Jump to content

How to use the Kuznetzov without DCS:Supercarrier?


CTR

Recommended Posts

Currently Su-33 pilots can use the Kuznetzov without limitations.

Will that change with the DCS:Supercarrier module?

Do I have to buy the module to fly carrier mission on the Su-33?

I mean russia only have one carrier, so there is no alternative, like for the US carriers.

 

Okay so when I have to buy the module then I want a DCS:Tug and some replacement arresting wires included. Not to forget some "Без сварки!" stickers.


Edited by CTR

[sigpic][/sigpic]



Flanker driver since 1996

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL... the kuz should come with a tug and broken cables.. i mean we do seek realism. Perhaps it had a secret power to sink drydocks and randomly catch fire while in port too.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IDK. Makes some sense to offer new kuz to su33 owners for some low low price too.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm under the impression that the Kuznetsov is only seeing a cosmetic update? I hope it gets better spawn locations as well but it would be nice to see that one being a free upgrade so people who only want to fly the Su-33 aren't forced into buying a module they don't want/need. I say that as someone who does plan to buy the super carrier though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least it teamkilled almost 10 times less planes than Nimitz

 

LOL... Well it did have the anti-skid deck I suppose.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm under the impression that the Kuznetsov is only seeing a cosmetic update? I hope it gets better spawn locations as well but it would be nice to see that one being a free upgrade so people who only want to fly the Su-33 aren't forced into buying a module they don't want/need. I say that as someone who does plan to buy the super carrier though.

 

I'm sure ED will post pics and details. I get the logic of bundling it with the other stuff, but I also see other folks points about just wanting the Kuz. But I really think I want to stay away from "micro-transactions" in DCS. Pay 8 dollars for the new Kuz, and 5 for the Burke, and for just 9.99 you too can grow a big mustachio and lob scuds at airbases. Etc.. So if I have to pay 30-40 bucks for a bunch of ships, then fine.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure ED will post pics and details. I get the logic of bundling it with the other stuff, but I also see other folks points about just wanting the Kuz. But I really think I want to stay away from "micro-transactions" in DCS. Pay 8 dollars for the new Kuz, and 5 for the Burke, and for just 9.99 you too can grow a big mustachio and lob scuds at airbases. Etc.. So if I have to pay 30-40 bucks for a bunch of ships, then fine.

 

I don't mind the classy burke being bundled. I just imagine that if they're are players out there who only have the Su-33 they are probably more budget minded and will have a hard time justifying buying the whole module just for a new Kuz. So that is a micro transaction I wouldn't mind seeing. Charge em 10 dollars or so for it and call it good.

 

P.S. I'm working on a good mustache already. No DLC required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah but then it turns into everything is going to be some sort of microtransaction because dude only wants units A and F but not C and D or whatever. I don't really want ED to go down that road.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion the new Kuz should be free for everyone in DCS as it wont have the deck animations and comms of the US carriers. Carriers are a BASIC feature in DCS, locking them behind a paywall isn't a good idea in the long run. Keeping old and outdated models as the free alternative is just poor practice in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carriers are a BASIC feature in DCS, locking them behind a paywall isn't a good idea in the long run.

 

You already get the "basic"kuznetsov for free. If you want something better, it's only fair to pay for it. I'm sure ED put a lot of work into the new Kuznetsov, even if it's "only" a visual model. Don't you think they deserve more then a thank you on the public forums for that? Giving new things away for free isn't a good idea in the long run either.

I do think that it should be bundled with the Su-33 rather than the supercarriers though. It really makes no sense for anyone else to have it IMO.

i5-8600k @4.9Ghz, 2080ti , 32GB@2666Mhz, 512GB SSD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You already get the "basic"kuznetsov for free. If you want something better, it's only fair to pay for it. I'm sure ED put a lot of work into the new Kuznetsov, even if it's "only" a visual model. Don't you think they deserve more then a thank you on the public forums for that? Giving new things away for free isn't a good idea in the long run either.

I do think that it should be bundled with the Su-33 rather than the supercarriers though. It really makes no sense for anyone else to have it IMO.

 

Yeah but why have two versions (an old and new model) in DCS? You'll end up having two Kuznetsovs on a MP server - one for people who dont own the carrier module and one for the ones who do. Sorry but that's nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone's arguments here are reasonable. I personally think it's fair for ED to charge money for the Supercarrier module. Doesn't mean I'm buying it, but it's cool with me. I'm sure those that are willing to pay money specifically for a place to take off and land will love it. I'll only buy it if it's cheap :)

 

On the other hand, it looks like they're spending a whole lot of time putting together new modules, instead of actually FINISHING what's already there! How long has the F/A-18 been in 'early release' (unfinished?)

How long will the F-16 be in early release?

What about the new WW2 damage models?

New, realistic weather and clouds?

 

Not to mention the talk about implementing Vulkan API a long time ago. What became of that?

 

I'd prefer it if they'd finish the existing content and work on the core sim engine now, rather than releasing a bunch of new stuff that isn't gonna be finished for years! One of the great things about DCS is the huge variety of aircraft modules. Now finish them! :)

 

AD


Edited by Aluminum Donkey

Kit:

B550 Aorus Elite AX V2, Ryzen 7 5800X w/ Thermalright Phantom Spirit 120 SE, 2 x 16GB Kingston Fury DDR4 @3600MHz C16, Gigabyte RTX 3070 Windforce 8GB, EVGA SuperNova 750 G2 PSU, HP Omen 32" 2560x1440, Thrustmaster Cougar HOTAS fitted with Leo Bodnar's BU0836A controller.

--Flying is the art of throwing yourself at the ground, and having all the rules and regulations get in the way!

If man was meant to fly, he would have been born with a lot more money!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Proper games make free updates and don't ask money to get access to one ship

Those "proper games" have a different business model and a lot better paying user to software complexity ratio then DCS.

 

I'm also not a big fan of their decision to bundle the kuznetsov with the SC, but then again, they do need to get their return on investment. If they don't, DCS is gonna die sooner or later.

 

 

Old Il-2 or "great battles" are a good example of great popular games without EA games syndrome.

Why don't you fire up "good Old Il-2" and compare its graphics, physics and system depth to even the TF-51? The mindblowing difference does not only come from better hardware but from A LOT MORE WORK put into flightsims today than 15 years ago. Like it or not, without EA we would be playing Lock-on level aircraft or War Thunder. Some people apparently have no idea how complex and time consuming the development of a DCS level aircraft is and while I see how EA is starting to annoy people, it will be worth it in the end IMO. But perhaps I'm wrong, looking at all the other high fidelity flight sims around like fighters ops, seveng f-18 and likewise...


Edited by sLYFa

i5-8600k @4.9Ghz, 2080ti , 32GB@2666Mhz, 512GB SSD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to mention the talk about implementing Vulkan API a long time ago. What became of that?

 

It's in the works, as per latest news letter.

 

On the other hand, it looks like they're spending a whole lot of time putting together new modules, instead of actually FINISHING what's already there! How long has the F/A-18 been in 'early release' (unfinished?)

How long will the F-16 be in early release?

What about the new WW2 damage models?

New, realistic weather and clouds?

 

I'd prefer it if they'd finish the existing content and work on the core sim engine now, rather than releasing a bunch of new stuff that isn't gonna be finished for years! One of the great things about DCS is the huge variety of aircraft modules. Now finish them! :)

 

AD

 

I think you're demonstrating a lack of long term thinking. Just look how far they've come in the last 10 years.

 

While I certainly don't like the way modules have been released in the past couple of years, I'm not going to complain either, because I recognise it as a necessity. No-one gets into this genre to make their fortune; they're doing what they're doing to keep the lights on. If they don't, they won't survive long enough to make the core improvements we all desire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...