advertising videos do not reflect the IG experience. How are the men on the deck going to work? will they have to be placed in the edition before ? Are they going to leave for the landing? In short, I need more review, test and video to better know what's in it.

 

I disagree with the ED words thing, I can't think of a case where ED has said something will be in and then just straight up said no or otherwise lied, the features and weapons list for initial EA release of the Hornet and what was coming later on has been accurate - sure it's taking time, perhaps a lot of time, but I guess that's the risk you take with a modern, up-to-date aircraft with complex avionics. Sure ED has often missed proposed release dates, sometimes by years for me I think the wait is worth it to get it right and they do eventually deliver something excellent, I'm okay with missing deadlines, DCS is incredibly complex and development is intensive and major setbacks are probably inevitable. I absolute get the frustration, but I guess it's a game of how patient you are, for me what eventually gets delivered are definitely worth the wait. The F-16 was a bit of a red flag, releasing it with so many things missing, but ED have been quick to pick-up the pace with things that were real alarm bells for me, I will eventually buy it, just maybe not right now. I still don't know where I stand on RAZBAM's module apart from the Falklands theatre, I had a previous disappointing experience with the Harrier on another sim, and while I don't want to bash them I don't think the Harrier is quite there yet for me.

 

I would say I semi-disagree with the promo-videos not representing the product, sure it's cinematic but I still feel it represents the product being sold. The only difference is probably most with SFX, though ED is getting better and a lot of aircraft have external sounds that have received subtle improvements so they sound a fair bit better IMO, markedly so than before, sure it's not quite what we hear in trailers, and sure it's maybe not perfect but I would say I'm reasonably satisfied - I guess mileage varies and ED are improving.

 

However, holding off until reviews and user videos come is pretty sensible regardless, as it better allows for a more informed purchase, so that's absolutely reasonable, if I wasn't heavily invested in the naval environment I would've waited but I feel that at the price for what we're getting and what we could see in the future it's worth it.

Edited January 18, 2020 by Northstar98