DCSW 2.5 and Caucasus Discussion?

[Raven68]

I have noticed that there are new threads creeping up over time on the various items for example, DCS F/A-18C OFP..., DCS Newsletter Discussion, DCS World 1.5 & 2.0 Open Alpha and I just noticed today DCS Update Patch Notes Discussion.

 

Is it ok to open this new thread to discuss what I believe most us agree to be the biggest milestone for ED since launching the DCS series? It seems to be barely mentioned since all the hype on WWII and it's elements. Don't get me wrong I love what ED has done to bring this forward I applaud them for it. Also the F/A-18C has stolen a lot of thunder since it was announced it would be demonstrated at E3 and there is nothing negative to say about that either. It's getting a lot of deserved attention.

 

I do have to ask Matt and any ED staff where is the PR for 2.5 and the Caucasus map? Is it not mature enough to mention or post any WIP pics? I do recall something from last year ...

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=170914

 

I am sure I am not the only one who is interested in the status of this. :)

[NineLine]

They let us know that as Normandy gets polished up and finished off, work would start moving over to getting the Caucasus Map ready for release, as well there are some big effects still being worked on such as explosions. As always, when it gets close to release, Wags and the team start sharing more and more info.

[remi]

Looking forward to the new effects, probably more so than the caucasus map, because that's the only graphics change that hasn't been implemented yet.

 

Better performance for these things would be great too.

 

 

Has anyone else noticed that sometimes clouds and contrails and missile trails sometimes flicker?

[MikeMikeJuliet]

I belive the topic has been under wraps for two reasons:

 

1 As of late the Spitfire, the Normandy map, the Hornet (and Harrier and Tomcat although not ED:s projects) have been the center of attention. This and the fact that 2.5 has been delayed from the initial approximate timeframe that it has not been as relevant a topic for a while.

 

2 The new version of Caucasus and the 2.5 version have been discussed to death the last time we had any substantial info on the subject (back in 2016 when we last got to see screenshots of the Caucasus remake).

 

 

So I feel the discussion has not been relevant, and probably won't become relevant before the Hornet is out.

 

 

Regards,

MikeMikeJuliet

[Raven68]

So I feel the discussion has not been relevant, and probably won't become relevant before the Hornet is out.

 

I am not sure how true it is now, but my understanding was that the F/A-18C would usher in naval ops for the SoH map which is dependent on 2.5. If it is true then it has to become relevant before the Hornet.

[probad]

if you give some thought to what wags and olgerd have been saying as to the hornet release you should realize your understanding is wrong.

 

there is obviously not going to be soh release before the hornet, and e3 has demonstrated carrier mechanics in 2.1, outside of soh.

so no, 2.5 and soh is not a relevant discussion right now.

[Raven68]

F/A-18C is several months away according to Matt. Could be towards the end of the year for all we know. What else have they said to give you anything definitive as to it being before 2.5? Do you have the pulse of ED? There are no dates for either item, but we do know that both are being worked on and resources are shifting to completing the Caucasus map. So why is it not relevant or worthy for discussion?

 

I will agree that I am skeptic about SoH, but again what do you or I know on the true status of this map? There was a mention in another thread that there may be a surprise for this year and SoH could very well be that. You can call it reaching, but is it really not worth a discussion?

[cichlidfan]

From Wags, regarding SoH, on May 29th.

 

Please do not expect any news on this project until after 2.5 is released.

 

Thanks

[MikeMikeJuliet]

I never said the subject isn't worth discussing. All I noted is that it might not be as relevant at the moment. And SoH is not relevant to the OP topic.

 

It has also been stated by Wags that the work on Caucasus continues After the Normandy is Completed. And Normandy is not yet completed. As said, the hornet is most likey coming later this year (tentative, not definite). But we do not have any statements considering 2.5 or Caucasus, which by logic would indicate to me, that they are farther out in the timeline than the Hornet. Also remember that ED currently has only one Map-dev-team. They need to finish Normandy first before any significant effort can be put toward Caucasus.

 

Naturally this is mere speculation as ED may have a plan for a surprise they intend to keep until the very end... but that is also speculation.

 

 

I'm not devaluing the 2.5/Caucasus discussion. All I am saying is, we have not had any new info on the subject for a while and there are more prevalent subjects on the table currently.

 

Regards,

MikeMikeJuliet

[NeilWillis]

When ED give us something to talk about regarding 2.5, then the discussion will gain some momentum, and relevance. Right now, we're in the midst of Normandy being fixed and the rolling out of a stable and complete 2.1.

 

All we know right now is 2.5 is coming, but we don't know when, and it is on hold until Normandy is complete.

 

The state of the F/A-18C is a separate issue, and we can hopefully expect to see it this year, but even that is by no means certain. Exhibiting a demo is a different animal to releasing it as an almost complete module..

[AKULA_OPTIMUS]

This version will mean the unification of all maps in one product, I can´t imagine any other reason not to make this a number one priority.

[terminator363]

This version will mean the unification of all maps in one product, I can´t imagine any other reason not to make this a number one priority.

 

Literally my thinking...

[Lao Fei Mao]

When ED give us something to talk about regarding 2.5, then the discussion will gain some momentum, and relevance. Right now, we're in the midst of Normandy being fixed and the rolling out of a stable and complete 2.1.

 

All we know right now is 2.5 is coming, but we don't know when, and it is on hold until Normandy is complete.

 

The state of the F/A-18C is a separate issue, and we can hopefully expect to see it this year, but even that is by no means certain. Exhibiting a demo is a different animal to releasing it as an almost complete module..

 

------2.5 is not coming, but will come out finally, might be the end of next year.:D

[Raven68]

------2.5 is not coming, but will come out finally, might be the end of next year.:D

 

My hope is that it is closer than what is being led on by all the silence. Yes I know there have been a lot of resource dedicated to the Normandy map to get it to early release, but I believe there has been some resources dedicated to the Caucasus map to keep the work going in parallel with Normandy.

[The Black Swan]

My hope is that it is closer than what is being led on by all the silence. Yes I know there have been a lot of resource dedicated to the Normandy map to get it to early release, but I believe there has been some resources dedicated to the Caucasus map to keep the work going in parallel with Normandy.

 

I'm inclined to agree,

Last year just before it was pushed past the end, we were told that they just had a few big problems to sort out before they would be ready to release 2.5.

The biggest was how to render large forests, The other was re-texturing a bunch of items.

Both of these I would think would have been helped by developing the Normandy map.

A lot of work was done on the caucuses last summer.

 

But we will see, I will be more than happy to stick with 1.5 and 2.1 if I have the hornet! :D

[twistking]

i would imagine, that also the campaign designers would need to do a pass on all their missions, to make sure placement is still good with the new forest-gemometry and that AI LOS is still decent with the higher mesh resoulution and new trees.

[The Black Swan]

i would imagine, that also the campaign designers would need to do a pass on all their missions, to make sure placement is still good with the new forest-gemometry and that AI LOS is still decent with the higher mesh resoulution and new trees.

 

Wow I hadn't thought of that.

[Raven68]

i would imagine, that also the campaign designers would need to do a pass on all their missions, to make sure placement is still good with the new forest-gemometry and that AI LOS is still decent with the higher mesh resoulution and new trees.

Wow I hadn't thought of that.

 

+1

[Stacker]

i would imagine, that also the campaign designers would need to do a pass on all their missions, to make sure placement is still good with the new forest-gemometry and that AI LOS is still decent with the higher mesh resoulution and new trees.

 

Although if this proved to be a huge hurdle I would happily drop forward compatibility with 1.X mission files in a 2.5.X build. If the cost of getting a 2.5 build sooner is without backward compatibility then I'd be prepared to take that! YMMV

[cichlidfan]

Although if this proved to be a huge hurdle I would happily drop forward compatibility with 1.X mission files in a 2.5.X build. If the cost of getting a 2.5 build sooner is without backward compatibility then I'd be prepared to take that! YMMV

 

The problem with that is there are paid campaigns that would also become incompatible. Then there is the issue of no longer having any training missions/campaigns for any of the the aircraft. The loss of both of those items would hurt the sales potential of ED's products.

[Stacker]

The problem with that is there are paid campaigns that would also become incompatible. Then there is the issue of no longer having any training missions/campaigns for any of the the aircraft. The loss of both of those items would hurt the sales potential of ED's products.

 

Retro-fixing them post release would be a compromise moving forward to remove any hold ups. Anyway, this is all rather theoretical.

[NineLine]

Although if this proved to be a huge hurdle I would happily drop forward compatibility with 1.X mission files in a 2.5.X build. If the cost of getting a 2.5 build sooner is without backward compatibility then I'd be prepared to take that! YMMV

 

I don't think that would be an option, I am sure that ED would not want to lose all that content.

[hazzer]

They let us know that as Normandy gets polished up and finished off, work would start moving over to getting the Caucasus Map ready for release, as well there are some big effects still being worked on such as explosions. As always, when it gets close to release, Wags and the team start sharing more and more info.

 

Wasn't Normandy made by a third party? Is Caucasus going to be updated by the same third party?

[NineLine]

Wasn't Normandy made by a third party? Is Caucasus going to be updated by the same third party?

 

Normandy was built by a 3rd Party, but ED did a lot of clean up work to get it into DCS. Caucasus is being done by ED, as well as SoH.

[Stacker]

I don't think that would be an option, I am sure that ED would not want to lose all that content.

 

For an Alpha/Beta I think it would be worth it.