Middle East Wishlist Thread

[MBot]

To critique the proposal itself, as far as I can see it includes not a single Coalition air base for Desert Shield/Desert Storm. I think it also includes no Iranian air base from the Iran-Iraq war. As such the proposed map would be fairly useless.

[Baco]

Now that is acriticism I can take. yes I agree that I have no idea where teh military bases are, my proposal was merely geogrphical. And well OK then Not posible. Bases too far away. Lest keep flying the caucasus as vietnam LOL...

[lazduc]

In this simulator/game, there seems to be an obsession with almost perfect reality. The

 

aircraft/maps must be an exact representation of the actual object. The song is, a price is

 

paid for this perfection and nothing less is acceptable. ( Which becomes very subjective

 

contrasted to the printed information from numerous sources.) Endless mind-numbing

 

useless dialog and arguments are posted. I think to narcotized the virus home-bound,

 

entertainment challenged, aeronautical gifted into aircraft geographical nirvana.

 

 

IMHO Laz

[Baco]

Its True..

There is a saying in my country that goes like this:

 

Something "Perfect" is enemy of something "Good".

 

Meaning that trying to achieve perfectión, you dont even reach a good enough level, because you squander your resources and never get anything done...

[Mr_Burns]

True dat..I fly hundreds of missions against narcotics in the mountains, the LGB vs Party in Clear and Present Danger but in the Caucuses, no problems here and agree with the sand map, enough already!

 

 

With the Falkland Islands and the new Pacific Islands there will be some nice sea maps.

 

 

Perhaps an alternative would be to use the WW2 map and create modern airfields and cities or update the Caucuses.

 

 

And my final word on this today, I truly think before any new maps are created, unless third party, they need to be more interactive.

 

 

By this I mean, proper destructible buildings with people interacting with buildings (ie. Civilians and Soldiers can enter and try and hide, better damage systems, potentially the ability to replace a mapped building with a mission building so there are not thousands of interactive buildings per map) and importantly, sea environment including Subs.

[Pikey]

Now that is acriticism I can take. yes I agree that I have no idea where teh military bases are, my proposal was merely geogrphical. And well OK then Not posible. Bases too far away. Lest keep flying the caucasus as vietnam LOL...

This thread is built on the wrong premise. Let me fix it.

First your map is 400km, it should be 450nm, over twice as large, so you could have US airbases and Iranian ones, probably Bagdad, the "secret" nuclear research and manufacturing at Natanz, Bandar Bushehr in the bottom right. Plus the area in the south of Iraq is less interesting than the surface of the planet Mars (and probably less hospitable) Half the map is unoccuppied, but the dense stuff is the Euphrates valley from the sea to Bagdad.

 

This nets you:

Iran: Dezful Airbase just a pixel off your original square in the top right corner - major contributor in Iran-Iraq war, Kermanshah, kindda level with Bagdad. I know less about this one.

Saudi Arabia: RAS Mishab, Al Qaisumah, King Khalid MC and enough flat areas for FARPs and ofc the "floating airbases".

 

The reason not to include this region is because too many players cannot AAR, according to that thread where they need it automatically done for them. Plus, the distances for combat missions were huge. Tankers forward deployed into Iraq and Fighters and bombers came from much further afield (other side of Saudi, Dubai, Qatar etc).

 

War just isnt exciting enough for GW1, people dont want 4hr flights, they want arcade DCS for 30mins max. Even the serious guys can handle 2hrs max before their wife nags them or their bladder needs emptied! This is the trouble, people ask for things but they dont understand. It's not what they want. Thats why people keep asking for Afghanistan map, which is so boring. PG was a great hotspot, well picked. Not sure Korea is a good idea. Europe is "object impossible". I think Boznia might be a good future pick.

Edited July 31, 2020 by Pikey

[shu77]

If it could be integrated into the current map I would disagree, Id rather see it than the missing items mentioned recently from tjhat map but until then Id rather see something new.

[TheGuardian]

 

....

 

War just isnt exciting enough for GW1, people dont want 4hr flights, they want arcade DCS for 30mins max. Even the serious guys can handle 2hrs max before their wife nags them or their bladder needs emptied! This is the trouble, people ask for things but they dont understand. It's not what they want. Thats why people keep asking for Afghanistan map, which is so boring. PG was a great hotspot, well picked. Not sure Korea is a good idea. Europe is "object impossible". I think Boznia might be a good future pick.

 

Couldn't agree more. Afghanistan is going to be hella boring as far as flying goes. Syria looks like it is going to be well done, kinda concerned about how well it will run with a full on mission/multiplayer. I would think and older Korea (1950) might be doable though. Boznia would be a good pick.

[Baco]

This thread is built on the wrong premise. Let me fix it.

First your map is 400km, it should be 450nm, over twice as large, so you could have US airbases and Iranian ones, probably Bagdad, the "secret" nuclear research and manufacturing at Natanz, Bandar Bushehr in the bottom right. Plus the area in the south of Iraq is less interesting than the surface of the planet Mars (and probably less hospitable) Half the map is unoccuppied, but the dense stuff is the Euphrates valley from the sea to Bagdad.

 

This nets you:

Iran: Dezful Airbase just a pixel off your original square in the top right corner - major contributor in Iran-Iraq war, Kermanshah, kindda level with Bagdad. I know less about this one.

Saudi Arabia: RAS Mishab, Al Qaisumah, King Khalid MC and enough flat areas for FARPs and ofc the "floating airbases".

 

The reason not to include this region is because too many players cannot AAR, according to that thread where they need it automatically done for them. Plus, the distances for combat missions were huge. Tankers forward deployed into Iraq and Fighters and bombers came from much further afield (other side of Saudi, Dubai, Qatar etc).

 

War just isnt exciting enough for GW1, people dont want 4hr flights, they want arcade DCS for 30mins max. Even the serious guys can handle 2hrs max before their wife nags them or their bladder needs emptied! This is the trouble, people ask for things but they dont understand. It's not what they want. Thats why people keep asking for Afghanistan map, which is so boring. PG was a great hotspot, well picked. Not sure Korea is a good idea. Europe is "object impossible". I think Boznia might be a good future pick.

 

I must agree with this Analisys...

 

But then again Vietnam also had long flight time to the Theater of Operations if you fly Airforce... But yeah I get the point.

 

Well I will settle for ANY new map, I just thougth this might be easier and faster to build tnan let ssay Nam, or Korea...

 

By the way I dont thinth that even in teh 50s the full theater of Korea could be rendered in one single map.. but maybe we coukld have four maps or three.. north center south.. who kows.. but it looks like at the moment no one is interested in making it....

[Fri13]

Most logical next map would be this area...

 

Would alowd a compleate simulation of desert Shield, Desert Storm,

+ a lot of the main battles of the Irak Iran War

 

And part of the Invasion of Irak and even what if counter ISIS operations, even thow the areas depicted were not afected that much.

 

Think how does that match to this:

 

[Fri13]

Even the serious guys can handle 2hrs max before their wife nags them or their bladder needs emptied!

 

1) You send spouse to do something else, be it gardening, night with her friends, buy her a full weekend in some spa place etc.

 

2) You use bags to empty your bladder when you are flying... What? Are you saying that you don't want realism? :huh:

 

Europe is "object impossible". I think Boznia might be a good future pick.

 

I don't think it is "impossible", as we have already the Channel and Normandy.

 

Possibly someone could make the Fulda Cap or some other location just somewhere in the Germany etc. Make it to even be somewhere in 70's time and it would be great even if as "just 450 x 450 km" for higher details and higher resolution terrain (all the small hills, rock faces etc).

Edited August 1, 2020 by Fri13

[Fri13]

By this I mean, proper destructible buildings with people interacting with buildings (ie. Civilians and Soldiers can enter and try and hide, better damage systems, potentially the ability to replace a mapped building with a mission building so there are not thousands of interactive buildings per map) and importantly, sea environment including Subs.

 

We don't need complex modeling, but having a infantry mount buildings is important. Have them basic rules to be followed.

 

- 8-way directions, so you can set infantry defend/engage specific building faces if not all.

- Have option to have infantry on roofs (spotted more easily, capable open AA fire etc from there).

- Have option to have infantry in cellar for low angle engagements.

 

And then of course have infantry to follow move near the buildings or get to defensive positions in corners etc.

No need for seeing them in windows or balconies an such. The rooftop is enough.

 

What comes to civilians, while I would like to have them included so that you get penalized from killing them etc. So you need to be sure about your launch/firing. It is just too high PR problem for ED. It would need to be hard coded to be so that no matter what, killing one civilian is just NO GO.

The idea of civilians is just such a can of worms for all kind legal, PR etc problems that it is just better to leave them simply out.

[Stratos]

We don't need complex modeling, but having a infantry mount buildings is important. Have them basic rules to be followed.

 

- 8-way directions, so you can set infantry defend/engage specific building faces if not all.

- Have option to have infantry on roofs (spotted more easily, capable open AA fire etc from there).

- Have option to have infantry in cellar for low angle engagements.

 

And then of course have infantry to follow move near the buildings or get to defensive positions in corners etc.

No need for seeing them in windows or balconies an such. The rooftop is enough.

 

What comes to civilians, while I would like to have them included so that you get penalized from killing them etc. So you need to be sure about your launch/firing. It is just too high PR problem for ED. It would need to be hard coded to be so that no matter what, killing one civilian is just NO GO.

The idea of civilians is just such a can of worms for all kind legal, PR etc problems that it is just better to leave them simply out.

 

Interesting requests for infantry, very spot on. DCS has a lot of potential for COIN ops, but for that we really need far better infantry moddeling, specially animations for better cover under fire, and the hability to be placed in the roofs.

Edited August 2, 2020 by Stratos

[draconus]

...Tankers forward deployed into Iraq and Fighters and bombers came from much further afield (other side of Saudi, Dubai, Qatar etc).

 

War just isnt exciting enough for GW1, people dont want 4hr flights, they want arcade DCS for 30mins max. Even the serious guys can handle 2hrs max...

Well, that Qatar bases are almost fine to me but probably no carrier went into the Gulf then. Since you ruined my dreams of best map suited for the Tomcat, please tell me which area should I wish for now :)

[stuart666]

Whilst I can see the logic of that section of desert (not least because Iranian Tomcats cleaned Iraqs clocks there), Ideally Id like North Cape. Because youc an fly any of the Soviet jets there plausibly, because you can fly the F16, F18, F14, any carrier aircraft we can get there, and if you build the map with a bit of Sweden, you have some good operating locations for Viggen. Its lightly populated, its got fantastic terrain. The only extraordinary thing is they havent already committed to doing it yet.

 

 

Id like Central front, but you couldnt do all of it. Even the Northern half you would have major cities like Hamburg, possibly even Copenhagen. Im not sure DCS can take that strain yet.

 

 

 

The other alternative is a new version of Caucasus, featuring the Transcaucasus military district and Northern Turkey. Id pay for that happily, because its the next best thing to Central Front, and you can fly damn near anything you like there on both sides.

 

 

So many good ideas, so little time. :)

[sadjad-vosoul]

Requesting Iraq Map

reason : 3 big scale wars happened and ISIS Crisis

 

1- Iraq-Iran War 1980-1988 (8years)

 

2- Iraq-Kuwait [uSA-UK-France-Egypt-Saudi] Gulf War (Desert Storm) 1990-1991 (6 Months)

 

3-Iraq-USA [NATO] 2003-2011 (8years)

 

4-ISIS war

 

[_Heater_]

+1000

[kh_m92]

+1

Map can also merge to PG and Syria Map for clients how have one of them

[xvii-Dietrich]

Although we don't have the right WW2 aircraft (yet), this was the area of the Anglo-Iraqi war in 1941.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Iraqi_War

[Baco]

Yes I would love it.

 

But t for desert storm you need bases farther south, so I don't know how they can implement that... maybe some generic bases right at the bottom, but the distance to Kuwait is negligible

[D1CE]

+1

Map can also merge to PG and Syria Map for clients how have one of them

 

That would be AWESOME if it's technically possible.

However, PG really lacks many important places, and this extension is really crucial. For example, Busheher Airport/Airbase which has been the main home of tomcats in Iran-Iraq war is not modeled now in PG. As well as large Kharg island which was one of the most "oil-wise" strategic battle areas in PG during the war.

And another thing that really pisses me off in PG is its terrain texture. There are just soil and dirt everywhere with no plant cover at all. Compare it with Syria map. The texture shouldn't be too different.

 

Best wishes for PG and its extensions :)

[D1CE]

Yes I would love it.

 

But t for desert storm you need bases farther south, so I don't know how they can implement that... maybe some generic bases right at the bottom, but the distance to Kuwait is negligible

 

Yes you're totally right. (e.gPrince Sultan Air Base even more south to Riyadh)

But I suggest the map wouldn't be like a square or rectangle. Maybe a non-conventional shape will cover the area :)

[impreza]

I vote for this map

[impreza]

+1.

 

[sadjad-vosoul]

yeah we really need this map , please ED