Minsky

Ее все видят в одинаковых границах и все скачивают один и тот же патч с одними и теми же файлами. Разница исключительно в том, что некупивших на месте новых локаций и моделей - размазня из трех полигонов.

If you own the old Normandy: 1944 and installed the today's Open Beta patch, you already have the full Normandy 2.0 map on your PC. The purchase simply unlocks the new HD content. There won't be any additional downloads, in-game prompts or alerts after you bought the 2.0. Just restart DCS and enjoy.

Нужно. Игнорируйте предупреждение и покупайте.

Most, if not all, owners of the old Normandy, I think? My guess is that they've simply renamed the Normandy 1944 to "Normandy 2.0" in their system and tweaked the storefront to display the discounted price. Meaning, it's not the new product per se. You can safely disregard this warning and continue with your purchase.

OK, this might help someone. I own both The Normandy 1944 (from the ED shop) and The Channel (via license transfer from Steam). Upgraded to today's beta and THEN bought The Normandy 2.0 (disregarded the warning that I already own it at checkout). There were no additional downloads after the purchase, the game simply started as usual with the previously low-res parts now displayed in high-res. Screens before the purchase: Screens after the purchase: As you can see, there are only three differences between the two sets of images: 1. I now have three Normandy 2.0 licenses on my account. (Yes, they've renamed my old "Normandy: 1944" license to "Normandy 2.0" before I even got the new map). 2. "Normandy 1944" replaced with "Normandy 2.0" in the Module Manager. 3. The hi-res textures and models.

I don't mind. Just need to make sure this passes the validation Maple Flags do in their campaigns.

@ASAP So you are saying that the newer manual (mine is dated 2012) doesn't explain how exactly the fuel quantity check must be conducted? The name kinda implies that we need to check if the pointers match the totalizer, and if the gauge shows the amount of fuel actually loaded. Can't really do that without touching the switch.

Some people might be unaware that most of the mainland is extremely rugged and desolated in the real life. But yeah, there's a huge difference between being desolated and completely bald and featureless like we currently have it in DCS. IMO the progress has been pretty decent for such a small team, as they created quite a lot of new locations since the release. Having said that, I do hope that they will start polishing the map and adding details once the few remaining aerodromes will be completed.

ED, can we do something about the RLWR threats symbology? At this size, their idents are simply unreadable: I'm sure the documents you have (which I cannot cite due to 1.16) clearly shows that the symbols and font must be twice as large. This is my "artistic rendition" of how it should look:

I wouldn't say very unfinished: just unfinished and unpolished. Nearly all paved aerodromes are already added. And the northern part, where the topmost arrow is pointing, is now mostly "orange/green". At some point the map's boundaries are going to be expanded further north to include a couple new airfields. But they still have a long way to go. Mostly by adding small details (roads, towns, farms, vegetation etc.) and retouching the satellite imagery.

The general consensus is that you have tons of them when flying high, less when flying low in populated areas (e.g. Ushuaia), and even less at most airfields. The "less" part may vary from "can barely notice this without an FPS monitor" to "completely unplayable". The jury is still out on whenever it is a core DCS issue or map's issue.

Guess we could simply replace "MAIN" with "As needed", or rephrase the item like this: Fuel display selector: WING or MAIN (if wings dry)

Would be nice to see any published document that explicitly says to switch it to WING. Yeah, I found this explained in one of the AFIs. Could it be that they switch it to MAIN during startup, and then to WING later?

Interesting info, thanks. Could this be some local practice? I mean, I'm not arguing with the logic, it's just that the published checklist says it should be set to MAIN after testing.

EDIT: See this comment: I believe they are aware. Cullen was supposed to be released a month ago, but has been postponed for some reason. This is the only part that somehow slipped into the game.

They were added in the last November, if I'm not mistaken. To Pagan and other unmarked airfields.

Yep, still bugged

P.S. A low fidelity map has many use cases. It can be used in missions where terrain's quality doesn't really matter (naval warfare or high altitude air combat). It can be used in missions where you would rather have tons of units than a pretty picture. It can be used as a testbed for making mods / missions / liveries. It loads blazingly fast, doesn't have memory leaks and doesn't eat up all your RAM and VRAM, so you can keep DCS running for hours alongside the other heavy apps.

Yep, that's why I highlighted the word "replace". I wouldn't mind Caucasus 2.0 with all the bells and whistles and poor performance that come bundled with every new DCS map. Just leave the old one alone

I disagree. This map loads fast and performs great on any PC. No need to replace it with something akin to Marianas where you can barely reach 60 fps on a high-end hardware struggling to render a tiny island.

IRL? Yes. In DCS? Not yet.

Понял, невнимательно прочёл тему=)

Я к тому, что вам там уже ответили: