Potential follow enhancements to the supercarrier deck handling update for Nov 2024

[Mr_sukebe]

I watched Wag's video about the new deck handlers yesterday.  That looks seriously cool, can't wait to try it.

 

There was just one point that felt a bit jarring, i.e. the 180 degree teleport at the end of the video.  Bearing in mind how awesome the rest way, it felt a bit out of place.

My is that at some point it'll be possible to add the capability for deck crew to use one of the deck tractors to turn the aircraft around.  I'm hoping that it might be a set of development down the line.  Clearly it's hardy a priority item, but would be ace.

[ghashpl]

I would like that 180' turn would be player based action (could be the same button as "salut")

Also - I would like to the marshal handoff to another one would not be just one hand wave, but last for 3 seconds? Somebody might miss that the marshal is sending us to another one.

[buceador]

12 minutes ago, ghashpl said:

I would like to the marshal handoff to another one would not be just one hand wave

On this topic, I'm guessing / hoping that the icon floating above the active marshal can be turned off? @BIGNEWY ?

[Esac_mirmidon]

Yes.

Is described in the video 

[BIGNEWY]

17 minutes ago, buceador said:

On this topic, I'm guessing / hoping that the icon floating above the active marshal can be turned off? @BIGNEWY ?

Yes you can see the options in Wags video

[draconus]

On 11/18/2024 at 9:55 AM, Mr_sukebe said:

My is that at some point it'll be possible to add the capability for deck crew to use one of the deck tractors to turn the aircraft around.  I'm hoping that it might be a set of development down the line.  Clearly it's hardy a priority item, but would be ace.

For now the Wags' answer is:

Quote

A push back would involve gathering deck crew from the general area around the jet, all lined up on different parts of the jet with correct collision and physics, pushing animations in unison, and not interfering with other animations and functions. Regarding the automatic rotation, this is a needed gameplay concession, for now, based on avoiding collisions with nearby aircraft and minimizing time in the landing area when parking in the stern. We are investigating a more elegant solution.

but I don't ask for a tow tractor (especially since it's not realistic to keep the pilot in cockpit when doing it) nor manual pushback (which is rare, rather than SOP). Just don't magically rotate me when not needed.

I understand sims sometimes have to take shorcuts but at least keep the unrealistic features to a minimum and make them optional wherever possible. Like currently I can ask for kinda realistic refueling and avoid unbelievable fast rearming or totally unrealistic repairs.

I made a similar request:

[Hoirtel]

I understand people's issues with the teleporting, it may be jarring but I am not sure there are other options. Tractor tows and manual push backs would be a huge amount of work for what is at best a tiny part of the game. Where does it stop? Should weapons be loaded by ordinance guys? Should the purple guys come and do refuel?

I think it may be one of those things that we get used to like the instantly appearing weapons and fuel. Just accept that this is what it is. 

I am sure that once it's out in the wild there will be refinements based on feedback.

[Mr_sukebe]

57 minutes ago, Hoirtel said:

I understand people's issues with the teleporting, it may be jarring but I am not sure there are other options. Tractor tows and manual push backs would be a huge amount of work for what is at best a tiny part of the game. Where does it stop? Should weapons be loaded by ordinance guys? Should the purple guys come and do refuel?

I think it may be one of those things that we get used to like the instantly appearing weapons and fuel. Just accept that this is what it is. 

I am sure that once it's out in the wild there will be refinements based on feedback.

agreed, it’s a “nice to have”, but should be a LONG way down the priority list

[draconus]

3 hours ago, Hoirtel said:

I understand people's issues with the teleporting, it may be jarring but I am not sure there are other options.

There is very easy option to not do any rotation/teleporting at all unless turned on in the options or requested by player.

Let me park and do my shutdown to end my mission - no harm in that, esp. in SP. This is realistic SOP.

[HILOK]

15 minutes ago, draconus said:

There is very easy option to not do any rotation/teleporting at all unless turned on in the options or requested by player.

Let me park and do my shutdown to end my mission - no harm in that, esp. in SP. This is realistic SOP.

exactly my feelings 

[Draken35]

1 hour ago, draconus said:

There is very easy option to not do any rotation/teleporting at all unless turned on in the options or requested by player.

Let me park and do my shutdown to end my mission - no harm in that, esp. in SP. This is realistic SOP.

"Requested by player" gets my vote. It shouldn't be too hard to add an option to the Ground Crew menu to do this.

[PLUTON]

+1

[MAXsenna]

I'll support you guys. Player choice is always the best solution!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Dangerzone]

We have CTRL+ALT+SHIFT+T to teleport back to a new parking spot. Given this, I think it would be best just to disable auto-rotate. Just leave the plane where it is, facing the direction it's facing and allow the player to use the feature already there to teleport to a new spot.

This wouldn't even require any new code. It would just require disabling/commenting out the code that does the 180 degree flip. 

I mean, yeah - it'd be nice to have the extra feature for the player to decide, popup menu, etc - but if that's going to be months or years away - I'd definitely be advocating for just disabling the 180 degree turn for now and have the player CAS-T it.

Edited November 20, 2024 by Dangerzone

[MadKreator]

I thought the directors were a nice touch, even thought I’m not much of a carrier ops guy. The fog off the carrier looked super cool. But then it got to the end and the teleporting started, I just had to literally face palm myself. I get the teleport to an entirely new free spot if necessary , but I 100% was expecting a pushback. Not even with the tractor, just the plane to move and at least simulate getting backed in. I’m no developer so I don’t understand if that is really that difficult to do, but imo that should have made the cut. The 180  or 90 degree teleport after stopping  is VERY cheesy… but the fog and directors ,

Edited November 21, 2024 by MadKreator

[Dangerzone]

54 minutes ago, MadKreator said:

 The 180  or 90 degree teleport after stopping  is VERY cheesy… but the fog and directors ,

Agreed. And my guess is ED know this, and probably planned a push back, but after spending 4 times the budget set for this feature to get to where it is, I think they drew a line in the sand and said "that's enough". Given the over budget of it, we're probably lucky to have what we have.

I do hope there is more room in the budget sometime in the future for a pushback (even if no tractor/deck crew - just moving the plane backwards on it's own). In the meantime, any requests we have for enhancements to this will have to be on the 'cheap' side - which is why I completely support the idea of just stopping when parked, and allow the user to then C+A+S+T.

[waterman]

Funny how users make excuses for ED .

Its no big deal animating the turn around , it was maybe beyond what they can do for now or thats going to be the next big upgrade when they work it out.

The DML Clone Declone Method i have been using for Railway Signals and to rotate locomotives on my turntables for over 2 years turns Aircraft around on the Carrier I just use a DML 36 Step 5 degree Sequencer and change the heading of each DML Clone Declone Cycle ! 

Waterman

Edited November 21, 2024 by waterman

[draconus]

1 hour ago, waterman said:

Its no big deal animating the turn around , it was maybe beyond what they can do for now or thats going to be the next big upgrade when they work it out.

It is a big deal if the place is tight and you have to care for collisions for different aircraft shapes and sizes, so I get that they were trying to avoid that (for now). But the AI can already get near the parking spot and do the pushback so the code is there. I'm not advocating the pushback for players though since the mission is over for the pilot anyway and he should not be sitting in the cockpit during tow operations.

Edited November 21, 2024 by draconus

[waterman]

I do actually agree with you just end the mission without the turn around. The mission is over anyway as you say.

Was just a fun experiment i did but not very much use for actual real time mission use.

cheers

waterman

 

[MadKreator]

9 hours ago, Dangerzone said:

Agreed. And my guess is ED know this, and probably planned a push back, but after spending 4 times the budget set for this feature to get to where it is, I think they drew a line in the sand and said "that's enough". Given the over budget of it, we're probably lucky to have what we have.

I do hope there is more room in the budget sometime in the future for a pushback (even if no tractor/deck crew - just moving the plane backwards on it's own). In the meantime, any requests we have for enhancements to this will have to be on the 'cheap' side - which is why I completely support the idea of just stopping when parked, and allow the user to then C+A+S+T.

I would tend to agree. End it right there at the final stop, or let the player choose to reset to a new spot if they plan to continue on. Or even just another pop-up message “ salute to return to available parking spot”. Either way they did accomplish a long awaited feature (directors). I also wonder how many players will even follow the full parking procedure. I’d bet the majority would still land on the deck and end the mission right there. (Purists excluded of course). Thats probably what I would do

[Dangerzone]

13 hours ago, draconus said:

It is a big deal if the place is tight and you have to care for collisions for different aircraft shapes and sizes, so I get that they were trying to avoid that (for now). But the AI can already get near the parking spot and do the pushback so the code is there. I'm not advocating the pushback for players though since the mission is over for the pilot anyway and he should not be sitting in the cockpit during tow operations.

I'll agree with your points, but with one exception. Your view is from a SP mindset, and doesn't take into account multiplayer 24/7 servers where players land, rearm and then take off again. For that reason I would advocate pushback - but I also understand that it serves fewer players than the rest of the directors functions so thus would again not be as high of a priority to implement. 

7 hours ago, MadKreator said:

I also wonder how many players will even follow the full parking procedure. I’d bet the majority would still land on the deck and end the mission right there. (Purists excluded of course). Thats probably what I would do

I find there's something satisfying about actually finishing off the parking. I've also been involved with online missions where it's great for everyone to come back to the ship, park, and get a screenshot of all the planes stacked up on the deck at the end of the mission (for those who make it ). I get that many probably won't use this part of the function, but darn glad it's in there for those of us who do.

[MadKreator]

2 hours ago, Dangerzone said:

I'll agree with your points, but with one exception. Your view is from a SP mindset, and doesn't take into account multiplayer 24/7 servers where players land, rearm and then take off again. For that reason I would advocate pushback - but I also understand that it serves fewer players than the rest of the directors functions so thus would again not be as high of a priority to implement. 

I find there's something satisfying about actually finishing off the parking. I've also been involved with online missions where it's great for everyone to come back to the ship, park, and get a screenshot of all the planes stacked up on the deck at the end of the mission (for those who make it ). I get that many probably won't use this part of the function, but darn glad it's in there for those of us who do.

Oh absolutely! Lots of views from different angles. I don’t usually have time even on MP for more than a single flight, but for sure the appeal is there for players that keep going, and especially squadrons that prefer full procedures. I should have kept my own use case out of it as I’m definitely on the outskirts of the player-base that wants, and will use these new additions Getting back on track, I would still like to see a pushback on the carrier even if I never actually make it that far. For the greater good!

 

[draconus]

10 hours ago, Dangerzone said:

I'll agree with your points, but with one exception. Your view is from a SP mindset, and doesn't take into account multiplayer 24/7 servers where players land, rearm and then take off again. For that reason I would advocate pushback - but I also understand that it serves fewer players than the rest of the directors functions so thus would again not be as high of a priority to implement. 

I find there's something satisfying about actually finishing off the parking. I've also been involved with online missions where it's great for everyone to come back to the ship, park, and get a screenshot of all the planes stacked up on the deck at the end of the mission (for those who make it ). I get that many probably won't use this part of the function, but darn glad it's in there for those of us who do.

If I were to do such mission in MP I'd probably choose to despawn and spawn into another aircraft after the sortie, ready, armed and fueled. No idea how the pilots would do it IRL. I doubt they would wait for pushback if they were to be rearmed, refueled and launched again. So for the current (soon) implementation that would be teleport option.

I really like to trap and park in some reasonable spot as close as possible to other aircraft, doing hard turn with my feet over the water - very satisfying indeed.

[SteelPig]

My concern is the behavior right after landing. As far as I know, deck crew would bring you outside the landing zone as fast as possible before they will order you to stop. With the way the crew acted in the video I'm not sure if a CASE I pattern with correct timings will be possible for more than a single jet. 

Edited November 22, 2024 by SteelPig

[draconus]

5 minutes ago, SteelPig said:

My concern is the behavior right after landing. As far as I know, deck crew would bring you outside the landing zone as fast as possible before they will order you to stop. With the way the crew acted in the video I'm not sure if a CASE I pattern with correct timings will be possible for more than a single jet. 

This was already explained in the comments with Wags saying he was lazy doing the procedure and the process is still WIP, they'll tweak it before release.