How will the Super Carrier be used in existing Missions?

[speed-of-heat]

I'm curious, as to how it will be used in missions, if you have existing missions that use a carrier, will they need updating to use the Super Carrier, or will it just automatically use the Super Carrier if you have paid for it?

[Reflected]

I guess it will be a separate model, so if you want an existing mission to use it, you need to go to the ME, and swap the unit.

[speed-of-heat]

I guess it will be a separate model, so if you want an existing mission to use it, you need to go to the ME, and swap the unit.

 

if that is the case (which would be real kludge), are we going to get re-worked carrier missions for the modules we have already?

 

And is there enough detection logic in the mission/campaign editor to enable content creators to detect the presence of the super carrier module and make use of it if present and default to normal carrier if not?

[Yoda967]

If ED follows the pattern of previous models (and I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise), then this will be like all the other modules coming before it: There will be campaigns and missions built specifically for the Supercarrier module that won't be usable unless you have purchased the Supercarrier.

 

ED and the 3rd party developers also generally include tailored missions in the module package, like those that have come with the FA-18C, F-14, A-10C, M2000C, AV-8BNA, F-16C, and others.

 

There seems to be a fairly large subset of DCS players who haven't learned the ME, so I'd expect ED to include a few missions to get you started, if you already own the Hornet and/or Tomcat.

[VpR81]

In the ME, i can also choose the AI to use aircraft models from modules i don´t own, will this be possible with the supercarrier as well and if, how will this work out in the mission. Or will the supercarrier at this point be handled more like a map module? If you don´t own it, it does not even appear in the ME´s unit list? Will get it anyways, just out of curiousity..

 

What i ask myself as well is, how will the supercarrier module affect MP missions. As a standalone module, i guess there will be possible slots for LSO etc.. But how does the boat itself work for players that don´t own the module, but the Tomcat/Hornet? Will they be able to land/take off from the boat, choose specific F-14 or F/A-18 slots that spawn on the boat, or is the supercarrier here as well handled like a map module? No ownership, can´t join the server?

 

Cheers

[Los]

The supercarrier is a new and separate ship. if you have an existing Mission with a CV you have to change it to the new carrier.

 

Los

[speed-of-heat]

The point is, it isn't really a usable module. It's a place for 'modules' to take off and land. Can't have missions and campaigns on it's own since you would need F-14, F-18, a helicopter or at least CA to use it properly.

 

 

 

I really don't like the idea to have a paid supercarrier with fancy animated crew ATC ect., while still having to take of from the old, subsized ones in all the missions and campaigns we already own..., cuz well, that'd kinda suck.

 

 

Would make more sense to make it replace the old carrier after we purchased it.

 

** This **

[mahuja]

Would make more sense to make it replace the old carrier after we purchased it.

 

I get where you're coming from, and I'd kind of like to see some autoupgrade myself, but I just don't see how it's practical.

 

Automatically upgrading or switching would be bad if any of

- multiplayer

- 'decorative' objects have been placed on it by the mission maker

- you want the mission to be plainer, without any extra procedures, obstacles, or other features used by the SC.

 

 

I'm guessing it will say in the store entry that you will need carrier capable planes separately from the carrier itself.

[speed-of-heat]

Would it be possible to write a script in say powershell to interrogate all the miz flies and do a search and replace with the new carrier model?

[Dun_Aenghus]

Good question. For example, how would it work with Baltic Dragon's Raven One campaign which he is working on or any other carrier-based campaigns in the future? Will two versions be released? One with the supercarrier and the other with the regular one?

[TheCabal]

The point is, it isn't really a usable module. It's a place for 'modules' to take off and land. Can't have missions and campaigns on it's own since you would need F-14, F-18, a helicopter or at least CA to use it properly.

 

 

 

I really don't like the idea to have a paid supercarrier with fancy animated crew ATC ect., while still having to take of from the old, subsized ones in all the missions and campaigns we already own..., cuz well, that'd kinda suck.

 

 

Would make more sense to make it replace the old carrier after we purchased it.

 

Exactly this. I was wondering how it would (or even can) fit into all we already have (missions, campaigns etc.). Will only a handfull of missions be developed for the F/A-18C (while the F-14 gets ignored) or will DCS Super Carrier be regarded as only a toy for online squads?

 

Creating many multiverses inside a multiverse. So... there always must be a version of a content for those who don't and those who do own Super Carriers?

[CaptHawk]

Can't wait to add this to a few carrier ops missions I have made. Working with the ME really isn't that hard once you figure out it's shortcomings and approach accordingly. I'll end up adding the super carrier as an additional carrier along with 2 other Stennis Carriers already in the multi mission. Those that have the Super Carrier mod can operate off of that. Those that don't will operate off the 2 Stennis groups. I think it will fit in just fine.

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[r4y30n]

Would it be possible to write a script in say powershell to interrogate all the miz flies and do a search and replace with the new carrier model?

 

With different dimensions between the two boats wouldn't objects be shifted around if you did a 1 to 1 swap?

[Harlikwin]

With different dimensions between the two boats wouldn't objects be shifted around if you did a 1 to 1 swap?

 

But if you know the differences in dimensions you could account for it too.

[speed-of-heat]

its not THAT much different, if you are placing things on the deck you have what 4 real spawn points on the Stennis and 14 on the SC ... so sure you would have to make some accommodations

[malibu43]

@ED - I would like to know the answer to this before purchasing. If I have to go back into existing stock hornet missions or any campaigns/missions I downloaded or purchased and manually add this in, I will probably not buy. Likewise I want to make sure future "official" missions or campaigns that I buy will make use of it without me having to modify everything. It would eventually be a mess to keep track of...

Edited January 26, 2020 by malibu43

[Tippis]

It pretty much has to be a separate unit in order to fulfil the requirement of being able to exist in MP without requiring all clients to own the module. To exist alongside the existing Stennis, the updated Stennis needs to be its own unit type. Alternatively, they specifically skip over CVN-74 and provide the other Theodore Roosevelt carriers.

 

Either way, it'll be a new unique unit that will have to be added in manually to any new and old missions. If it had just been a model update, similar to the Su-34 a while back, then that would have been one thing, but it's not like that: this is a completely new unit with new behaviours and mechanics and functionalities that must be able to fit in with pre-existing units. So it must be more like the F-16CM and F/A-18 Bl. 20 when the game already had existing F-16 and F/A-18 units.

[LASooner]

10 ships of the class have been produced, of which, we will include five of the Theodore Roosevelt sub-class:

 

CVN-71 Theodore Roosevelt

CVN-72 Abraham Lincoln

CVN-73 George Washington

CVN-74 John C Stennis

CVN-75 Harry S. Truman

 

I would hope we wouldn't have 2 Stennis carriers if we buy this. They have said when you buy the new A-10 module update it will replace the existing one. I would hope... I do hope the same goes for the current Stennis.

[Tippis]

I would hope we wouldn't have 2 Stennis carriers if we buy this. They have said when you buy the new A-10 module update it will replace the existing one. I would hope... I do hope the same goes for the current Stennis.

The key difference is that an updated A-10 only affects you, the pilot. Any updated in-cockpit systems will only make a difference to you and not to outside observers since they just see a regular old A-10 going through its motions without knowing (or caring) why it does what it does.

 

A carrier is different. Its functionality, and especially a corrected and more decorated deck, will affect everyone, and everyone who interacts with it needs to see the same thing or you'll have all kinds of nasty desync.

 

It matters less with things like the crew since (last I saw it mentioned), they're not actually collidable, but then you have things like the differently positioned and aligned catapults. You can't have two aircraft operating from “the same” Stennis but seeing different ones: on your screen, you're lined up; on his he is, but for both of you it looks like the other guy is half-way into the sea. Alternatively, both of you see both as lined up because your respective clients know both aircraft are hooked up, but in reality, one (or both) of you are not actually in the positions shown.

 

Remember, a good portion of the new functionality only serves a purpose in MP, and as such, the carrier as a whole must work in that environment. They've already (after some grumbling) said that it would work without blocking non-owners from a server, which means that both old and new must be available to place to support both owner and non-owner clients. If it had just been an SP object, things would have been different and you could conceivably have made an autoreplace since “everyone” (i.e. the single player) would always see the same unit, but as it is, the Suppercarrier is as much — maybe even more — of a multiplayer tool.

Edited January 26, 2020 by Tippis

[speed-of-heat]

— maybe even more — of a multiplayer tool.

 

I don't play much multiplayer, indeed i slotted my first multiplayer time this morning.

 

but i really don't understand your logic at all, if im hosting the server, you get to see the same ship as i do? now as i understand it you would only be able to "interact" with the advanced functionality of the SC if you own it... otherwise ... you won't.

 

the alternative would be having two carriers ? or just the old carrier?

[Tippis]

I don't play much multiplayer, indeed i slotted my first multiplayer time this morning.

 

but i really don't understand your logic at all, if im hosting the server, you get to see the same ship as i do?

The problem is, the current Stennis and the updated Stennis are different in a bunch of ways as described earlier. In order for the updated variant to magically appear in older content, all previous instances of it would have to be auto-replaced by the new variant but ED will not just give away the new variant to everyone so they'd still see the current model.

 

If they implemented a method where old Stennis carriers were automatically replaced by new ones for owners, you'd have a situation where one client who doesn't own the module would end up on the old Stennis whereas a second client who does own the module would end up on the new one… except those two different carriers are the same unit. For both clients, the “other guy” will look like they're not behaving correctly since on their end, they're move around on and interacting with different structures. Walls, catapults, deck limits, placement of static objects — none of it would be the same on both clients, and who knows what he server will go by when calculating collisions and… well… the lack thereof.

 

On your screen, you have the fancy new carrier and room to spare as you try to turn around on the deck… but the server decides that no, your nose wheel is actually dangling off the edge right now. On your screen, you're perfectly lined up for a hookup, but the server thinks that the catapult is actually 2m to your left, so you have to grope around in the dark before you get hooked up to what looks like thin air.

 

The only way to avoid that is to do what they said they'll do: Newmitzes use their own units and model; old Stennisses their own units and models; everything looks the same for everyone because they're two separate entities, and non-owners simply can't interact with the new units. But the collisions and interaction points and relative placement positions would be properly synced for everyone involved. But this also means that old units will remain old units; new units have to be added manually — no automatic replacement.

 

the alternative would be having two carriers ? or just the old carrier?

Yes. The current solution proposed by the devs in the discussions on how the supercarrier would work in MP is that you have the two side by side: old Stennis for non-owners; Newmitzes for owners, which can obviously result in there being two different Stennises at once. That's not particularly new or strange, however — it's how you have to do it anyway at the moment since the current carriers are severely limited in how many spawns they support. If you want to offer numerous client spawn points for numerous different aircraft, you just have to liberally sprinkle the map with multiple Stennisses anyway. Adding another one to handle the supercarrier owners won't be all that odd.

[zcaa0g]

I would hope we wouldn't have 2 Stennis carriers if we buy this. They have said when you buy the new A-10 module update it will replace the existing one. I would hope... I do hope the same goes for the current Stennis.

 

 

Are you the very same LASooner that posts on DirtBurglars? Regardless, Boomer Sooner! :)

[LASooner]

Are you the very same LASooner that posts on DirtBurglars? Regardless, Boomer Sooner! :)

 

The same.

[Horns]

OP's question seemed pretty straightforward, so I'm surprised we haven't had an official answer yet. This was an inevitable question and I would think ED would have a prepared answer, even if it was to tell us their aspirational goal and maybe how they are working through it.

 

I don't make or modify missions nor do I play multiplayer, so I knew I was rolling the dice when I bought the supercarrier module and I'm fine whether it will work with current content or not. However, other customers will search for an answer to this question and wind up looking at this thread, so in my opinion it would be best to have an explicit, official answer to greet those people whenever such an answer becomes available.

[Viking 1-1]

Even if it doesn't work with the old missions, who cares?

 

I mean we had plenty of time with the "old" carrier, and now we are about to step in a new area. And to be honest: I can't think of any Hornet or Tomcat pilot, that doesn't want the new carrier. I mean we love carrier ops, so why don't step up to the next level?

 

This will be a great experience and within the blink of an eye our cool guys that create our missions will support us with new, amazing missions.