LooseSeal

Yeah... I have a Liberation campaign going with a full Syria map in 2010, and my Patriots waste their entire missile stock in the first 5 minutes stupidly and disastrously trying to shoot down the masses of Scuds being launched. Although considering how completely useless the Patriot in DCS is, it doesn't really matter that much. I also wish they wouldn't engage the literal moment an enemy crosses into their engagement area. I hope the updated AI logic is going to include the SAMs. They need to be able to figure out what the chances are of their missile actually reaching the target or not.

SR-71 - Even though it would be utterly pointless within the context of DCS, unless we suddenly need reconnaissance missions for the dynamic campaign... Who cares about that, though? I just want to look at it.

Yeah, it's basically the only way to destroy an S-300 site when playing Liberation. Swamp it with 30+ HARMs until it runs out.

Yeah, it took me a while to figure it out. They implemented it some point in the autumn I think. I wish they put critical changes like that in the changelogs for patches rather than bury them in a sticky on the forum. Or even better... in the manual. Fairly sure that should be your issue!

I'm not sure you're having the same problem as the OP, but it is strange that your bombs are not hitting... So, you're lined up on the target, but the bomb fall line is off to one side? The only time this has happened to me is when starting on the carrier and the alignment has finished but I put it in NAV rather than in IFA. And because the carrier keeps moving... you end up with navigation that's a few miles off where it should be. Could that be the issue? That's the only explanation I can think of for the fall line being off.

Furiz - your post is exactly what I mean about how it doesn't scale as you zoom in and out. The light just stays the same and engulfs the aircraft. And if they're only going to investigate it in VR, well... it's missing the point. It is exactly the same problem on a standard display.

Hey Joaoperru As petritis has said, you shouldn't have to select anything when you land at the carrier. The only 'skip' option I saw during the first mission was in regards to whether I wanted to skip the aerial refuelling part. After you've completed refuelling, just go and drop your bomb then immediately return to carrier. You shouldn't have to select anything except normal carrier comms (which are being a bit weird at the moment for me!)

I'd recommend a campaign like the Serpent's Head 1 and 2 first of all, and then Raven One. Something a bit more "on rails" that will essentially guide you on what to do. There's quite a lot going on in this campaign, not necessarily difficult I think, just maybe a bit overwhelming at first if you haven't done a campaign in the Hornet before. As for AAR - I don't think it's "necessary" but it may be useful... Things like weather, etc, can't be adjusted. You are limited in terms of what you can change to the roles of your flights (SEAD, CAP, CAS, etc) and the waypoints of your own flight. For night missions, I really wouldn't be too concerned! I don't think all that much changes, really. In fact, I personally find landing on the carrier at night way, way easier than in day time. It's basically just a straight in landing from 21 miles out. TLDR: Serpent's Head 1 -> Serpent's Head 2 -> Raven One -> Operation Pontus.

I've just seen this thread and really find it quite funny it says "correct as is." I'm also yet to see anyone try to defend the bloom or even say it's acceptable. For me, it's way overdone and not realistic. It also doesn't appear to scale whatsoever as you zoom out in external view. The aircraft may get smaller, but the light bloom just stays the same, and eventually it all just melds together and makes a giant flying orb. Actually, the look of it at distances is my biggest issue. Sort of baffling how this is considered "correct as is" given the amount of photographic evidence to the contrary. As for the ED photo provided, that is definitely not a good example... really surprised it's being stood up as a good example of photography, let alone an example of the lights themselves.

Just thought I'd give some observations so far. Some I think are bugs. The Comms presets seem to be back to front in comparison to the kneeboard, which is a bit confusing at first. The fact there are no subtitles for much of the voiceovers during the mission is a bit of an issue. Not only for people who are hard of hearing, but also because the AI AWACS is constantly giving BRA reports over the top of the voiceovers (which seem to have a lower volume than the AWACS, making it ever harder to hear). I think I missed at least half of what was said until I switched the AWACS off. The flight lead of 'Trimmer's' flight was shot down. I attempted to order his wingman to RTB but there is no response and he just continued to try to fire HARMs at an SA-6 site that had already been destroyed. It appears only the flight lead can be ordered. And so his wingman died after needlessly flying over a Shilka... I ordered Fish to RTB. They proceeded to turn to the carrier, then dive from 30,000ft to the ground and fly over Iglas and Shilkas at 200kts. They both died. When I RTB'd, I switched to the carrier comms and the Marshal was just stuck on repeat ordering me, or whoever, to go to the marshal stack. I couldn't 'abort inbound', or 'established' or 'commencing'. It just kept repeating the orders to go to marshal stack. I don't know if this is a Supercarrier bug, but I did notice similar behaviour in the first mission. All in all, I think the potential is there to be very fun and replayable. However, until my allies stop flying directly over the top of AAA at low altitude for no apparent reason, then it's going to be hard to be immersed in it.

No problem! Thanks for the reply!

First of all, great idea for a campaign and I can't wait to get into it! So, I finished the first mission and I'm now trying to figure out how to set up the first 'real' mission. But... I'm having some trouble which is more than likely my own ignorance. I want to assign the packages to new tasks, and in the manual it shows a picture of Phoenixes 2, 3, 4 and 5 on the map with blue circles around them and an X. But in my mission planner I don't see those circles? I've attached an image so you see what I mean. When I click on them I only see a white line extending out to a triangle saying something like "Search then engage in zone SEAD Trimmer", but nothing I can edit and no blue circles. Also, in the manual it says I should fly to an "RV Point" first - in the mission planner, do I need to put my first waypoint over this RV Point? I'm not completely sure where it is. **Also! Just some things about the first mission - Phoenix flight doesn't land at the carrier, they go and do another lap of the circuit then just fly around. When approaching the tanker, it's hard to understand what you're supposed to do. You're told to send your wingman to refuel, but there's no instruction on whether we should use normal comms to contact the tanker or not. And the comms option for the tanker is greyed out, which confuses the situation too.

I don't know about the ejection seat thing specifically, I think only a tiny fraction of the player base would ever really need/use that. However... an interactive kneeboard would be a really neat feature to have at some point. But also should be fairly low down the priority list.

I've said my piece and I stick with it, but I suspect you're going to get a few other people perfectly willing to answer your question soon enough. So... basically what you're saying is when the Typhoon comes out, nobody will fly any other fighter anymore because we all just gravitate to the most modern and most capable?? That really is quite a strange, and naive, way of thinking about people who play this sim.

I'm just going to comment specifically on one thing you mentioned and leave the rest for more informed people than I - The Hind will sell and it will sell well. Personally, I'll be getting both the Hind and Apache. They're completely different beasts. Both have their own magic. The Apache, well, come on... it's just cool as hell. But the Hind? It's an icon. Who wouldn't want it!? Now that's just me... but I suspect I'll be far from the only one getting both.

I'll second that about the Harrier. It has the potential to be really fun, but a few weeks ago I went back to it for the first time in over a year... and it's just too buggy for me. Which was really disappointing given the amount of time it's been. So yeah, the Hornet, all the way. Especially as they aim to have it 'complete' by the end of first quarter.

Oh yeah... A DCS Liberation mission in Syria when dozens of missiles are suddenly launched - that doesn't put my PC on its knees, it knocks it on its back and straps it down to the floor. I completely agree on the ground AI/cardboard cutouts thing. Soldiers who just stand there when an A-10C is bearing down on them is a bit immersion-breaking. But FPS? Completely unfeasible on a technical level. Ground fidelity could never be high enough while maintaining performance. I remember when MSFS was being shown off and people were going nuts about how good the ground looked from 30,000ft and how they'd be walking and driving about on the ground. And then it was released, and... boom - technical limitations hit home.. "Why is that bridge merging into that skyscraper!?" I mean, Arma is arguably the most realistic commercial FPS game out there and it can be seriously taxing on an average PC. And it has only a fraction of the number of calculations DCS has to do.

Using the supercarrier with Liberation is a complete hassle... you have to make sure you have only a certain number of flights spawning on deck at any one time or there's going to be gridlock. I'd say a maximum of 8 aircraft or so. Also, trying to predict which Cat your wingman is going to head to once you start rolling is a hilarious lottery. I really hope they're working on AI pathfinding/logic for this. They have said they're implementing plane directors, so you'd assume they'll need to sort these issues out or it just isn't going to work.

Sorry.. I don't believe there's any way to edit the environment in DCS. Pretty blunt answer I'm afraid, but there it is!

Any idea where they said that!? Would be a bit of an own goal given they showed us an Apache with an FCR in the reveal video. I find it very hard to believe it's only a "hope to".

So I'm trying out a Caucasus scenario with USA 2010 vs Russia 2010 and I'm immediately presented with a conundrum... There is a Moskva sitting just off the coast from where you start. I tried a first mission with myself as CAS in the east. I very quickly noticed though, that my F-15Cs in the west were chasing Flankers right into the path of the Moskva, which was having a great time shooting them all down. Any idea if there's a decent way to destroy her? Or just give up and start a different scenario? *And I had thought the S-300 rings of death in Liberation were difficult*

No, you absolutely do have it correct. This type of AWACS call will be easier when the Hornet finally has Offset points, but it isn't difficult to do it by setting a course line through Rock and dead reckoning the distance using the HSI/SA pages. As for this specific mission - isn't this the mission where you're going up against Prince? It's a while since I did it, but I don't recall having to find any Iranians in that mission. If you're talking about finding Prince during the dogfight then it may be best to use your SA page as the AWACS will have lit him up on there. Certainly easier than trying to work out offset points in the middle of a dogfight...

I don't believe so at the moment, unfortunately. Those old Russian tankers are the best you've got. As for civilian traffic... our options there are basically limited to some buses under the Russian section of ground units. At least that's all I can remember. But - I do seem to remember one of the ED staff saying something last year about plans to make the world more alive, such as fully destructible environments. Hopefully that includes more civilian assets too. I feel like it would be necessary, or at least desirable, for the dynamic campaign?

Any more word on when we might expect this? That preview seems like an age ago now!

I was wondering this too. I just assumed there was some kind of criteria for firing it, but there is no documentation about it and I can't seem to find a pattern. If it is as intended then not being able to fire steeper than 20 degrees seems a bit weird... and makes your strafing a bit of a dangerous affair!