Normandy Map Discussion

[Andy1966]

makes sense to me, the unit list is the unit list, with all aircraft and vehicles, and the maps are seperate, pick which map you want to use then populate it with units of choice. its gonna be awesome, cant wait, being able to use era aaa wil be a big improvement also

[TwilightZone]

makes sense to me, the unit list is the unit list, with all aircraft and vehicles, and the maps are seperate, pick which map you want to use then populate it with units of choice. its gonna be awesome, cant wait, being able to use era aaa wil be a big improvement also

agree +1.......era appropriate anti aircraft and vehicals will be great.....common Normandy!:pilotfly:

[Cripple]

I'll play the Devil's Advocate here a wee bit, but do we need this level of ground "bling" in what is essentially a flight sim? How much of it will you actually notice whilst zooming along at 250mph, let alone once one has some altitude?

 

(I noted that DCS is being described as "not just a flight sim", but let's be honest - most of us are here for the fidelity of the flight modelling and various period aircraft, rather than looking forward to driving an M4 through realistically-modelled bocage...)

[Brigg]

well said Cripple :thumbup:

[KeyserSoze]

im looking forward to Normandy, with all it comes with, high fidelity aircraft and era appropriate ground vehicals! i want icing on my cake! and yes, i would notice, especially when i'm doing a ground attack. high fidelity planes and period ground objects and vehicals dont have to be mutually exclusive:joystick:

[IronJockel]

I see nothing wrong with high quality ground units.

Let them look as good as possible and if you think it is unnecessary set the quality lower.

I am looking forward to use combined arms with ww2 units. In fact I probably will use it a lot more than I currently do.

 

Gesendet von meinem GT-I8200N mit Tapatalk

[DefaultFace]

I think it's not a matter of Important vs not important and more a question of is it more Important than something else. For me I personally think it's nice to have, and while I would'nt want minecraft tanks, I place more importance on the map and damage model and all the other dozens of features we're getting. That being said, high detail is how ED does it's work and I don't see that changing any time soon.

[DB_Cooper]

looking forward ;-)

[alado]

doubt, being the map of normandia a map of the Second World War, the vision and search aircraft will be as difficult as in the other maps?

The search for contacts in the current maps I find it horrible.

[MegOhm_SD]

I'll play the Devil's Advocate here a wee bit, but do we need this level of ground "bling" in what is essentially a flight sim? How much of it will you actually notice whilst zooming along at 250mph, let alone once one has some altitude?

 

(I noted that DCS is being described as "not just a flight sim", but let's be honest - most of us are here for the fidelity of the flight modelling and various period aircraft, rather than looking forward to driving an M4 through realistically-modelled bocage...)

 

Why? For CA and Chopper pilots regardless of period. There will be those that use the map for such. In fact, I can see myself including a chopper mission just to fly around and explore the Normandy map with lots of period vehicles scattered around. The better their detail, the more I will like it.

 

I can also "see" tank battles one day in this map.

[Captain Orso]

If the first video showing WWII ground units with war birds zooming around above has less than good-looking vehicles etc., it will not be good advertising for DCS-W.

 

It may seem like a completely secondary aspect of DCS-W, but if it looks great, it will draw in customer, if only to use them as back-drops, extras, and objects to blow-up in videos; and people love to make and watch these videos, which make for great advertising DCS-W.

[NeilWillis]

I can't help thinking you are getting a little too analytical with this Captain Orso. Yes, it is a very very minor problem, that I am sure could easily be addressed when the manpower becomes available.

 

Hasn't enough been said on the matter now? I think the message was received and understood with your first posting on the subject. Now, you are beginning to sound obsessive!

[Talisman_VR]

I'll play the Devil's Advocate here a wee bit, but do we need this level of ground "bling" in what is essentially a flight sim? How much of it will you actually notice whilst zooming along at 250mph, let alone once one has some altitude?

 

(I noted that DCS is being described as "not just a flight sim", but let's be honest - most of us are here for the fidelity of the flight modelling and various period aircraft, rather than looking forward to driving an M4 through realistically-modelled bocage...)

 

I agree with you there Cripple :thumbup:

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

[DD_Fenrir]

Why do the work twice?

 

If CA WW2 is on the cards then why build a low detail model and go to the effort of LODs and physics modelling, baking texturing and importing and testing if you're gonna have to do it all over again later with an uprated model? Do it once and do it right.

 

Besides, people attracted to the CA world enhance player base making multiplayer more immersive and interactive; plus the CA tankophiles could well be drawn into trying the airframes. Increased playerbase = more investment = impetus for further module development.

 

It's not just about CA players either.

 

What about the movie makers? I've seen some absolutely fantastic videos where it's not all fly bys and gratuitous air externals but where views of ground units are intrinsic to setting the story giving feel and dynamism and context. I'm sure they welcome some attention on ground units - I certainly do as a viewer.

 

As long as LODs are optimised efficiently it should have no bearing on us propellor heads.

 

I do find the blinkers that some seem to adopt round here a bit exasperating...

[klem]

Why do the work twice?

 

If CA WW2 is on the cards then why build a low detail model and go to the effort of LODs and physics modelling, baking texturing and importing and testing if you're gonna have to do it all over again later with an uprated model? Do it once and do it right.

 

Besides, people attracted to the CA world enhance player base making multiplayer more immersive and interactive; plus the CA tankophiles could well be drawn into trying the airframes. Increased playerbase = more investment = impetus for further module development.

 

It's not just about CA players either.

 

What about the movie makers? I've seen some absolutely fantastic videos where it's not all fly bys and gratuitous air externals but where views of ground units are intrinsic to setting the story giving feel and dynamism and context. I'm sure they welcome some attention on ground units - I certainly do as a viewer.

 

As long as LODs are optimised efficiently it should have no bearing on us propellor heads.

 

I do find the blinkers that some seem to adopt round here a bit exasperating...

 

That's all very well Fenrir but current LOD modelling on all aircraft leaves a lot to be desired let alone new ground vehicles. The main concern though is performance and the abilitiy to tweak levels of detail are minimal and semi-global so no opportunity to reduce say ground vehicle detail alone. Of course ground vehicles for low level work will be great but performance hit is a worry.

Edited October 17, 2016 by klem

[klem]

Why do the work twice?

 

If CA WW2 is on the cards then why build a low detail model and go to the effort of LODs and physics modelling, baking texturing and importing and testing if you're gonna have to do it all over again later with an uprated model? Do it once and do it right.

 

Besides, people attracted to the CA world enhance player base making multiplayer more immersive and interactive; plus the CA tankophiles could well be drawn into trying the airframes. Increased playerbase = more investment = impetus for further module development.

 

It's not just about CA players either.

 

What about the movie makers? I've seen some absolutely fantastic videos where it's not all fly bys and gratuitous air externals but where views of ground units are intrinsic to setting the story giving feel and dynamism and context. I'm sure they welcome some attention on ground units - I certainly do as a viewer.

 

As long as LODs are optimised efficiently it should have no bearing on us propellor heads.

 

I do find the blinkers that some seem to adopt round here a bit exasperating...

 

That's all very well Fenrir but current LOD modelling on all aircraft leaves a lot to be desired let alone new ground vehicles. The main concern though is performance and the abilitiy to tweak levels of detail are minimal and semi-global so no opportunity to reducce say ground vehivle detail alon.. Of course ground vehicles for low level work will be great but performance hit is a worry.

[IronJockel]

No performance is not a worry.

It's easier to scale stuff down than to scale it up.

So If ed notices a performance problem they tweak it a bit.

I'm rather sure that they know more about what they are doing than we think we know what we are talking about.

[Medic8ed]

The T-90 in particular seems to have a high level of detail for a ground unit and to my knowledge has not caused issues. No reason to think it will be any different with the WWII ground units.

[Grimes]

The T-90 in particular seems to have a high level of detail for a ground unit and to my knowledge has not caused issues. No reason to think it will be any different with the WWII ground units.

 

Yeah ground objects aren't on the same playing field in terms of model poly count or textures to the degree of ships and aircraft. Ground units typically are around 20-40k in size, there are a few that go above that number but not many. Most of the new ship models are near 100k or more. Aircraft are usually 100-200k, but there are a few extremes in there like the new Mig-29 model at 440k. There are plenty of aircraft though that are below the 100k number, some well below it. For example the 3 WW2 fighters are in the 50-60k range.

[Medic8ed]

Yeah ground objects aren't on the same playing field in terms of model poly count or textures to the degree of ships and aircraft. Ground units typically are around 20-40k in size, there are a few that go above that number but not many. Most of the new ship models are near 100k or more. Aircraft are usually 100-200k, but there are a few extremes in there like the new Mig-29 model at 440k. There are plenty of aircraft though that are below the 100k number, some well below it. For example the 3 WW2 fighters are in the 50-60k range.

 

Well I knew that they aren't on the same levels as aircraft. All I was saying is that just looking at the pictures of the Tiger I (or Tiger II), they don't seem to be any higher detail than the current T-90, or maybe slightly better (which is to say, I think that the Tiger is a great looking model by the way). I could be vastly wrong since I don't play CA frequently but that was just my opinion by looking at things. I guess we will find out soon enough what resolution/poly count the WWII ground units are. Perhaps they are making them sharper since WWII aircraft fly slower? Or they figure people will want to play WWII CA more? Either way it goes, I would imagine that ED is going to do their best to have things optimized well. :thumbup:

[Talisman_VR]

Just as long as the possibility of getting something like 50 to 80 odd pilots on a WWII MP server will not be made difficult then that would be great.

WWII in DCS has the opportunity to be massively popular if it starts attracting WWII pilot enthusiast from other titles.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

[adrianstealth]

is this supposed to be happening this year?

[Vitormouraa]

Yes, it's planned to be released this year. (AFAIK)

[adrianstealth]

That's brilliant ! With cold dark winter coming then this type of major update couldn't be better timed !

 

On that basis it's an instant buy from me !

[Vitormouraa]

Yeah, I'm sure it will be an amazing map. Beautiful scenery, it looks gorgeous. :)