Normandy Map Discussion

[jermin]

No

 

DCS 2 Open alpha early access is what you need, once normandy is out you download it in the module manager, if you dont have NTTR you will not need to have it also

 

How can I check whether I have DCS 2 Open alpha early access or not?

[Nirvi]

How can I check whether I have DCS 2 Open alpha early access or not?

 

You can download it here for free:

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/downloads/world/alpha/

[DD_Fenrir]

Case 1. My friend wants to join me on Normandy Map to fly WW2 era mission but doesn't have WW2 Asset pack and it is required as the mission designer used assets from it.

 

Response: If your chum wants to fly WW2 era missions and has the Normandy map why didn't they get the bundle? Why would anyone buy the Normandy map if they're interested in WW2 era missions and not get the assets too? Nonsensical.

 

Case 2. My friend wants to join me on Caucasus Map to fly WW2 era mission but doesn't have WW2 Asset pack and it is required as the mission designer used assets from it

 

Response: So your friend isn't interested in the Normandy map but likes WW2 era missions. Okay, bit disingenuous but I can see the logic. However, the case 1 response still stands. If you're interested in WW2 content get the Asset Pack. The other option is they have to buy Normandy to access the WW2 assets even if they don't actually want the map.

 

Or... Maybe what they actually want is all the content but don't want to pay for it.... hmmm.

 

Case 3: My friend wants to fly modern a/c over Normandy but isn't interested in the WW2 Assets

 

Response: Win! With the current system they're not being charged for content that they find irrelevant.

Edited March 10, 2017 by DD_Fenrir

[FlightControl]

Just in case anyone was in an answering mood....there's an LST and other beachable ships....can we beach them and have (script) unloading of units - the current Caucasus engine denies us this. Will that be a new engine feature?

 

Pleased to see the impressive list of extras.

 

Charming little avatar you got there Pikey :-)

[TwoLate]

Case 1. My friend wants to join me on Normandy Map to fly WW2 era mission but doesn't have WW2 Asset pack and it is required as the mission designer used assets from it.

 

Response: If your chum wants to fly WW2 era missions and has the Normandy map why didn't they get the bundle? Why would anyone buy the Normandy map if they're interested in WW2 era missions and not get the assets too? Nonsensical.

 

Case 2. My friend wants to join me on Caucasus Map to fly WW2 era mission but doesn't have WW2 Asset pack and it is required as the mission designer used assets from it

 

Response: So your friend isn't interested in the Normandy map but likes WW2 era missions. Okay, bit disingenuous but I can see the logic. However, the case 1 response still stands. If you're interested in WW2 content get the Asset Pack. The other option is they have to buy Normandy to access the WW2 assets even if they don't actually want the map.

 

Or... Maybe what they actually want is all the content but don't want to pay for it.... hmmm.

 

Case 3: My friend wants to fly modern a/c over Normandy but isn't interested in the WW2 Assets

 

Response: Win! With the current system they're not being charged for content that they find irrelevant.

Also hey I want the WW2 objects so I can use it on Crimea. (I wonder if you can do that) or use it in NTTR.

[cichlidfan]

(I wonder if you can do that) or use it in NTTR.

 

I believe that is the plan.

[drPhibes]

There's no pleasing some folks. If Normandy was only sold as a complete package, people would be complaining about the price and asking for the option of buying it without the period AI.

[NineLine]

Many country have use Bofor guns until the early ninety, I am not including the third world

 

 

This is my Bofor Gun after my IQC in RCA July 1989

 

%5Bimg%5D[/img]

 

MBot have done it's homework, for what I recall, he have been civilize and polite. By being a creator of content he may have spot a problem down the line that most of us, the end user, haven't or can't see yet. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

This of course is true, and if any units we get are still in use today, I have zero issue forwarding requests to move them from the pack to the global unit list. But lets be fair, that wasnt his point. As a content creator, you have to have a handle on your audience, and as I said, its not much different than making content for a new module that not everyone might have right now.

[myHelljumper]

This of course is true, and if any units we get are still in use today, I have zero issue forwarding requests to move them from the pack to the global unit list.

 

Maybe that's the solution, pure WW2 units stay in the pack, units like the bofor that are still in use today can be put in the base game. :)

 

No loss for ED because people who want the pack will still buy it for the WW2 stuff and all the community can enjoy the modern area relevant units.

[NineLine]

I cant promise it will happen, but if we can make a case for it, ED is pretty reasonable. I believe Iran still uses bofor units as well, so its possible we could make that happen.

[myHelljumper]

I cant promise it will happen, but if we can make a case for it, ED is pretty reasonable. I believe Iran still uses bofor units as well, so its possible we could make that happen.

 

I'm very happy to hear that it can be possible :).

Edited March 10, 2017 by myHelljumper

[NineLine]

I havent talked to anyone about it, but it makes sense to me, and its not like we are talking a lot of WWII units that see action currently.

[Decibel dB]

This of course is true, and if any units we get are still in use today, I have zero issue forwarding requests to move them from the pack to the global unit list. But lets be fair, that wasnt his point. As a content creator, you have to have a handle on your audience, and as I said, its not much different than making content for a new module that not everyone might have right now.

 

 

Well to be fair I think it was. Perhaps I miss read him but from my angle, noting he have said, was wrong, misleading or false, it was his point of view, he made some good point and it was delivered in a polite and constructive way.

 

Again this is my understanding of it's post and from the non native English speaker that I am :thumbup:

[NineLine]

Well to be fair I think it was. Perhaps I miss read him but from my angle, noting he have said, was wrong, misleading or false, it was his point of view, he made some good point and it was delivered in a polite and constructive way.

 

Again this is my understanding of it's post and from the non native English speaker that I am :thumbup:

 

You are right, its possible he was picking that one unit because there are instances of that unit still used today... but that is one unit, it doesnt negate the point of charging for the asset pack, or having it distributed the way it is.

 

Anyways, only he could clear that up, my points still stand.

[Decibel dB]

This of course is true, and if any units we get are still in use today, I have zero issue forwarding requests to move them from the pack to the global unit list.

 

If it's that simple to do this with few units that my inter lap , we have noting to worries about the future, we're in good hands :thumbup:

[NineLine]

If it's that simple to do this with few units that my inter lap , we have noting to worries about the future, we're in good hands :thumbup:

 

Again, this is only my opinion, I dont make any decisions. Its possible they dont see this the same way.

[steve1977]

Blown away again by those latest screenshots, cant wait to play multiplayer with this map...

[Pikey]

As someone who worked with a modeller for weeks just to produce just one ship for the community only to see little uptake because it's a mod and that's way too complex for some people, I'm disappointed in peoples reaction to the extra choice Eagle Dynamics gave them by splitting the cost of the assets and the map. I find the intellect behind it selfish, I've found many posts lacked foresight or understanding.

 

WW2 was never part of DCS to begin with, despite the platform being free for the original 90's based weaponry and the continual development every week that's never announced in the weekly updates but you always find when you look through the encyclopdedia.

 

So to bring WW2 up to a standard (and a recent standard at that) it's a completely new factor for DCS that has nothing to do with it's original platform. To get there, (and I actually have been heavily involved in the modelling, texturing and LUA work for one unit) takes an inordinate amount of time that must be recouped.

 

I will proudly be hosting this DLC in multiplayer, with fantastic task based scripting, patrolling, AI slot balancing, flak and bomber escort. And the non complaining enthusiasts will be most welcome.

[Bearfoot]

As someone who worked with a modeller for weeks just to produce just one ship for the community only to see little uptake because it's a mod and that's way too complex for some people, I'm disappointed in peoples reaction to the extra choice Eagle Dynamics gave them by splitting the cost of the assets and the map. I find the intellect behind it selfish, I've found many posts lacked foresight or understanding.

 

WW2 was never part of DCS to begin with, despite the platform being free for the original 90's based weaponry and the continual development every week that's never announced in the weekly updates but you always find when you look through the encyclopdedia.

 

So to bring WW2 up to a standard (and a recent standard at that) it's a completely new factor for DCS that has nothing to do with it's original platform. To get there, (and I actually have been heavily involved in the modelling, texturing and LUA work for one unit) takes an inordinate amount of time that must be recouped.

 

I will proudly be hosting this DLC in multiplayer, with fantastic task based scripting, patrolling, AI slot balancing, flak and bomber escort. And the non complaining enthusiasts will be most welcome.

 

+1

[myHelljumper]

As someone who worked with a modeller for weeks just to produce just one ship for the community only to see little uptake because it's a mod and that's way too complex for some people, I'm disappointed in peoples reaction to the extra choice Eagle Dynamics gave them by splitting the cost of the assets and the map. I find the intellect behind it selfish, I've found many posts lacked foresight or understanding.

 

WW2 was never part of DCS to begin with, despite the platform being free for the original 90's based weaponry and the continual development every week that's never announced in the weekly updates but you always find when you look through the encyclopdedia.

 

So to bring WW2 up to a standard (and a recent standard at that) it's a completely new factor for DCS that has nothing to do with it's original platform. To get there, (and I actually have been heavily involved in the modelling, texturing and LUA work for one unit) takes an inordinate amount of time that must be recouped.

 

I will proudly be hosting this DLC in multiplayer, with fantastic task based scripting, patrolling, AI slot balancing, flak and bomber escort. And the non complaining enthusiasts will be most welcome.

 

Yup.

[Boris]

I totally agree that the assets deserve to be paid for, as they represent significant development efforts. They're not just scenery but also contain controllable vehicles for combined arms.

 

Still, I find it a shame that these assets are separate from the map. My worry is, that this could lead to increasing incompatibility in multiplayer and more complexity in terms of prerequisites for campaigns etc.

[tom1502]

I don't understand the fuss here.

 

People openly proclaimed that they did not want WW2 in DCS and that they would not be interested. In effect they split the community. This solution means they can buy the map and use it for whatever they want, but they don't have to do WW2. If they don't want it they don't buy it. If they don't want it then the chances are that they are not going to join a WW2 server anyway, so they don't need it.

 

ED has just given people what they originally asked for, and the people that want to fly WW2 can do so - they just have to buy the extra bits to enable it. Really think people need to move on from this.

[MAD-MM]

I don't understand the fuss here.

 

People openly proclaimed that they did not want WW2 in DCS and that they would not be interested. In effect they split the community. This solution means they can buy the map and use it for whatever they want, but they don't have to do WW2. If they don't want it they don't buy it. If they don't want it then the chances are that they are not going to join a WW2 server anyway, so they don't need it.

 

ED has just given people what they originally asked for, and the people that want to fly WW2 can do so - they just have to buy the extra bits to enable it. Really think people need to move on from this.

 

 

 

Mean we talking about the future of DCS call this Asset Pack 1 not only rely on DCS WW2

[Captain Orso]

Many country have use Bofor guns until the early ninety, I am not including the third world

 

 

This is my Bofor Gun after my IQC in RCA July 1989

 

%5Bimg%5Dhttp%3A//i.imgur.com/2gJoqBQ.jpg[/img]

 

MBot have done it's homework, for what I recall, he have been civilize and polite. By being a creator of content he may have spot a problem down the line that most of us, the end user, haven't or can't see yet. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

Yes, but Bofors is not Bofors. The WWII Bofors is the 40mm/L60. After WWII they got phased out for the 40mm/L70, which has practically nothing in common with the L60, other than both being 40mm and both being from AB Bofors.

 

I didn't single anybody out on their tone or aggressiveness. I addressed MBot about his, -you can't prove it won't splinter the community-statement. You can never prove a negative, but that is not evidence of a positive.

 

He and others claimed to know what the results will be. I asked for evidence of that.

Edited March 10, 2017 by Captain Orso

[Captain Orso]

This of course is true, and if any units we get are still in use today, I have zero issue forwarding requests to move them from the pack to the global unit list. But lets be fair, that wasnt his point. As a content creator, you have to have a handle on your audience, and as I said, its not much different than making content for a new module that not everyone might have right now.

 

No, this is not true. The WWII 40mm Bofors is the L60. Post WWII it's the L70. Those two have nothing to do with each other.

 

Now, if ED wanted to do a quick refresh of the L60 to add to DCS-World as the L70, that would certainly be welcome ;)