What map do you see for yourself?

[Zimmerdylan]

OK....I know that this "poll" isn't really fair at this point seeing that Normandy has not been released, but my curiosity doesn't really center around experience as much as interest in one or the other.

 

So my question is:

 

Of the 3 maps now (or shortly) available, which of them do you feel that you will be or are flying the most?

If you could please clarify why you prefer it or think that you will prefer your chosen map over the others.

I can tell with some degree of certainty that I will probably favor the 1944 map at this point because I fly WWII modules about 60% of the time when flying DCS. I have always had a great fondness for this era of aviation. So whether the Normandy map is perfect or not. I see it being a pretty important part of DCS for me. And then NTTR right after that, and then the 1.5 map last.

So what do other people think?

I am really interested in how this plays out. I thought that the NTTR map would be much more popular than it seems to be but it doesn't appear to be that way at all. So I'm looking to get a feel of what people are thinking about the newest addition and how it will impact the already existing maps.

 

Thanks guys.

Edited May 21, 2017 by Zimmerdylan

[shagrat]

All of them... Of course.

[some1]

It's still good ol' Caucasus for me.

 

NTTR I seldom play, partly because it's inconvenient to use a separate DCS install, partly because some airplanes don't work well in the high desert, partly because it's an alpha branch and sometimes there are more issues there than on the 1.5x version.

 

Normandy I don't plan to buy. Not interested in a WWII map and I decided to vote with my wallet this time.

[Northstar98]

Caucuses for me, largest body of water, varied terrain, gigantic possibility as a theatre and for mission design.

 

NTTR I'm not really that into but would like to purchase it at a later date.

 

With Normandy, I was watching the livestream and I found this (see attachment) Notice how the English Channel is blocked off by land at both ends? So that Cornwall is actually connected to France? That has to be hands down the biggest immersion killer in human history as the map now isn't even accurate! I'm sure it's all for good reason but wouldn't it be better to just have the south west of England modelled in it's entirety and then have endless water? Because having fictional land blocking off the water, and connecting the South-West of England to France is I'm sorry just a colossal immersion killer, I'd personally cut England off, and have endless water to the west and maybe keep the blocked off bit of channel to north-east (see 2nd screenshot).

 

I know that on the Caucuses the water is blocked off by land, but only at the Bosphorus strait to the south-west which is only 3km across, the whole of the Black Sea itself is accessible and the land bordering it apart from the eastern side (which is the focus of the map) is low detail (flat) anyway...

Edited May 21, 2017 by Northstar98

[Pikey]

Caucasus 2.5 for me. It's just because the balance of what I would play would lean towards the more modern kit. Come Hormuz, I'd be moving and living on a carrier forever.

[Northstar98]

Caucasus 2.5 for me. It's just because the balance of what I would play would lean towards the more modern kit. Come Hormuz, I'd be moving and living on a carrier forever.

 

Agreed I'm bursting for the Caucuses 2.5 map, I just hope the water in the Straits of Hormuz map aren't cordoned off by fictional land like what I discussed above.

Edited May 21, 2017 by Northstar98

[cichlidfan]

Considering that not only has Normandy not been released (though I have flown it), but nobody has seen what the 'new' Caucasus map will look like or seen more than a glimpse of what Nevada will look like with the new lighting system, there is no basis for valid decision to be made.

[Northstar98]

Considering that not only has Normandy not been released (though I have flown it), but nobody has seen what the 'new' Caucasus map will look like or seen more than a glimpse of what Nevada will look like with the new lighting system, there is no basis for valid decision to be made.

 

But Normandy is the WW2 map and the Caucuses map and NTTR we already have. Sure we don't have the fully improved graphics for either but we already have the full Caucuses map and we already have the possible uses of the theatre sorted (which are loads) and the same for NTTR (which to me has less potential than the Caucuses just because of the lack of varying terrain and no large bodies of water). But it's possible uses as a theatre, we already have good ideas for.

 

Normandy adds an authentic WW2 setting which on the face of it looks very good. It also provides us the possibility of historical amphibious landings

 

We certainly have a valid basis for a decision on map preference. As DCS is a sandbox simulation, allowing players to largely do what they want, and sculpt missions as they desire (which was my main selling point from an ex FSX player - plus the far superior realism and the fact that combat is supported, and being a huge improvement over Strike Fighters 2).

 

The map that currently offers the most choice for missions is currently the Caucuses as it checks/has the possibility to check every single box. The only one it doesn't are missions involving larger ranges, which really demands much larger maps, to the point that a world map becomes more desirable (and yes I can dream! :D) but the resources required for such a thing is so immense, that even just making a very basic world with basic airfields and then have higher detail regions (which would be the maps we already have) purchased to add detail to specific regions is huge; which means that some/most players, are understandably not in favour of such a thing, purely because the possibility of it ever surfacing is extremely slim :cry:

Edited May 21, 2017 by Northstar98

[gospadin]

Ultimately, I believe I'll choose to mostly fly NTTR.

 

Normandy is historically interesting, but the terrain itself is somewhat boring. I like having mountain to hide behind in Caucasus and NTTR.

[rajdary]

Mostly Caucasus, having bought the other 2 on presale i will still always think of the Caucasus as the real "Tour of Duty Map" , Nttr is clearly training no matter how much imagination can be put in missions.(May be only UFOs Invasion would cut it for me as "real":lol:)

Normandy will be very intresting but i am mostly into modern jets.

[al531246]

Caucasus but when Straight of Hormuz drops, that'll probably take the lead position.

[cichlidfan]

But Normandy is the WW2 map and the Caucuses map and NTTR we already have. Sure we don't have the fully improved graphics for either but we already have the full Caucuses map and ...

 

Lighting for Caucasus is almost secondary. ED is redoing the map and the changes, that I think we will be getting, are going to breathe new life into that map. I expect that many people that might want to fly a different map, just for the change of scenery, will be reconsidering the Caucasus.

 

Personally, I don't even like looking at a screenshot of the current Caucasus because the mountains ruin every image that shows them. A new mesh and realistic looking trees will make it, almost, a completely new map.

 

I had high hopes for NTTR but it didn't live up to my expectations and new lighting isn't going to fix the things that disappointed me.

 

Normandy is too small for jet missions, unless you want to fly across the channel for every mission.

 

The bottom line is it is too soon for the poll to have any meaningful value, except to satisfy the OP's curiosity.

[Phantom88]

I love NEVADA Now and spend all my time there,Really looking forward to the new lighting effects in NTTR 2.1....I'm a WWII Kickstarter Backer and will get Normandy + Assets pack,But I'm more looking forward to SoH Map for some dense urban [blackHawk Down] Chopper flying

[The Legman]

Caucasus and 2.5 can't come soon enough. One version will make things much easier. Can't fathom the nightmares the devs are having having to release multiple branches at the same time.

 

I see myself flying mostly in the Caucasus until a more interesting modern scenery is set.

 

I have NTTR but barely fly on it. I plan to fly on Normandy mostly helos and of course warbirds, but they are still not the scenery i am looking for.

 

Strait of Hormuz, Vietnam, Balkans, would add so much. Pity that maps take forever to come. They are so detailed in the end though, but still.

[Northstar98]

Lighting for Caucasus is almost secondary. ED is redoing the map and the changes, that I think we will be getting, are going to breathe new life into that map. I expect that many people that might want to fly a different map, just for the change of scenery, will be reconsidering the Caucasus.

 

Personally, I don't even like looking at a screenshot of the current Caucasus because the mountains ruin every image that shows them. A new mesh and realistic looking trees will make it, almost, a completely new map.

 

I had high hopes for NTTR but it didn't live up to my expectations and new lighting isn't going to fix the things that disappointed me.

 

Normandy is too small for jet missions, unless you want to fly across the channel for every mission.

 

Again, this all from a purely graphical perspective - in which yes, we can't make a decision because we only have 2 maps released - 1 of which under heavy refit and the other still waiting on other graphical improvements. But as a theatre, and the qualities that define theatres (excluding graphics) Caucuses gets my vote.

 

I also agree that as it currently stands Normandy is ill-suited for jet missions (or anything that isn't WW2 for that matter) which is a shame seeing as the Caucuses map, while most of it is the Black Sea is still significantly larger, with significantly more space for players to actually use. Plus I loathe this (see attachment)

Edited May 21, 2017 by Northstar98

[Zimmerdylan]

Hmm....Actually, so far the results are exactly what I thought they'd be. And I'm willing to bet that they will not be much different weeks after the release of Normandy.

Judging by all that I have heard via TS in the servers, and everything I have read on the forums, NTTR will probably never see the popularity that Causasus enjoys, and the Normandy map (I predicted in my mind) seems to be too specialized to many for their purposes. So from all that I have listened to about it from people who aren't purchasing it, it has already been predetermined by many as a non starter. The results of the pole make perfect sense to me.

I agree with another poster that Normandy will be pretty much a WWII map. I probably will never fly anything other than WWII era planes on it. Something about it feels as though I would be tracking mud all over hallowed ground. And that's fine. I'll still most likely will fly it a lot.

One thing that I have noticed about a lot of folks is that they expect a lot out of these sims. Sometimes (IMO) unreasonably so. I remember having many expectations of DCS when I first started flying it. And.....I found myself continually unhappy with it more often than not. But then I began to come around to the reality of all of this. It's not real. It's a simulation. By it's very nature it can never replace reality. If we expect it to be as good as reality, then we're just shorting ourselves of a whole lot of enjoyment. So I will accept the Normandy map for what it is. I accept Nevada for what it is. Same for Caucasus. I fly Nevada because I live in this desert. And even though It's not exact, or even close to exact. I cannot expect it to be. And I don't. As a result, I enjoy DCS a whole lot more than a lot of people I see here complaining about details that just don't really matter.

Immersion is in the eye of the beholder.

 

As a last thought, I could not afford a computer that could handle any flight sim that was remotely close to reality. As it is always being stated on the forums of another sim that many here fly. When people there get on the forums and cry about their FPS being 12. There isn't a computer built that could handle it on max settings. And in my opinion, that sim isn't half as detailed as DCS.

I'm pretty happy with all 3 maps. But then I have no issues with immersion, or not being able to imagine scenarios in my DCS world. For me.....It's what I make of it.

 

Addition: ED has done an outstanding job of creating three worlds for me to play in and fulfill my boyhood dream of being a pilot. I believe that they have done and still do their best to create a detailed, believable platform for me to do this.

They do their part in all of this. If I did not think so, I would not be paying for any of this stuff. I think that the rest is on me. So it is up to me to do create the reality. I cannot expect the devs to think for me. My part is using my imagination and letting go of the paradigms that confine their wonderful creation to mediocrity. And I never disappoint myself. Call me crazy...............but it keeps me happy.

Edited May 22, 2017 by Zimmerdylan

[Ironhand]

Late to the party...again. Caucasus.

 

Can anyone point me to any details of what the revised/new Caucasus map will offer?

[OnlyforDCS]

I for one will fly Normandy and Nevada from 2.1 until the 2.5 merge. Depending on server viability, missions, bugs, etc. of course.

 

Im mostly flying WWII stuff now anyway.

 

If the merge is delayed again, or is a long time in coming, then I guess Ill be back to 1.5 to get a fix of modern jet combat, unless there are some decent servers on 2.1, as it seems most of the DCS userbase is quite happy where it is.

[Solty]

Probably Normandy. That depends on the population though. I don't want to be alone there.

[winchesterdelta1]

I want big as maps where it that takes weeks to weaken infrastructure and has theater defense weapons you have to take out or destroy. So basically all maps as long as they are big and have immersive combat. I want maps where you make a mistake and die, and you have to fly another two hours. I want maps where if you fail to punch a hole int he enemy defenses your entire flight has to abort and fly back for another hour without any result.

[FalconPlot16]

if i had them all then my answer would be : normandy and nevada

[Exorcet]

They are all good maps and I intend to fly them all. The Caucasus map is probably going to be my preferred region due to its size and airfield spacing.

 

If Nevada ends up growing, it might overtake the old map. A change of scenery to something less familiar is also good because I don't like having every square inch of map memorized.

[msalama]

Probably SOH and/or Caucasus v2.

 

I've got NTTR installed ATM & am downloading DCS v2.1 / Normandy now, but Nevada is just too plain and boring. And for Normandy I'd need a dedicated ground attack plane first since I'm a groundpounder, not a fighter puke ;)

[Boris]

Definitely Caucasus due to it's suitability for modern combat scenarios. Can't wait for the 2.5 version.

I'll be spending more time in Nevada and the new Normandy map once the most glaring bugs are ironed out.