Thamiel

But a (possible) server setting you are sure to ignore is still enough for your to school me about "the new normal" and "just the way it is"? If you dont care about it, why are we talking?

Its not the new normal or it would be final? But it isnt. Again: its WiP (3rd time pointing that one out). Its there for a reason (see above) and it was introduced for at least another one good reason I can think of because I am a VR player. These points are not my concern. My concern is leaving that "choice" to the player in a competitive environment, because there is no such thing in such an environment. No soccer player would willingly lineup on the field wearing a blindfold even if given the "choice" to do so, unless its a blind football match, which of course is, what this is all about. Second, as a server admin, you cannot choose not to choose. Every server setting draws a line between those who choose to login and those who dont. You make your own decisions as to what server settings satisfy your needs as an admin. Thats ok. I would like to choose not to hunt pixels and I would like to compete on even ground against other human players. Thats ok too? Until 2.8 that was possible. Not anymore.

I go with the first part of your sentence, I fail to see how it relates to the second one: if it is a server / mission setting, it cannot be divisive for MP, it is by definition universal (and therefore good) for all - on that very server. I dont see things which are odd. I said it before: I get it, its WiP. Its not a bug, its a feature. Its meant to be there so it can be tweaked and pimped. All I ask is that for the duration of this process, restrict it to certain servers, so there is at least a choice to play competitivly on even ground, because as I pointed out earlier: if left to the player, there is no real choice in the PvP/MP environment. And thats not even covering the real clumsy "black pixels are bad" immersion breaking part.

I get it, its WiP. Also, I'm not a regular PvP or SP player, my domain really is PvE/MP. This experiment kills the immersion and returns DCS into a video game where you hunt pixels instead of looking for targets with your eyes and sensors. It is a gamechanger, and I am afraid, not for the better: 1) I dont need the TGP anymore when attacking ground targets with the A-10. Just follow the black squares. Heck, I dont need the A-10 anymore, i can find my echo point without coordinates or TGP just by looking out of the canopy of my P-47. 2) It devalues specific capabilities brought to the game by certain modules. Who cares about the Harrier and its FLIR sensor picking out possible targets in front of you and pointing them out in your HUD when you have black squares at those precise positions already visible? Now everyone has a error-free 360° "FLIR". 3) You dont really have a choice in using it or not. In a competitive PvP environment, this is a must have or you are out of the sky. Once DCS had a reputation of a Sim where you can use stealth and surprise to your advantage. Now not so much. Again, I get it, its WiP. But it should be lined up in the list of other "easy shortcuts" along with "easy communications" "G-effects" and so on, so mission builders could decide how to enforce it or leave it to the player. Clear six!

More than that, why putting so much emphasis on the authenticity of available source data instead of using "educated guesses" real close to the parameters your are forbidden to use? Discussions will happen anyway by people using and comparing the module to its counterparts.

Because they can ?

Yeah, that would be nice indeed (I'm a little biased though). Also, I'm afraid it would be a huge effort to assemble a map with sufficient performance as it was and is a densely populated area with lots of infrastructure, landmarks and details. There are settlements everywhere except maybe military training areas. Almost every city has a unique set of cultural, industrial buildings and/or monuments visible from above. Lots of work if you want to do it right. And lots of critics if you fail. Economically, too much of a risk, if you ask me.

Dont take it personally. The community is primed by ED and 3rd party developers towards patches, fixes and add-ons coming in years instead of months, if at all. Asking for a time frame is merely a feeble attempt to give you the chance to be different for a change. We know this is EA and the map is out for one day. Have a nice weekend. Good effort so far.

I know what you mean - dont encourage people to flood the net with videos how to bomb the sacred places of the big 3 while cultural background music provokes strict intentions how those images should be interpreted. In the end, its a war game. Things are going boom. I applaud ORT for their courage to add this specific region to the dcs portfolio but in doing so, I would suspect that they did answer the beforementioned questions in the first place, at least for themselves. Otherwise, its just "we want to, but we dont dare to." In any event, I think the map looks very promising and a solid debut to DCS. I have seen roll-outs with far less substance.

I dont think so. There are more politically and/or military disputed areas modelled in dcs maps. I can understand that you check the map against feedback of the community before you add details and subsequently performance requirements. But to ignore the fortress of Masada is something completely different. Its not a set of unique buildings but a very characteristically shaped mountain plateau at the west coast of the dead sea. In the air, it should be recognizable without a second glance. It cant be that expensive in performance terms to model a mountain top like a big rhombus and place it at the correct spot.

Yeah, got that too. Doing some sightseeing in southern Israel yesterday as a first look at the new map I couldn't recognize Jerusalem at all. I had to double check the F10 map to verify that the settlements beneath me are indeed meant to represent the temple mount and a divided city. Gaza was recognizable though. Dont get me wrong, Cairo looks great, but there are more landmarks in this region than 8 big pyramids.

I would like to opt for a simple NVG on the helmet. Once there was a mod available for just that reason but an integrated solution would be prettier. Also, its not really part of the aircraft, but of pilot equipment and regarding the time frame, even the Hind has it modelled.