Standalone Kuznetsov

[Rudel_chw]

20 minutes ago, Hinkey said:

The original Kuznetsov and the very outdated Carl Vinson reflect poorly on the rest of the great work being done in DCS and should probably be deprecated/pulled.

 

 ... that would break a lot of my older missions, for no real benefit ... if you don't want to use the old Kuznetsov, just dont use it and purchase the 2017 version, no need to delete it from the Sim.

[Hinkey]

3 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

 ... that would break a lot of my older missions, for no real benefit ...

Fair point. Agreed. Still feel like the Stennis/Kuznetsov 2017 level of models are a better fit for baseline DCS considering the very high quality of current modules. Including the 2017 and deprecating the the old Kuznetsov (while keeping it available for mission builders) would help address some of the very uneven model quality developing in the sim. Also, please tell me you don't have a bunch of missions featuring the Carl Vinson

[diveplane]

just like US carrier ,, make the Russian carrier a new module animated crews, deck lighting etc.. gladly pay for it

[Rudel_chw]

On 7/14/2021 at 11:30 PM, Hinkey said:

 Still feel like the Stennis/Kuznetsov 2017 level of models are a better fit for baseline DCS considering the very high quality of current modules.

 

Not sure if I understood you correctly .. you want the SC Kuznetsov 2017 to be available for free?  

 

On 7/14/2021 at 11:30 PM, Hinkey said:

... please tell me you don't have a bunch of missions featuring the Carl Vinson ..

 

No, in fact none ... but I do have several missions with the Kuznetsov & Su-33

[Hinkey]

On 11/20/2021 at 11:26 AM, Rudel_chw said:

you want the SC Kuznetsov 2017 to be available for free?

Yep. Free, included, the baseline quality standard for the sim; however you want to characterize it.

[Rudel_chw]

30 minutes ago, Hinkey said:

Yep. Free, included, the baseline quality standard for the sim; however you want to characterize it.

 

And the people who paid for it? .. how would they feel about ED giving away an asset they had to paid for?

And that baseline quality standard is impossible to achieve, this is a Sim that came to the market over 10 years ago, you want the developers to re-do their assets every few years for free?

I paid for the updated A-10C II, even tough I already owned the original A-10C because for me, having flyed it since 2013, it was a price that I had fully amortized over that time .. I didn't saw anything wrong with having to pay for its update.

[Hinkey]

2 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

And the people who paid for it? .. how would they feel about ED giving away an asset they had to paid for?

Agreed. Now that it was included in a paid module it would be pointlessly disruptive to carve it out and give it away.

2 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

And that baseline quality standard is impossible to achieve, this is a Sim that came to the market over 10 years ago, you want the developers to re-do their assets every few years for free?

A side effect of having made such impressive quality improvements in the sim over the last 10 years is that some assets have been left behind. Yes, I do think that assets will occasionally need to be updated to fit the advancing quality of the sim. ED made the business decision not to charge for the baseline sim so some of those improvements will necessarily be for "free". For example the current S-3 and the SH-60 need updating, The quality difference between them and modern assets is jarring. They actually detract from the experience when placed on deck.

2 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

I paid for the updated A-10C II, even tough I already owned the original A-10C because for me, having flyed it since 2013, it was a price that I had fully amortized over that time .. I didn't saw anything wrong with having to pay for its update.

You and me both brother. I'm not advocating for free stuff. What I am advocating for is a very high quality sim.

 

[Northstar98]

16 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

And the people who paid for it? .. how would they feel about ED giving away an asset they had to paid for?

To be honest, when said paid asset has elements that look like this:

When it's supposed to look like this (though here the covers on the IR/EO system are closed, see this image for a picture of them open):

And then when you compare it to the free Stennis or Forrestal, or hell even the Tunguska (fires a practically identical missile from practically identical tubes), then having it be a paid asset does leave somewhat of a sour taste in my mouth.

It's not just that either: there are areas that you can see straight through the model, and RADARs that undergo a metamorphasis as they turn, and this is before we talk about any of the other issues that are a blight on DCS' naval environment as a whole.

I wasn't expecting it to be up to the same standard as the Nimitz-Roosevelt carriers we got with SC (after all, no FF modules), but I'd at least expect it to be on par with other free assets, but in some areas it definitely falls short.

16 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

And that baseline quality standard is impossible to achieve, this is a Sim that came to the market over 10 years ago, you want the developers to re-do their assets every few years for free?

This simply isn't the case, and they really shouldn't need to redo their assets every 3 years, once stuff has been brought up to the same standard, then unless DCS radically changes its graphics engine to the point where existing models are incompatible (which sounds very unlikely), it should never need to be redone.

And the only improvements you could make to some of these new models is stuff that requires a platform upgrade to begin with, take the 2P25 and 1S91 of the 2K12(M3?)/SA-6b, beyond things like having a proper suspension model and graphical representation of damage (beyond alive and destroyed), there's nothing else you could do to improve these models while providing even a remote benefit to doing so. 

16 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

I paid for the updated A-10C II, even tough I already owned the original A-10C because for me, having flyed it since 2013, it was a price that I had fully amortized over that time .. I didn't saw anything wrong with having to pay for its update.

Agreed and I'm definitely not opposed to having a paid Kuznetsov, or having paid upgrades in general, but if it is a paid asset, I'd expect it to be at least up to the standard set by the free Stennis and other free assets, but currently, in some areas, it definitely falls short.

I'm also not opposed to having paid for asset packs, but to please the MP crowd (even if I don't play it), how these assets should work is that to non-owners they're spawnable in the ME and visible at least in multiplayer (even for a lower level of detail) to non-owners but none of their more advanced features are available.

Edited November 23, 2021 by Northstar98
posted a picture of Kortik-M when I think the Kuznetsov as depicted in DCS uses the baseline Kortik

[Mad_Shell]

I don't know if you guys are aware but the Kuznetsov 2017 is now part of the free assets (latest open beta, but no idea since when it's available in the free assets)...

Edited November 23, 2021 by Mad_Shell

[Dragon1-1]

IMO, they should make a full SC-level Kuznetsov for those who bought SC. Admittedly, there isn't much to fly from it right now, but if a full fidelity Su-33 ever becomes a thing (and it's not such a fanciful idea, it's basically a navalized Su-27S, which is supposedly possible), then there would be. 

[Hinkey]

7 hours ago, Mad_Shell said:

I don't know if you guys are aware but the Kuznetsov 2017 is now part of the free assets (latest open beta, but no idea since when it's available in the free assets)...

 

Great. Also hilarious given the discussion above. Does anyone know if the same multiplayer restrictions apply to Kuznetsov 2017 that apply to the American Supercarriers:  "...if you do not own the Supercarrier module, you will not be able to spawn on the deck to takeoff or catch an arresting wire to land." I can't check because it's already installed.

[draconus]

10 hours ago, Mad_Shell said:

I don't know if you guys are aware but the Kuznetsov 2017 is now part of the free assets (latest open beta, but no idea since when it's available in the free assets)...

You mean that anyone can place one in a mission? It was always like that. Try to start Su-33 from the Kuznetsov 2017.

@Hinkey you can test it by disabling SC in module manager.

[IcedVenom]

So can ED comment on this matter I really want Kuznetsov but won't pay for SC

[Silver_Dragon]

So can ED comment on this matter I really want Kuznetsov but won't pay for SC

ED has no talking none about them and has none plans.

Enviado desde mi RNE-L21 mediante Tapatalk