GUFA

My intent was to give barry_c a way to get his question answered, and stay away from the ban hammer

Mabye this is a better way to get an answer. This is WW 2 Heathrow: Is this the Heathrow we will be getting?

G'day Maestro Glad to see someone from Team Ugra stepping up and giving us the low down on Normandy V.2.0. My initial impression was not favorable to say the least, but as more information has become available that has softened considerably. Mainly want more battlefields in more diverse locations. That said I do had some questions. So I will just go straight to the"3 Elephants in the room" Games such as DCS are fairly "niche" products and as such it is hard to get people into these types of games. So as a 3rd party what do you see as your role in (hopefully) bringing more people to DCS? More people> more money> more opportunity for more maps, land & sea unit packs=happier player base>more profit for ED and partners. So initially I didn't think V.2.0 would achieve that. As someone who is very new to DCS I don't want to buy products that I cannot use if the game dies. But I have watched DCS through mediums such Grim Reapers for years though and I chose to invest over the last year because I believed that DCS was not far hitting a critical mass that could turn a good game to Multi Century E-sport for a broad audience. But still to achieve this ED and 3rd parties have to work out some glaring issues with the core game. So to the 2nd Elephant in the room Do you think as a developer, in unison with other map makers to lobby ED to Create the much mentioned "Global Map" and does this "GM" offer benefits to you as a "map maker" Now for the 3rd elephant Can you see development of this map extending past release Maybe add BENELUX, parts of Germany? Have you considered adding time periods, I thinking along the lines of maybe a late 60s-early 80 layer and a 20?? layer. Just to be clear I am not expecting you to deliver this in 1 package. Upon reflection I do think Normandy V.2.0 may also be joined by V.3.0 and so on ad infinitum. Any way just some things to consider. Loved Syria BTW keep up the good work

I think it was finished, but it really fell short. Wags did call it "feature complete" and some ED spokespeople where calling it "Straits of Hormuz" before release. See as I understand ED's POV, by keeping maps to a smaller size ED was attempting to broaden accessibility and allow people who couldn't afford the "Hardware" to run larger maps into the game. That said It was disappointing that Qatar, Bahrain and Oman weren't mapped/filled out, even though they are in the grided area if you open the map up. I certainly would have love to have seen Konarak Airbase, Iran. @ Nukeproof, Should you wish to see that map extended, put up a poll you would certainly get my Up-vote.

Seeing you already know how Ugra are going to sort it why ask me?

Great you can read so it's just you can't comprehend Ok from now on I will take Slooooooooooow

Normandy 44 isn't all bad at least we get this.

When Someone actually, eons from now, gets around to making North Africa I'll shout you a drink at "Sam's" joint

So I am not a Software engineer but this is how I could see it working. 1. ED does the "Globe" as a "Blank" Slate" the only human features would be the Suez & Panama canals. reasons for doing so should be obvious. 2. A ED Take responsibility for the "natural" features of the "whole Globe" i.e. watercourses, trees/forests, mountains,hills. Features below sea level such as the Dead Sea and any elevation change. With under sea warfare being added in some form they would also be responsible for seabed topography. Now this may sound hard but it is actually being done by satellites already using radar and/or LIDAR. Question is can ED get hold of that data because this is "MILITARY GRADE" data and subject to OPSEC issues & possibly CLASSIFIED. One consideration that would need to be looked at is, when doing "period maps (Marianas WW2 and today for instance). Is how do you account for continental drift also Landslides and other geological events. also watercourses change &/or dry up among other changes that occur over short time periods. There are other "natural changes" that I have missed but I'm sure you get the Idea. Now this is were the "Map Makers" come in They would obtain the license from ED to do the Human Features as "Layers" on the map. In Normandy 44 case all the towns,cities, any thing "human" related become the responsibility of the "Map Maker". Now there are some issues that I'm not quite sure who would be responsible for. Take Farm Fields, I would think ED owns this. And Dams/resonators. So as a user you get a "Globe Map" from ED. then you buy from the Map Maker the Human layer(s) that, then sit on top of ED's Natural Feature only "Globe" I think this is probably the way ED would do it. But I also think by that stage ED needs to concentrate on the Core and give Map & Module Development to the 3rd parties. I would think map maker's would find benefit in this approach as they don't have to worry about river,hills, forests etc. They can just concentrate on the human inclusions & this would likely speed up map development considerably. All of which you the user wouldn't notice. The purchased "layer" wouldn't look or feel different. And when you fly over UN-purchased areas you still see terrain. but it wouldn't have any human features.

Unless there are two (2) folders sitting in /mods/terrains Now thats just wrong... I DO THINK THAT ADDING LONDON AND PARIS IS ACTUALLY PRETTY COOL. SO DON'T PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH. The main thrust of my argument is that Normandy 44 isn't a "NEW" map it is an Update/Upgrade. And that it Will tie Ugra up for years meanwhile other more interesting/challenging battlefields are on the NEVER NEVER, Even Warbird buffs, such as some of you appear to be would surely like other battle fields? Frankly am also disappointed that OnReTech are doing Sinai. NOT JUST WHINGING FOR THE SAKE OF IT, BUT BECAUSE NOW NORTH AFRICA WW2 WONT HAPPEN FOR QUITE A WHILE. Surely you would be able to recognize that having EL Alamein, Operation Torch would be fantastic. Or what about other WW2 (European) Battlefields such the Bombing of Cagliari, Anzio, The Winter War, Stalingrad, Moscow or Kursk. Now someone who lives in the Indo/Pacific, I haven't even touch on the Pacific Theater (don't mention Marianas that wasn't particularly famous IRTPT) And that's just for the WW 2 Warbird fans. And outside of WW2 European/North Africa theaters, What about Korea, Cold War Africa or Kashmir... No, nobody could possibly be interested in them... LET ME UNDERSCORE ONCE AGAIN, I am not against Normandy 44, You've (Beirut) won my over 1/2 a dozen posts ago. So pat yourself on the back I have shifted from my 2nd post on even IF I have reservations (questions of priority) So WHY have you been "Cherry picking" and lets be truthful, you have been. What I have said from 2nd post on. Is: A. Normandy 44 could have been a back burner project, Even if Normandy 44 V.1 isn't great, it is usable, NOW. And if you don't like it use The Channel. B. London and Paris are great additions to the map, but are "bling" as of now. Can you have Land Force engagement in these cities No ED hasn't fixed "combined ops, RTS" modes yet. Even if they did fix it they have also hinted at FPS "type" play as well. Personally would love to assault large cities but the game just isn't there yet is it How about playing the ball... Mental Health degrees aren't on the back of Cereal boxes, Return yours

1: Look for a start my currency is AUD so currently it will sell at $15.63... 2: My gripe was never about money anyway it was always about getting new original, non desert or do-overs, maps. Why does every respondent IGNORE that Fact. I have already Acknowledged the discount 1/2 a dozen times already... I even suggested I would be happy to pay twice, once for (all of) Great Britain, once for France (same). Heck I would also like the map to go to the East Polish border. But NO People want to flog me over initial comment... I am arguing for more diverse maps period, Vietnam, The Korea's+ Japan, Belgium/Portuguese West Africa, Kashmir or the Indonesian Archipelago. But what are we getting, a 2nd Israel map (come on Ugra could have probably added this to Syria. Which, by the way is a fantastic map, Afghanistan (possibly next ED map), Kola And Capricornia. So when Ugra dropped the news that they were doing another Normandy 44 "I did my nana". So 4 deserts and a redo can you see why I snapped? So read all of my post didn't you Hey pot your BLACK...

Okay I didn't see this post until some 10 hours after my last post. As it does appear that you have defended my right to have a say, even if too robustly for some. And as I have invested money into the game and I am not a "free user". I do tender a Apology, as worthless as you may see it. I like to think I am accountable for what I say, and had I seen/interpreted. My posts would have had a different complexion. But the Failure was on my end, and as such I am sorry. Now does that means that other concerns are invalid no, I do think that some in ED + third party are not doing anything for customers not in the European sphere. And other maps (NOT DESERT) The only maps in the forthcoming group are 1940s Marianas and Normandy 44, All the others are deserts, even if they are green deserts (Kola). That is why I have a "Bee in my Bonnet" as regards to maps. Once again I am sorry.

Okay look had you read all my posts you would know that I have significantly shifted my views about Normandy V.2.0. So, for the Record I um-reservatley Apologize If i have personally offended (you). Some of that post and the ones that followed were meant to be funny. But obviously most didn't see the humor. I am from the English, speaking side of the mudball (not UK) so my humor isn't always understood. Again I do apologize for my (this particular)comment and whilst I wont self censor I do & will apologize when wrong.

Cuuul

If I'm wrong I say sorry, its the right thing to do... So Be a man and say sorry.

So I am a paying customer read my prev post... Now I could be lying, are you calling me a Liar If not then I have the right to critique do I not?

Beirut Said "think customers are allowed to complain as long as they bought or keep buying stuff. If someone just sticks with the free version and the two planes and complains about everything else, that might be pushing it." Look if I misinterpreted what you said so be it, but the quote above would seem to say Exactly that. Maybe it was Ala 13 that inter-mated that "Because I Hadn't bought all $5000 worth of DCS modules I had no right to comment." Look I'm not some selfish 'A' hole that wants my needs to be fulfilled above all others.I Make suggestions to benefit all users and having more battlefields+different eras does that. Tell me I'm wrong?

So being a new customer I not entitled to have a say. "Just shut up and follow along with the rest of the sheep" Come on now you are just misrepresenting what I am saying, I have already stepped back some way after my initial reaction so be truthful... As to what I own in DCS A: thats none of your business B: I have volunteered that information already. But just to make it clear: I have all current maps. I have all current land/sea unit packs. I own one(1) FF module so far, As I spend more time in DCS I will be buying other modules. But if I my opinions are to lampooned/discounted attack (by Devs), so be it. Obviously they don't need my money...

Ain't that the truth Rather hoping I IFE do the Zipper with the M339s imminent release. And am also hoping for them to all of the Italian variants. S G to start and another poster suggested a TF module. So 3 modules, Think I'm being overly ambitious.

Already stated in previous posts that the Issue isn't price, And yes All modules are DLC. The issue that bugs me is that Ugra resources that could used for a new map are going to be decicated to Normandy 44 instead of a original map. Not all of us "live" in France/ UK and as such care to have 3 maps that are repeating the same ground, era so how about considering why I was so "Luke Warm" on Normandy 44 V.2.0. That said 10 buck Normandy 44 V.2.0 10 bucks I'm there, Just Keep Growing the Map East & South and I'll be a Happy Chappy.l That would be cool if confirmed.

I think a lot of these issues will be resolved once DCS they're intended "Whole Planet" development. It would surely be easier "If" developers are able to start maps in theyre appropriate positions. After that maps can be "stitched" together. Growing a map also becomes a lot easier I would think. Also You start thinking period maps become easier to build. Now I'm no Software developer,but a map could start in 1939 and then you apply different eras as layers should be feasible. Just let me State "For the Record" that Easier isn't easy . Just would be nice to fly over BENELUX and Germany as well.

As I stated on my last post call DLC and be done with it. I imagine Ugra has already importing good chunks of N V1 (thinking of the natural features mainly).

For a start Simple Question to you are YOU assuming or HAVE YOU COUNTED. Come on be truthful... This isn't a rant it is me stating my CONDITIONS on which I will buy this product. I am also stated my ambivalence to buying 2 products that are the same (even if the later one is improved). If this is the case call it DLC. Heck If they did southern England and charged 10 bucks, then did France (and my hope WW 2 Central Europe) and charged $10 NTH France, would you really have objected to that?

To be Clear: I'm not against a update/upgrade of 44 France, Southern England, People are entitled to be remunerated for they're efforts. I am new To DCS and my pathway as a latecomer has been to buy all the maps as well. Just don't want 3 maps that are the same area and period. Okay let me play "team Ugra", How does Ugra make money off of this?

Really sorry to here your dads not in good health. +1, I am an Aussie though (or a Facebook user) so I not sure how much help I would be.