Normandy Map Discussion

[VincentLaw]

I have two perspectives on this. First, I mostly play DCS in singleplayer, and apparently most DCS customers do too, so this is logically where ED's focus is. My singleplayer self is excited to be able to mix and match DCS in a way that feels like a combat FSX. I can select whichever pieces I like and mash them together. That is great. If I want to drive a Jeep down the Las Vegas strip with CA, I can do that. I don't mean that as just a rhetorical example either. I'm actually planning to do that. I have always been an advocate of compatibility between world war 2 and modern modules, and I am very happy to see confirmation that CA will be compatible with the world war 2 assets.

 

Second is my multiplayer perspective. Now, it's still not the idea of unit packs that bothers me here. I'm perfectly fine with the future Kuznetsov and Vinson DLC. My multiplayer self is concerned only by the statement that players will be unable to join servers if they do not own the necessary AI units. With only one unit pack it's not a huge problem, and I know the vast majority of world war 2 enthusiasts will purchase this relevant unit pack anyway, but the easiest way to see the potential of this problem is to imagine these very real possibilities: What happens if a multiplayer mission decides to throw a random Jeep in Las Vegas? What happens when someone thinks it would be cool to have Flak 88 shooting at an A-10 over Georgia? These ideas that would be cool for a single player mission will result in non-world war 2 players being locked out of the server.

 

This problem will only get worse as more unit packs are created, resulting in more potential barriers for server access, which could be harmful to new members of the community. Concerns about this kind of exclusion of new players from servers is valid, but from my experience with other games, the primary result will be lower populations on servers using unit packs, and higher populations on servers with only basic DCS world units.

 

I have two possible suggestions to ED for how they may most easily resolve this issue, and perhaps negate much of the criticism I've seen:

 

Idea #1: Take the DLC Carrier approach and use low detail models for people who do not own the asset pack. It would make sense to restrict CA from driving these low detail units.

 

Idea #2: Use placeholder 3D models when the player joins a server with AI units they don't own. Is that a Tiger II? It's a T-55 now. Panzer IV? T-55. Sherman? T-55. Flak 88? Make it a Zu-23.

 

Both of these solutions will allow for AI unit packs to be sold while also helping preserve the multiplayer community.

Edited March 9, 2017 by VincentLaw

[Raven68]

Everything sounds/looks very good so far! The only outstanding issue I have, and it only personal opinion, is the 1.5+ month wait until release. I expected no more than a month, but why close to 2 months considering it was mentioned that...

We are getting close!

Not my definition of close, but it's a personal perspective. Again things are looking good and I am ready to spend some overtime money on some new ED releases! :)

[NineLine]

While I'm fine with it either way they release it, I'm not sure what you're talking about, $60 is the post-release price for the combo as currently stated.

 

?

 

Its a bundled price sure, based on how they are selling it now (and we have seen how ED likes their bundles, and gives a bit of a price break for them), the individual prices are probably closer to what they are worth. But then what they are worth can be in the eye of the beholder I suppose...

[NineLine]

Everything sounds/looks very good so far! The only outstanding issue I have, and it only personal opinion, is the 1.5+ month wait until release. I expected no more than a month, but why close to 2 months considering it was mentioned that...

Not my definition of close, but it's a personal perspective. Again things are looking good and I am ready to spend some overtime money on some new ED releases! :)

 

Honestly, 1 day is too much of a wait when the goodies look this good, am I right? :)

[NineLine]

Idea #1: Take the DLC Carrier approach and use low detail models for people who do not own the asset pack. It would make sense to restrict CA from driving these low detail units.

 

Idea #2: Use placeholder 3D models when the player joins a server with AI units they don't own. Is that a Tiger II? It's a T-55 now. Panzer IV? T-55. Sherman? T-55. Flak 88? Make it a Zu-23.

 

I thought of stuff like this when I first heard about the approach they were taking. I am not sure these work as even if you remove the ability to see the models for these, there is more going on than just pretty shells.

 

As an example, a pilot might not care what an 88 looks like, just that its shooting at him, he might never get low enough to see it, so in this case he gets everything he wants without ever needing to consider purchasing the pack.

 

So I dont know, I mean even the carrier idea, its not proven that it will be viable in DCS, so we dont even know if that is going to happen, I know that is the plan, but if they cant make it work, then what...

 

And then restricting CA based on ownership of the Unit pack, again, sounds like a lot of effort, so more coding, more core changes and a lot of work when people should just look at how ED likes to put their stuff on sale and save up for that day.

[NineLine]

Looking at the video it seem that ground LOD is ready for playable infantry (FPS): last thing to be implement should be explorable buildings.

 

Gameplay's level could gain a huge advantage.

 

 

Bye

Phant

 

I would love if we got there one day, even if it was a smaller map, maybe Helos only, then air start aircraft, and controllable FPS style infantry... but I think that's not even on the radar, but what fun could that be... anyways, I dont want to drift off topic... but yes, I want to run up that beach in First Person :)

[Cibit]

Very generous pre purchase price. I just cannot wait to fly choppers around this map and obviously the planes that its been designed for too. Also the idea of driving a kettingrad around the place will be joyous too:)

 

Off topic our rep lines have grown long again !

[BlackLion213]

The map looks awesome and so is the trailer. I am particularly impressed by the combination of the new lighting, water effect, and overcast/rain - looks beautiful!

 

• Avro Lancaster

• Hawker Typhoon

• C-47

• Ju-88

• Fw 190 A-6 and A-8

• Bf 109 G-6

• A-20 Havoc/Boston

• B-24

• B-25

• B-26

 

I was expecting the B-17G to be the only new AI with the rest of the action coming the existing DCS WWII birds - this list is a massive upgrade!

 

It also addresses one of my long-term questions: how will the need for an ever-growing variety of AI for new modules be supported?

 

With all of the new and diverse modules coming from ED and the 3rd parties, DCS will need a lot of new AI to offer a complete experience. This new form of DLC supports the creation instead of it being an after-thought (or development burden with an unclear ROI).

 

The proliferation of high-quality DLC campaigns is a great example of how product diversity in DCS can really benefit players. Without DLC campaigns, players would be limited to the campaign that accompanies the module since there is no clear benefit to the devoted time and expense of creating a new one.

 

It also opens the door for a new type of DLC developer to enter the fray or for certain 3rd parties to expand their product line - improving their financial viability and speeding development of future products. The variety of DCS AI mods speaks to the idea that many would be excited to create DLC by offering a product that is much smaller in scope and complexity than a Module or Map. It might also offer a means for a new developer to gain proficiency with the DCS development tools (3D modeling, SFM, ASM for AI) before taking on a project as huge as a new aircraft module.

 

This may seem like a pretty optimistic view to some and I can understand others worrying about the need to buy something else. But the opportunity to have more content and make choices will lead to a much better sim than staying with limited content that is homogenous across all players.

 

Thats my 2 cents.

 

-Nick

[some1]

I was expecting the B-17G to be the only new AI with the rest of the action coming the existing DCS WWII birds - this list is a massive upgrade!

 

 

Keep in mind that this is a list of planned additions in the future. As we all know, "planned for future" in DCS World is an indefinite term that can mean several years to complete.

 

On a positive note, I didn't plan to buy Normandy map as I'm not interested much in a WWII theatre but with that long list of additional assets, I'm sitting on the fence right now. :)

[alado]

Hawker Typhoon............................................ plsssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

[Flogger23m]

Many people (I have no idea why) seem not to be interested in the WWII stuff. This way they can get the map a little cheaper. It has been mentioned that there will be some sort of "modern" mode for the map so those strange people not interested in "real" flying can use all the current assets and they are hardly likely to frequent WWII servers so I think the worries of "fracturing" the community are being overblown. I think we need to give others a bit more credit for having the intelligence to master complex modules and not being confused about which product they want to buy. Of course I could be wrong.......

 

The problem with getting the map only is that modern units will not fit in very well. The towns, props and structures will be from the 1940s. Likewise, I don't think there will be many air fields which can accommodate the jets. Helicopters wouldn't be too bad. Unless you just want to fly a handful of playable WWII planes in a proper setting but with no units to conduct combat with, I don't see why you would not want the AI units. Perhaps a few people just want the map so they can fly their P-51 alone.

 

It is not really much of a deal though. $60 gets you the map + AI units. Considering the price of NTTR, I think it is fair. I am just worried about the few people who may misunderstand and the potential of further fracturing the community.

 

Its a bundled price sure, based on how they are selling it now (and we have seen how ED likes their bundles, and gives a bit of a price break for them), the individual prices are probably closer to what they are worth. But then what they are worth can be in the eye of the beholder I suppose...

 

What they are worth are based on two things really:

1) What they sell for. In this instance, it is worth $60 otherwise ED would charge more.

 

2) The next important part which you already mentioned, what the market feels is acceptable.

 

I think $60 is fair assuming the AI units are up to par and behave properly for their time period. But that is just my opinion.

[showtime817th]

On the video at 1:20 is that a new and updated explosions? Looks new to me if it's not...also looking forward to the new map and assets...I also order a new VKB Gunfighter Pro joystick so, hopefully both of them will show up about the same time.

 

S!

[mwd2]

Thanks for honor the Kickstarter Backer.

[Dav IRL]

Am I happy to pay 60 measly bucks for around 2000 more hours in a new theatre with new models? Hell yes!

[golani79]

Look guys, my money is important to me as well. I have a family, I just bought a house in one of the most expensive markets in North America. So I understand we dont want to part with it when we dont have to. But the quality and effort going into these things is going to be worth it. DLCs are just the way things happen nowadays... I dont have many games anymore that I havent spent extra on... ask my wife... she loves it... not.

 

So before we go off the rails, let it soak in, look at that list, and see what ED is giving you, then decide.

 

As a side note, if you want to post right away, remember we have rules, you are allowed an opinion, but you are not allowed to break the rules expressing that opinion. Calling people names or throwing a tantrum wasnt acceptable in kindergarten and its not acceptable here.

 

I don´t think people are concerned about the price but much more about the separation of the units and the map and the possibility of the MP community getting split up.

Edited March 9, 2017 by golani79

[Paradox]

I don´t think people are concerned about the price but much more about the separation of the units and the map and the possibility of the MP community getting split up.

I agree and take exception to the idea that the number of DCS customers who use multiplayer is so small that our thoughts don't matter at all @cichlidfan

 

After all why are we on the forum if we don't enjoy human interaction in games?

[antagonist]

I was prepared to be up in arms over the AI assets costing extra after seeing some posts here, but considering Normandy+assets is the same price as NTTR, I'm not sure what the fuss is about.

 

The water looks amazing.

 

Yeah, my feelings exactly.

 

Got notified by friends how the map and its assets were going to be split up, went 'dafuq', went ahead and read up on stuff to either warrant or void voicing my aggravation, then went on to find the price for both was not any more reasonable or unreasonable (YMMV) than the one for NTTR.

 

Now I'm sitting here asking what the goddamned problem was in the first place. *shrug*

[steve1977]

I dont know about V1's, but I know the list isnt complete. And things can be added down the line.

 

I would love to see them as well.

 

 

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=168825&page=2

[philstyle]

Yeah, my feelings exactly.

Got notified by friends how the map and its assets were going to be split up, went 'dafuq', went ahead and read up on stuff to either warrant or void voicing my aggravation, then went on to find the price for both was not any more reasonable or unreasonable (YMMV) than the one for NTTR.

Now I'm sitting here asking what the goddamned problem was in the first place. *shrug*

 

 

 

Me too. Woke up to the Sh**storm. Hunted around for the source...

Finally found out that instead of clicking one-button for a $60.00 purchase of map+assets I would have to click two buttons for $30 map + $30 assets.

 

 

Not really the throw-in-the-towel scenario I was expecting based on the volume of brown coloured precipitation coming down.

[MAD-MM]

Well was shooting the last 4 Years on HMWVV and Tanks with my WW2 Birds.

When i decide to build on the free Caucasus Map a Mission with the Gazelle and a German Search Light out of the Asset Pack, how will this work for other Player without WW2 Stuff?

The Price was never the Point.

[Agg]

On the video at 1:20 is that a new and updated explosions?

Nope, those have been in DCS at least since the Mustang was released...

[OnlyforDCS]

Well after reading this thread since the Normandy release schedule & pricing news I have one pretty important (IMO) question, that amazingly no has asked yet so far, so here goes:

 

If I purchase the bundle pack, or just the asset pack for example, and for purely practical reasons, do not wish to install the 2.X Alpha version because I don't want to deal with the bugs, frequent alpha changes etc. or just want to wait for the 2.5 Merge: Will I be able to use the AI Unit pack in the 1.5.X stable release branch? (On the Caucassus map obviously)

 

Hopefully ED have thought of that, since I think a lot of people (especially those that game on the bigger and more popular servers) prefer to stay with the release version until all the Alpha bugs have been ironed out, to save space, not deal with multiple branches etc.

 

Thanks.

Edited March 9, 2017 by OnlyforDCS
grammar

[MBot]

I foresee problems in the future with the approach of separate AI unit packs. Let's take the 40 mm Bofors for example. This is a very useful new AI asset that had a long service live after WWII. Should I include in a new Viggen campaign for example, where it would fit very well, even though this will probably exclude the majority of Viggen players from being able to play it? Or the new ships? Or should I omit a useful asset that is available in DCS in order to reach more users? If such separate units packs are the future, questions like this will multiply. Those that own everything will want missions/campaigns to make maximum use of everything, while the others don't want to be excluded from missions/campaigns over some minor units they don't own. Fracturing even of SP content will be a real consequence.

 

Just for the records, I do not have a problem with the price itself.

[NRG-Vampire]

Well was shooting the last 4 Years on HMWVV and Tanks with my WW2 Birds.

When i decide to build on the free Caucasus Map a Mission with the Gazelle and a German Search Light out of the Asset Pack, how will this work for other Player without WW2 Stuff?

The Price was never the Point.

 

honestly, i dont see where the problem is

 

this is all up to the mission designer and to the 3D models what he wants to use in the mission

 

if the mission designer did not put any currently available official objects into that mission (M1 or T-72 tanks) then you wont see these models in the mission. this is sure-fire

 

moreover: today if you made a mission with/used community-made-mod-models (tanks, ships, structures etc.) and you host this mission online then clients who does not "installed" the same mods and its models wont see these in the mission too, or wont be able to join to the mission

this asset pack will be the "mods-addons" implementation and the 3D models

this is how simple: if you "installed" the asset pack you will see the models, otherwise wont. if you "installed" the map you will see the map, otherwise wont

 

 

 

ED offered 4 choices:

1. buy nothing

2. buy only the map ---(will be good for (currently available in the ME) modern vehicles and aircrafts as well)

3. buy only the asset pack --- ( "mods-addons" implementation and the 3D models will be usable on other maps as well and vehicles will be drive-able by Combined Arms module, hopefully, if i understand it correctly)

4. buy both the map and the asset pack

Edited March 9, 2017 by NRG-Vampire

[StandingCow]

The fracturing of the community is the only concern I have with all of this. With the amount of work it takes, they can't give the maps away, and selling maps fractures the community, but now an asset pack as well?

 

I was thinking about this... Which is better? 1. Sell all WW2 maps at a premium price since they include these assets. 2. Sell assets separately so that people only have to pay for them once and sell the maps for less (this gives people the option). 3. Wait until they actually have additional WW2 maps then present these assets as separate purchases (assuming more WW2 maps will be coming out).