Supercarrier Development Progress and F-14 Carrier issue

[TomcatBall]

Hello there,

i just read the newsletter from ED, and I am hyped about the Carrier improvement. I can't wait to see that in action. But my question here is, will this new stuff work with the HeatBlur F-14 Module? I ask because I have some issues:

I started with the F-18 module and did some carrier landings and when I was on speed I was able to catch 3 wire. Since I fly with the F-14 module, the carrier module doesn't seem to be compatible with the tomcat. 

Some examples happen to me:

I am on speed, TomcatBall, then he says "you're too slow" or "you are too high" and to catch the 3 wire is like 1:100. I strongly believe, that the carrier is not 100% compatible with the F-14. If so, then please ED, don't ruin the F-14 legendary module, make it compatible for the F-14 too. I hope the guys from the parking location on the deck will recognize the F-14 correctly.

Great News.

Thank you ED 

[TomcatBall]

As you can see here, I was right: 

 

[rob10]

No one doubted you were right, F-14 issues with LSO have been reported multiple times.

[Ahogephilia]

Combined arms was Abandoned project,

and Supercarrier seems to be the project that be abandon 3rd party.

 

 

[TomcatBall]

If so, then I have to go back to the F-18. At least a new 3D model is in work.

[MAXsenna]

On 9/9/2023 at 8:25 PM, TomcatBall said:

At least a new 3D model is in work.

For what? I'm just curious.  

[Silver_Dragon]

On 9/9/2023 at 7:10 PM, Ahogephilia said:

Combined arms was Abandoned project,

and Supercarrier seems to be the project that be abandon 3rd party.

 

 

Can explain supercarrier as ED continue on develop with the ready briefing room, CAG room and plane directors / Brown on carrier crew?

Quote

 

Supercarrier

Development Progress

We continue to add the logic and animations that govern how aircraft are directed from a parking location to a catapult and how aircraft are directed out of the landing area after recovering. This includes new yellow shirt plane directors and brown shirt plane captains. Aircraft will be handed off between multiple plane directors to reach their assigned catapults with realistic animations.  Closed Beta Testing of this is on-going. This is a complex and time consuming task to account for a myriad of conditions that could “break” the logic. Thank you for your patience as we strive to complete this new feature soon.

 

Quote

Quote

Supercarrier

Development Progress

Hero5.png

The Supercarrier has been receiving a lot of work behind the scenes. This can be divided into the following features:

Ready Room and PRIFLY (airboss deck). Both views will provide new functionality never seen before in a DCS product. To complete this, we will first need to release the Vulkan API into DCS. 

Both rooms will be a 3D environment that support VR and Voice Chat that allows you to:

Ready Room

Review your mission brief and set up your aircraft.
View various cameras around the deck.
Chat with other players.
Review the mission map.
Live sounds from “the roof”.
PRIFLY

View the deck below you.
Direct the carrier’s heading and speed with wind indications (permission controls available for network play).
Control deck lighting.
View PLAT CAM.
View plotting map.
New Plane Directors and Captains. The next big step is to add plane captains next to the aircraft that pass the pilot to a series of plane directors (yellow shirts) that will route the aircraft from its parking spot to the assigned catapult. Upon landing, yellow shirts will direct the aircraft from the landing box to its assigned parking location or back to a catapult.

We truly hope you enjoyed this update on our plans for 2023, we look forward to making them a reality. Thank you again for your passion and support, 

 

 

 

[NineLine]

On 9/9/2023 at 11:10 AM, Ahogephilia said:

Combined arms was Abandoned project,

and Supercarrier seems to be the project that be abandon 3rd party.

 

 

I'm sorry, neither are abandoned. CA is feature complete and recieved fixes from time to time as well as new units to control etc.

The Supercarrier module is getting major feature work done and we just shared info on some of this recently in the newsletter. 

You can be frustrated by development speed I understand this but please do not make false statements when we just shared an update on progress recently.

Thanks 

 

On 9/8/2023 at 10:02 AM, TomcatBall said:

Hello there,

i just read the newsletter from ED, and I am hyped about the Carrier improvement. I can't wait to see that in action. But my question here is, will this new stuff work with the HeatBlur F-14 Module? I ask because I have some issues:

I started with the F-18 module and did some carrier landings and when I was on speed I was able to catch 3 wire. Since I fly with the F-14 module, the carrier module doesn't seem to be compatible with the tomcat. 

Some examples happen to me:

I am on speed, TomcatBall, then he says "you're too slow" or "you are too high" and to catch the 3 wire is like 1:100. I strongly believe, that the carrier is not 100% compatible with the F-14. If so, then please ED, don't ruin the F-14 legendary module, make it compatible for the F-14 too. I hope the guys from the parking location on the deck will recognize the F-14 correctly.

Great News.

Thank you ED 

We are working through some issues with the F-14 along with Heatblur, but as it's their module they need to be involved and have a full plate as well.

As for new features it might be best to ask them what they plan to do or if they plan on supporting new features. Our focus will be first on the F/A-18C and as above work with Heatblur may be needed for F-14 support.

[Demiurgo]

19 hours ago, NineLine said:

I'm sorry, neither are abandoned. CA is feature complete and recieved fixes from time to time as well as new units to control etc.

The Supercarrier module is getting major feature work done and we just shared info on some of this recently in the newsletter. 

You can be frustrated by development speed I understand this but please do not make false statements when we just shared an update on progress recently.

Thanks 

 

We are working through some issues with the F-14 along with Heatblur, but as it's their module they need to be involved and have a full plate as well.

As for new features it might be best to ask them what they plan to do or if they plan on supporting new features. Our focus will be first on the F/A-18C and as above work with Heatblur may be needed for F-14 support.

This is weird business practice. You are offering a product (SC) and announcing features that may or may not work with third party modules? We are not talking about an unofficial mod but a thing you earn money for. Also you disrupt the ecosystem and force people to change behavior to use different products BOUGHT from you like configs (happened with the burble).

Honestly you should review this.

[TomcatBall]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Demiurgo:

This is weird business practice. You are offering a product (SC) and announcing features that may or may not work with third party modules? We are not talking about an unofficial mod but a thing you earn money for. Also you disrupt the ecosystem and force people to change behavior to use different products BOUGHT from you like configs (happened with the burble).

Honestly you should review this.

I didn't see it that way, but I have to admit, you're right... absolutely....

[NineLine]

18 hours ago, Demiurgo said:

This is weird business practice. You are offering a product (SC) and announcing features that may or may not work with third party modules? We are not talking about an unofficial mod but a thing you earn money for. Also you disrupt the ecosystem and force people to change behavior to use different products BOUGHT from you like configs (happened with the burble).

Honestly you should review this.

It's up to the 3rd Party if they want to support these features. It requires them to add or update any of these features. As they have their own carrier now they might only want to support that. We do not have 100% access to their modules so if anything needs to be done on their end we rely on them. While new features are developed we must concentrate on the module we have full access to and add beyond that afterwards. 

We are full willing to make the F-14 work with it if its in HBs development plans to do so, this is why I suggested asking them, they are more aware of their plans than I am, and if they have discussed or started working on this. 

[Demiurgo]

34 minutes ago, NineLine said:

It's up to the 3rd Party if they want to support these features. It requires them to add or update any of these features. As they have their own carrier now they might only want to support that. We do not have 100% access to their modules so if anything needs to be done on their end we rely on them. While new features are developed we must concentrate on the module we have full access to and add beyond that afterwards. 

We are full willing to make the F-14 work with it if its in HBs development plans to do so, this is why I suggested asking them, they are more aware of their plans than I am, and if they have discussed or started working on this. 

HI. Where does it say in https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/other/supercarrier/ that features of the SC ONLY ARE CONFIRMED for ED's OWN MODULES?

You don´t get that also here https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/planes/hornet/ and https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/planes/tomcat/

Is not something I should ask your third party devs....it's something you should declare by yourself.

I know that DCS has become a really complicated product and it's going to get worse because you just keep adding modules without ever finishing things in most of the cases but you should try to clarify things like this.

Things like double burble, datalink that worked for some but not for others, effects that you see in one plane but not in others, different radar implementations, etc are making the experience really uneven and in many cases leading to wrongful purchases that probably happen to people like OP.

Thanks

[NineLine]

1 hour ago, Demiurgo said:

HI. Where does it say in https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/other/supercarrier/ that features of the SC ONLY ARE CONFIRMED for ED's OWN MODULES?

You don´t get that also here https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/planes/hornet/ and https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/planes/tomcat/

Is not something I should ask your third party devs....it's something you should declare by yourself.

I know that DCS has become a really complicated product and it's going to get worse because you just keep adding modules without ever finishing things in most of the cases but you should try to clarify things like this.

Things like double burble, datalink that worked for some but not for others, effects that you see in one plane but not in others, different radar implementations, etc are making the experience really uneven and in many cases leading to wrongful purchases that probably happen to people like OP.

Thanks

You are just being argumentative now, I told you how these new features develop. They start with our modules and move to 3rd Party later as time allows. Maybe it would have been better not to answer at all if you are going to look so negatively towards normal development plans and suggestions to ask 3rd Parties about their development plans. Thanks.

[Demiurgo]

20 minutes ago, NineLine said:

You are just being argumentative now, I told you how these new features develop. They start with our modules and move to 3rd Party later as time allows. Maybe it would have been better not to answer at all if you are going to look so negatively towards normal development plans and suggestions to ask 3rd Parties about their development plans. Thanks.

Believe me, I am not being argumentative and is not a gotcha thing. I strongly suggest you modify this because is no good for consumers. For instance.....F15E radar can catch normal traffic but other radars can't. This difference in experience is not good. Do you agree on that? Same with Maverick boresighting in the F16.

If you continue this trend (that seems to be accelerating) experience is going to suffer.

[NineLine]

50 minutes ago, Demiurgo said:

Believe me, I am not being argumentative and is not a gotcha thing. I strongly suggest you modify this because is no good for consumers. For instance.....F15E radar can catch normal traffic but other radars can't. This difference in experience is not good. Do you agree on that? Same with Maverick boresighting in the F16.

If you continue this trend (that seems to be accelerating) experience is going to suffer.

No, you are mixing many things, and as I stated, I never said it would not be supported with the F-14, I said that it would most likely require help with Heatblur as it's their module. 

[Demiurgo]

25 minutes ago, NineLine said:

No, you are mixing many things, and as I stated, I never said it would not be supported with the F-14, I said that it would most likely require help with Heatblur as it's their module. 

I am mixing nothing but ok. From my first comment in this thread I mentioned the same but you are deflecting. You are saying that one thing here but before you said "It's up to the 3rd Party if they want to support these features". I hope you see the conflict from this point of view.

But generally, my main point is: you are having modules that, for reasons, operate differently with your assets and IT'S NOT INFORMED properly. That's something YOU need to fix instead sending us to talk to third party. Period.

[NineLine]

2 hours ago, Demiurgo said:

I am mixing nothing but ok. From my first comment in this thread I mentioned the same but you are deflecting. You are saying that one thing here but before you said "It's up to the 3rd Party if they want to support these features". I hope you see the conflict from this point of view.

But generally, my main point is: you are having modules that, for reasons, operate differently with your assets and IT'S NOT INFORMED properly. That's something YOU need to fix instead sending us to talk to third party. Period.

Thanks for the feedback, but I have answered you already. 

[Mike Force Team]

Time to lock this forum post.

Mike Force Team

[draconus]

14 hours ago, NineLine said:

It's up to the 3rd Party if they want to support these features. It requires them to add or update any of these features. As they have their own carrier now they might only want to support that. We do not have 100% access to their modules so if anything needs to be done on their end we rely on them. While new features are developed we must concentrate on the module we have full access to and add beyond that afterwards. 

We are full willing to make the F-14 work with it if its in HBs development plans to do so, this is why I suggested asking them, they are more aware of their plans than I am, and if they have discussed or started working on this. 

@IronMike Can you please shed some light on the HB plans to fix existing problems (like F-14A not being recognized properly by SC crew and wrong ball call, F-14 getting wrong LSO calls, wrong FLOLS/meatball position, bad/improper trap grades) and to implement new SC planned features (yellow directors and brown shirts interaction)?

[NineLine]

Dear all, I just heard from our testing lead that director routing is being done with the F-14 in mind as well. So as it stands now this should work with the F-14 upon release, another promising note is that it fixes some issues with blocked CATs as well.

Thanks

[Ahogephilia]

Honestly, I'm losing hope in DCS.
For example, we've had helicopters like UH-1 for 10 years now, and we still rely on userscript (CLTD) for helicopter transportation. JTAC-FAC is incomplete and most players are using autolase script. Also, can we rescue a pilot or crew without CSAR script?

ED is always like this, they showcase some features at launch and then don't develope them.

 

Edited September 21, 2023 by Ahogephilia

[IronMike]

17 hours ago, NineLine said:

Dear all, I just heard from our testing lead that director routing is being done with the F-14 in mind as well. So as it stands now this should work with the F-14 upon release, another promising note is that it fixes some issues with blocked CATs as well.

Thanks

Thank you @NineLine - to add to this both sides are also aware of (and working on) all the other outstanding issues regarding the Tomcat - which have been tracked on both sides.

To everyone, rest assured that both parties are committed to bring a complete SC experience with the F-14. Thank you for your very kind patience.

[IronMike]

11 hours ago, Ahogephilia said:

Honestly, I'm losing hope in DCS.
For example, we've had helicopters like UH-1 for 10 years now, and we still rely on userscript (CLTD) for helicopter transportation. JTAC-FAC is incomplete and most players are using autolase script. Also, can we rescue a pilot or crew without CSAR script?

ED is always like this, they showcase some features at launch and then don't develope them.

 

 

I really get the frustration that comes with the reality of development, but at the same time I would like to carefully add that this kind of assessment is a bit on the unfair side. I can only tell you from our own experience that ED is tirelessly working on improving DCS, and the scope has gotten as big as we all wished for and continue to wish for, and more and more features need to be developed as the entire ground continues to shift, so that we all can continue to have a great, contemporary simming experience. I see simming like yourself, and I am sure so does ED, where additional features like CSAR, etc add a ton of fun and immersion, but the bottom line remains that the Huey is a rock solid simulation of this fine helicopter, developed at a time where the technology we have at our disposal now was still in the making in parts.

There are few games that survived this long, without remaining as they were 10 or 20 years ago, that continue to improve, while in the meantime tons of new features and improvements have been added by ED, ever growing and evolving the DCS universe, from weather to multithreading to small improvements all across the board and so many more still to come. While I absolutely do not intend to speak for ED, I can assure you that it is not easy to just add what everyone wants, with so many different wishes. And most importantly, if I may kindly remind: this is not the sub forum and place to discuss non-SC related issues, while I am sure that ED will be happy to hear your feedback.

Personally, if you allow me, I would just like to add that we're all in it for the long haul, that we want to fly in DCS many years from now, and that I think a very bright future lies ahead for all of us. I remember still how mind blown I was when I first started up LOMAC. If I started up DCS today for the first time, in comparison, I think someone would have to pick me up from the floor, and I ofc do not mean that as self praise, but as praise for ED. They truly deserve it, and we're all quick to forget, when this or that thing we want the most still hasn't happened, while missing the bigger picture.

Thank you for your kind understanding, and I truly hope that you don't lose yours and stay with us for many years to come.

Edited September 21, 2023 by IronMike

[TomcatBall]

I get frustrated too, but as a gamer who spent many years playing and following development of many games, i know how complicated and long term it can become. Like Star Citizen, they promise you so much, but they just can't deliver. ED have +100 workers, and they are doing in my opinion great work. I mean, just look the graphics. They have so much tasks to accomplish, just look at the roadmap. I need hours for making one wallpaper, imagine how much they need to implement new systems. We, including me often think, they have a magic stick and they just publish it.

Everything have its own time and DCS is about high fidelity aircraft Sim. This is just my picture how I see this.

[MAXsenna]

3 hours ago, IronMike said:

If I started up DCS today for the first time, in comparison, I think someone would have to pick me up from the floor, and I ofc do not mean that as self praise, but as praise for ED. They truly deserve it, and we're all quick to forget, when this or that thing we want the most still hasn't happened, while missing the bigger picture.

Very true! If one needs reminders, just watch some five year old content on YouTube, and then start up the game today!