Marianas islands Map

The principle of misusing resources, IMO, still holds good. Do you want a better example? Ok, so they could have expanded/improved/completed the Caucasus map instead of making this one.

Why they would do that, when they have just two years ago finished the Caucasus 2.5 refreshment that was moving the old map from Terrain Engine 2 (?) to Terrain Engine 3(?) and so on done major work for it. And now they are developing a new Terrain Engine and new Graphics Engine (EDGE was as well long time ago) that requires complete new rework on everything as they are implementing Vulcan, new path finding, new graphics, new weather system etc.

And now they are testing all that with the new map, that has very limited requirements for the work on land elements, as it is mostly about sea.

And once they have polished, finished etc that work, they can start (again) updating Caucasus and other maps and allow its use on new Third Party maps as well!

They need something easy to work for it, and as community has wanted a "sea only" map, they gave it to the community, and with it they can as well benefit the future versions!

They nailed two birds with one stone, otherwise they would have just been working internal testing map of somekind for the new things and we would never know anything about that.

Why they would do that, when they have just two years ago finished the Caucasus 2.5 refreshment that was moving the old map from Terrain Engine 2 (?) to Terrain Engine 3(?) and so on done major work for it. And now they are developing a new Terrain Engine and new Graphics Engine (EDGE was as well long time ago) that requires complete new rework on everything as they are implementing Vulcan, new path finding, new graphics, new weather system etc.

 

And now they are testing all that with the new map, that has very limited requirements for the work on land elements, as it is mostly about sea.

 

And once they have polished, finished etc that work, they can start (again) updating Caucasus and other maps and allow its use on new Third Party maps as well!

 

They need something easy to work for it, and as community has wanted a "sea only" map, they gave it to the community, and with it they can as well benefit the future versions!

 

They nailed two birds with one stone, otherwise they would have just been working internal testing map of somekind for the new things and we would never know anything about that.

Well put and good thoughts. :thumbup:

Ooh, free map ! Thanks ED.

Never mind the nitpickers, they are obviously unaware that USAF routinely flies Hogs off carriers to make sure all the megalodons stay in the Marianas trench :)

Free map, what's not to love. Cheers, ED!

I absolutely love this map. My only concern as well as others have stated is I want a WW2 version. I absolutely hate flying WW2 planes over modern maps or vice versa. Please don’t do that. I’d rather pay to have 2 versions then only have 1 for free. That’s just my opinion.

Its not that its "Fictional" scenarios...after all UAE/US vs Iran is a Fictional Scenario...NATO involvement in Causacus conflicts is a "Fictional Scenario"

 

 

Its just that its "Far-fetched" Fictional Scenarios isn't it? USN/USMC vs a Marianas occupied by the Chinese? How did that happen? A Chinese task force attacking US bases in the Marianas? Where are the Naval/Amphibious assets available to make that work...ignoring the fact that there's no "Redfor" plane to fly and the idea that a Chinese Task Force could even get to the Marianas without being destroyed...

Well the Argentinians managed it against the British in the Falklands... It's not too difficult to imagine, you could easily make it work providing the assets to do so (There's a Ropucha-I LST present in the model viewer, so there's Russia for you...)

As far as far fetched goes, what about the Viggen on any map we currently have? Especially the NTTR map, it's navigation system doesn't even work with that side of the planet, the devs added a workaround so it did - that's something so far-fetched it doesn't even work properly. US carriers in the Black Sea? erm the Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits would like a word...

And you could say that any alternate-history scenario is far fetched - it doesn't matter, DCS is a self-described sandbox, you can do what you like. It doesn't have to be China already occupying the islands, it can be a mission tasked to sink an amphibious group on their way to make a landing on the islands (exactly what you said).

Sure the assets are missing, that doesn't mean they'll always be missing - we have an entire 3rd party focused on producing Chinese assets (okay the JF-17 is Pakistani but it jointly developed with China and uses exported Chinese weaponry). The aforementioned Ropucha-I LST is present in the model viewer, the new Kuznetsov coming in the future isn't too far away from the Liaoning... So we have the starting blocks for a Russian amphibious assaults.

It seems like you guys are trying a little too much to find something to complain about, on a product we pay nothing for...

I think Fri13 and Pikey have really nailed it here.

Brilliant news, thanks a lot ED.

Now, however, I'll be joining the ranks pushing hard for Hellcats, Zeros, Bettys, etc.

Looks good, both for historic WWII and fictional cold war or present day.

And we seriously need a Zero now, that where based on both Guam, Saipan and Tinian... Or maybe a KI-84 or N1K2-J to better match the late war planeset for the other nations? Or a J2M Raiden maybe?

"The Raiden made its combat debut in June 1944 during the Battle of the Philippine Sea. Several J2Ms operated from Guam and Saipan and a small number of aircraft were deployed to the Philippines."

Some Google results looking at what the Japanese had there in 1944...

Saipan:

https://www.pacificwrecks.com/airfields/marianas/aslito/index.html

https://www.pacificwrecks.com/airfields/marianas/marpi/index.html

Guam:

As of June 1, 1944, Japanese air strength on Guam consisted of 100 Zeros and 10 J1N1 Irvings at Airfield No. 1 and 60 P1Y Ginga at Airfield No. 2.

https://www.pacificwrecks.com/airfields/marianas/orote/index.html

https://www.pacificwrecks.com/airfields/marianas/agana/index.html

And there where P-47, P51, F4u and P-38 fighters based on Saipan. And naturally a big heap of B-29s where both Enola Gay and Bockscar took off from Tinian...

Speaking of that - Tinian airbase is now being setup as a divert Airfield for Anderson base at Guam:

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2016/02/11/u-s-pacific-air-forces-chooses-tinian-island-as-divert-airfield/

Thank you for the map I like a lot I wished it was bigger than 400 Km but no real complaint from me. Especially since it is a Free map...

its no secret that we one day want to model the globe.

You may want to contact a well known Czech sim studio and see if their new tech can help as i believe their new upgraded platform does just that. Though you would probably have to trade off alot that makes DCS great in order to implement it...like flying for instance :lol:

Well the Argentinians managed it against the British in the Falklands... It's not too difficult to imagine

Well its 900 miles from Puerto Belgrano to Stanley and in 1982, The Falklands Islands Military was an Antarctic Research Vessel and precisely NO aircraft.

Its 2,500 miles from Yulin to Guam (and would involve a transit in restricted waters between Taiwan and The Phillipines) - and is home to B52s, RQ-4s and F15s

I'm not entirely sure the scenarios are comparable...

And there where P-47, P51, F4u and P-38 fighters based on Saipan. And naturally a big heap of B-29s where both Enola Gay and Bockscar took off from Tinian...

Ignoring the obvious B29 operations...were ANY land Based tactical aviation sorties flown FROM the Marianas during the War?

My understanding is that operations were planned with the new P51H models for Operation Olympic but never happened...

From a "Warbird" Point of view the Marianas map will be suitable for Carrier based F4U sorties if/when Leatherneck release it (and associated Carrier assets) and long-term if any developer takes on a late war Zero model and releases it...

Several J2Ms operated from Guam and Saipan and a small number of aircraft were deployed to the Philippines."

None J2M ever reach Marianas.

US force found there only some manuals for this plane.

The J2Ms from the 381st kokutai (the first J2M unit deployed in combat zone) defended Borneo and few were found on the Philippines.

Ignoring the obvious B29 operations...were ANY land Based tactical aviation sorties flown FROM the Marianas during the War?

Read this - during the capture of the Marinas Islands that took quite a while - P47s based on Saipan played an important role with tons of missions flown:

https://books.google.se/books?id=CDWtdzMt9AEC&pg=PA691&lpg=PA691&dq=p47+tinian&source=bl&ots=0QZPllG9x2&sig=ACfU3U1QoZNhksDz9pfN333EboPuurUZnA&hl=sv&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwididWgtOzmAhUJxosKHQKkCl4Q6AEwBnoECAMQAQ#v=onepage&q=p47%20tinian&f=false

The battle of Saipan and the landing there was one of the major operations of the Pacific war - and the continued operations in Guam and Tinian.

There is definitely material for a nice P47 campaign starting with those first P47s landing on Aslito on the 22nd going right into the fight to capture Saipan first and then Guam and Tinian.

Interesting read...thanks :)

And regarding P38s from Saipan:

"By late 1944, Lockheed P-38s of the 318th were routinely flying missions to Truk and Iwo Jima from Saipan—1,500-mile (2,400 km), 8-hour trips."

From the Wikipedia page about the 318th FG that was based on Saipan - mainly with P47s but also P38s.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/318th_Fighter_Group

These fighters also participated in the defense of the Marinas from Japanese air attacks on the Marinas after the US capture:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_air_attacks_on_the_Mariana_Islands

Perfect location choice.

Can't wait for this map.

Well done ED !

Well its 900 miles from Puerto Belgrano to Stanley and in 1982, The Falklands Islands Military was an Antarctic Research Vessel and precisely NO aircraft.

 

Its 2,500 miles from Yulin to Guam (and would involve a transit in restricted waters between Taiwan and The Phillipines) - and is home to B52s, RQ-4s and F15s

 

I'm not entirely sure the scenarios are comparable...

It's not entirely dissimilar either, the difference is the Argentinian navy is far less capable than the Royal Navy, their submarine fleet was all diesel boats, the most modern from the early 70s, but half of them WW2 submarines modernised in the 50s. They had the same destroyers but a third as many, and a WW2 aircraft carrier operating A-4B Skyhawks. However, the islands were closer and practically undefended (there were around 60 marines, but were totally outnumbered). So despite the less capable navy, because of the proximity and weak military presence the Argentine invasion was successful.

With Guam the US has plenty of military presence in the region as you say but now we have 2 fleets (the Chinese South Sea Fleet and the US 7th fleet) which have similar numbers and similar capability, the US probably has the overall advantage but the Chinese HHQ-9 is roughly equivalent to the SM-6 , the HHQ-15 roughly equivalent to the SM-2MR, the FL-3000N is roughly equivalent to the RIM-116. The YJ-8, roughly equivalent to Harpoon, the YJ-18 arguably superior to Harpoon...

So ignoring Japan, South Korea and the US 3rd fleet we've got a surprisingly even fight... And what if the Russians and Chinese team up?

Sure modern day realistically it's far-fetched, but I'd argue it has merit as a potential conflict - with an emphasis on a true blue water naval engagement, amphibious operations (assets permitting), maybe even ASW further in the future.

DCS is a sandbox, you can do what you like, if you can physically do it, regardless of how likely it is to happen IRL you can (and should be able to) do it in DCS, this is why you can put nuclear powered aircraft carriers in the Black Sea (physically they're capable of sailing there, a treaty prevents them from doing so), same with stationing NATO forces in Georgia. You can have as realistic a scenario as you desire or the least, you've got realistic assets to do what you want with. If you want to do an unrealistic anti-ship strike with a Mirage strafing things with guns you can.

As for realistic scenarios, I for one have a tough time believing that you seriously only fly the MiG-21, -29, Su-25 and Su-27 on the Caucasus map fighting the 2008 Russia-Georgia war... Nothing NATO involved in that - certainly no Viggens or F-14Bs.

I'll say it again, but the Viggen isn't just unrealistic in the theatres we have at the moment, it's unrealistic to the point where the dev's had to take some liberties with the navigation system, so it works outside of the Baltic (not bashing the Viggen by any means, I love it, and very pleased to have it).

Source: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3005508&postcount=59

We don't have the assets for the Gulf War either - literally no Iranian naval assets, we don't even have the tankers or merchant vessels for the stuff that happened a few months back... So anything you do there you have to take a few liberties with... We have a couple of SAMs, HY-2 and SCUD-B...

And what-if fictional scenarios? They happen in simulators (even if lite-sim) literally all of the time... SF2 anyone? Cold Waters anyone? All it takes is a few liberties taken and some imagination. Basically none of the scenarios I see in DCS are completely realistic, there's always some if not many liberties taken, what-ifs or some alternate history employed - because then we get to use our imagination, and we can be much more creative, potentially producing more interesting situations (of course subjective). I don't know about you but I'd probably grow tired of being locked to the same historically accurate scenarios where the outcome is already known, but for me exploring what-if scenarios is typically far more interesting.

The Marianas is a fantastic map choice from multiple directions. From ED's perspective there's only a tiny amount of land, so it should take less effort to build. It also means that all of the land can be high-detail. On the subject of land you can scale it up from 400x400km to ~2700x1300km and only increase the land area by ~150km^2 - Saipan alone is ~115km^2, it's a tiny increase. And 2700x1300km? That's a total area of just over 3.5 million square kilometers and only 0.03% of that is land.

Because there's so little land, and fewer objects, trees etc the map should be faster to build, bugs and errors should be easier to fix, simply because there's a heck of a lot less to go wrong. The smaller object count should also benefit performance, even if scaled to up to the gigantic 3.5 million km^2 map above. So a map with a primary naval focus, that can be made very large easily with less chance of a performance/workload hit.

There's lots of water around, with a fairly iconic sea-floor - this would be a perfect choice to develop a proper underwater for DCS, with a basic underwater environment and an accurate depth map (which can be made low resolution - the resolution of the pre-2.5 Caucasus map would be more than enough). This will probably be necessary for the Mk40 and Mk63 bottom mines that's planned for the Hornet (https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3285514&postcount=13 - the Mk40 is actually already present in the modelviewer). But also for other underwater weapons, like torpedoes (which according to a newsletter are in development); SLCMs (the 3M-54E and 3M-54E1 have been present and animated (though without their capsule) in the modelviewer for ages) and AI submarines - we've had updated Kilos in the form of the B-871 Alrosa (877V Kilo) and a 636 Kilo present in the modelviewer (and even in-game for the B-871, just can't do anything) for ages, both should be able to launch the aforementioned 3M-54E/E1 and taking a look at the modelviewer are both fully animated. We've also got the upcoming Type VII U-Boat as part of the WW2 assets pack.

Now with a map like the Marianas, the main focus is of course naval warfare, but the map is still accessible to land aircraft - okay, realistically these will be BLUFOR but lets try some of that imagination I mentioned earlier:

Let's set-up a Cold War/Post Cold-War era scenario; Saipan and Tinian are under the control of REDFOR while BLUFOR has control of Guam and Rota, with most of their forces on Guam. The mission being to capture the enemy held islands while defending your own. Stationed offshore on opposite sides of the map are opposing large carrier battlegroups. In the littoral area of the islands we have opposing amphibious fleets which will try and capture each other's islands. Each islands have they're own defenders, and each island has at least 1 airbase for land based aircraft.

In this one mission from the player's perspective we can have:

• Air-to-Air - CAP, Intercept, Escort and Fighter-Sweep missions fulfilling air-superiority and fleet defence missions. The F-14
  • 
    

  B, F-15C, F/A-18C, MiG-29, Su-27/J-11A, Su-33 and JF-17 fit here, you could easily throw in the AV-8B too and even the F-5E and MiG-21Bis as well.

  [*]Air-to-Ground - this will predominately involve taking out hostile defenders, SEAD and once/if hostile units make their landings CAS. Basically everything but the F-15C fits here.

  [*]Anti-Ship strike this one's pretty obvious, candidates are chiefly the F/A-18C, the AJS-37 and the JF-17 though any aircraft capable of delivering suitably large bombs are candidates.

  [*]Helicopter insertions, the amphibious assault doesn't have to be just from landing craft and amphibious assault ships, we can have transport helos in the mix too.

So we've got essentially all things covered, in a mission that took maybe a minute of thought, okay while it's physically possible, it's far fetched alternate-history and an operation would probably never happen in this way where both are defending and attacking in war-thunder like fashion. You can easily modify this situation to be more realistic, it's possible to make this into a shorter mission or a much longer one, made possible by this map.

TL;DR:

Pros:

• All of the land can be made high detail without impacting performance
  
• Map can scaled to be incredibly large without hindering performance - a perfect test bed or trial mission
  
• Islands with airbases are probably just far enough away for at least pseudo-realistic island vs island combat
  
• Perfect environment for naval everything, yes everything
  
• Perfect opportunity to develop an underwater environment, opening up torpedo bombers, MTBs and maybe even ASW further in the future
  
• Best map so far for open-water fleet vs fleet combat
  
• Real-world WW2 theatre
  
• It's free and available for everyone - like seriously!
  

Cons:

• Small land area limits land based aircraft and land conflicts, particularly large REDFOR bombers.
  
• Apart from WW2, conflicts have to be alternate reality with at least one 'what-if' in play, though this offers up the potential for creativity.
  

ED, I am a fanboy since the first piece of the flanker series, but what a waste of ressources. . . sorry. . . no one needs that. never heard before that this island is ever existing in real world. . . why no area with historical background, e.g. cold war, balkans. . . i dont need a holiday map.

+1 :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

The Marianas is an almost perfect map choice from multiple directions - from ED's perspective the landmass is so small it takes less effort to build, it's surrounded by essentially open ocean on all sides, so it's size can be scaled up and all the land can be detailed. It's the best map for large fleet-on-fleet blue-water naval engagements with carrier battlegroups, while still be accessible to land based aircraft (though one-sided). ED could also trial an underwater with an accurate depth map, suitable for underwater weapons currently being developed (Mk-40 and Mk-63 air-dropped bottom mines from the Hornet, air-dropped torpedoes), as well as functional AI submarines. It's free so it's accessible to everyone, there's far less objects that need to be placed saving workload and also being friendlier to PCs in terms of performance.

 

So, we have a map where every piece of land can be high detail, while still being very large, perfect for developing the naval environment further - potentially underwater ones too. With less work required to build saving time, that should yield better performance on hardware... Bugs should be less prevalent and quicker to fix purely by having a hell of a load less to go wrong...

 

The cons are that it's realistically restricted to land based BLUFOR, and ship based aircraft, but there's still enough usable land and airfields to be useful, it also works for semi-realistic, what-if modern conflicts, and realistic WW2-era conflicts. So all things considered it's basically perfect...

 

And all of that - for free!

+1 Very well said.

Excellent work ED, very excited for this map!

Shame the thread went down the road of arguing the difference between far-fetched, reasonable, possible, probable, unreasonable, imaginative and so on.

At this point it's really just individual. I can absolutely guarantee that thousands of people do have the ability to enjoy the map concept despite limitations. For which, there are so many, in all of DCS, as to render the concept of playing anything with authenticity extremely restricted. And believe me, we could drag the conversation down from global orbats and geopolitics, right to the DCS simulation of radar and ECM and chaff code to find some kind of argument over realism. It's just not worth it though. Somethng has to give way for realism at every step.

As for assets, you have to start somewhere. Who would deny that the P-51 raised eyebrows and no one knew what to do with it at launch? But should we wait until the entire Luftwaffe were modelled before flying it? Or just some planes, the exact number being... 42? We could repeat the arguments over the 109K model, the P-51 Korean version or even the F-16 version and start talking about what combat these things saw and flew in. Do I have a right to be disapointed at the choices? Sure. It gets my OCD flowing that I can't essentially get Harpoon 3 down in DCS on a map with some relevant combat, but you know, we have all managed up until now and this map only gives us more tools, not less.

Being disappointed with the exact way ED develop is an excercise in futility. One can counter-argument every time with opinion and stand quite safely in a defensible position because that's an opinion. But the only real loser is the person that cannot make good use of what they are given in life.

If the Spanish can claim Guam in 15-whatever it was in randomly blown canoes, the Chinese/Russian/Korean/Martians can capture it in 2020. Just to make this absolutely clear, I haven't yet decided if a joint Swedish-Chinese coalition will already have possesion of Guam in their Red and white Viggens, before the US arrive in their P-51's led by the Grim Reapers talking in Farsi.

"no one needs that. never heard before that this island is ever existing in real world"

You've never heard of Anderson AFB Guam?

"why no area with historical background, e.g. cold war, balkans."

https://www.andersen.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/414630/andersen-air-force-base-history/

The strategic importance of this area to the United States and her allies as far back as World War II can not be overstated. It is also perfectly suited to carrier / Navel operations for both Blue AND red assets.

I'm glad rocks are finally starting to look like rocks. I hope ED continues on making the terrain resolution better, with more fine, granular detail. Anyway, this is going to be a great map for low level helicopter flying!

I hope this free map will be more populated on servers, its dissapointing to see that there's always relatively few people playing on PG or nevada.