Map: Normandy vs Channel

[cmeliak]

Hi guys,

What is the difference between Channel and Normandy map? Anybody here can compare?

Thx

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Both covers more or less the same area, but Normandy is centred in the so called region with the Channel only in the lower resolution and detailed area (Channel is not detailed at all, TBH, except for 3-4 aerodromes in the British side to increase playability) while Channel map is focused on that area but since it's only in early access now we don't know yet the final extension the lower detailed area will feature, the final aerodromes in and out the detailed area, or how low detailed will be that area at all. The area is what it is, English Channel and Normandy, but they don't cover the same space despite being more or less adjacent.

 

 

 

S!

[cmeliak]

I have noticed that area is comparable. I don’t understand why this is splitted. Does it makes sense to unify both maps and achieve usual ED quality?

Edited June 27, 2020 by cmeliak

[Mr_sukebe]

I have noticed that area is comparable. I don’t understand why this is splitted. Does it makes sense to unify both maps and achieve usual ED quality?

 

They were done by different development teams, and I get the impression that the Channel uses some newer technology than the Normandy map. So being able to integrate would probably be VERY difficult (i.e. EXPENSIVE).

[cmeliak]

They were done by different development teams, and I get the impression that the Channel uses some newer technology than the Normandy map. So being able to integrate would probably be VERY difficult (i.e. EXPENSIVE).

You are probably right. I think for each pilot here it is important now to identify which map is going to be developed and extended in a future. I think Channel is the right one ...

[cmeliak]

OK, just installed Channel map and my first impression after one hour in Spitfire is:

- channel map is definitely smaller than normandy map, not just a bit

- channel map has nicer buildings and environment feels better, more nice and feels more natural

 

So the point now is where ED wants to go and as wrote above i guess Channel map is the way.

In that case, looking for a London to be included and Duxford definitelly is a must.

[Holbeach]

Duxford is well off the map, but Biggin Hill is coming.

 

 

..

[cmeliak]

Duxford is well off the map, but Biggin Hill is coming.

 

By

..

 

Well off map for now. But I am optimistic and hope this map will extend in the future. :)

Otherwise mostly of missions, multiplayer especially, will be above water and that can be a

Bit of boring. We will see.

[Mr_sukebe]

Well off map for now. But I am optimistic and hope this map will extend in the future. :)

Otherwise mostly of missions, multiplayer especially, will be above water and that can be a

Bit of boring. We will see.

 

Be aware that the map actually has content all the way to docklands in the north west of the map. So there’s a good deal of England and France to fly over

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Duxford is well off the map, but Biggin Hill is coming...

Duxford maybe a bit far away from the current detailed area we have, but Nick Grey said at some point it was meant to be modelled.

 

 

S!

[Ala13_ManOWar]

I have noticed that area is comparable. I don’t understand why this is splitted. Does it makes sense to unify both maps and achieve usual ED quality?

It's something to do with the current map technology they use (although a newer one in the Channel map), map extension is limited by PCs power so maps should be split in order to keep them playable. Bear in mind they don't use any kind of procedural stuff, DCS maps are hand made with objects picked one by one to keep ground detail high and believable. ED aim in the future some kind of tech allowing them to model maybe the whole Earth in low resolution and current maps to be on top of it so we could fly from one to another in lower but usable detail. But that's for the moment a future, way ahead future I guess, intention they have.

 

 

 

S!

[davidtsw]

It's something to do with the current map technology they use (although a newer one in the Channel map), map extension is limited by PCs power so maps should be split in order to keep them playable. Bear in mind they don't use any kind of procedural stuff, DCS maps are hand made with objects picked one by one to keep ground detail high and believable. ED aim in the future some kind of tech allowing them to model maybe the whole Earth in low resolution and current maps to be on top of it so we could fly from one to another in lower but usable detail. But that's for the moment a future, way ahead future I guess, intention they have.

 

 

 

S!

 

Um, have you actually seen and flown over Normandy, even the updated version ? Same goes for the other maps from what I've seen on YT. There's no way it's all done manually. Very obvious, random texture blend in places.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Um, have you actually seen and flown over Normandy, even the updated version ? Same goes for the other maps from what I've seen on YT. There's no way it's all done manually. Very obvious, random texture blend in places.

I believe I said "objects", not textures. You can cut the "it's a repeating pattern" in Normandy since that's not a argument of yours :doh: (so many people use it these days :music_whistling:) and it's not exactly true anyway. But still, I said "hand picked and placed objects", read again. At least it's being said so, don't get me wrong, I don't know ED seating side by side in their workplace and what and how they do :lol:.

 

 

 

S!

[Rudel_chw]

Hi guys,

What is the difference between Channel and Normandy map? Anybody here can compare?

Thx

 

My opinion: The Channel has higher ground level detail, including more detailed airfields. But Normandy is bigger, has 4 times more airfields and most important for Single Player, there are several DLC Campaigns for it.

[Pikey]

1) Channel map is relatively new in the development cycle, Normandy is fairly mature (also affects DLC)

2) Normandy is focused on the ALG's and Landings, up to the breakout at Falaise, liberation of Le Havre, so it's a somewhat tight gap of the autumn of 1944. The density of the ALG's is quite restrictive in the appearance of when the map is supposed to depict.

3) Channel map appears to be late war due to Manston, but outside of that, I think there are more flexibilty in time scales than Normandy. I dont think Channel is so restrictive on dates.

4) Actual elevation and scenery density appears higher on the Channel map than Normandy. The Dover area has to be a good challenge for the most beautiful area depicted for a flight sim anywhere. I looked at a few historic ridgelines on Normandy and found the relief data was quite "soft". None of these regions have more than hills, but the Channel seems to make use of the elevation data better in my opinion.

5) The area covered by Normandy is much larger. However, we saw it expand post release and we can expect something similar for the Channel.

6) Where Normandy was French north coast centric with almost nothing of detail in England modelled, I get the feeling the centroid of the detail is the south coast of England. France is pretty good, Calais is amazing, but I see the house models of the English period villange detached farmhouses and see those as having slightly more love than the French farmhouses (I'd expect more stone used in France from the overhead).

7) Until you have clipped your wheels on a tree coming into land at one of the grass airfields like Lympne, that is sat on a hill, you haven't lived. It's really unique seeing that elevation data and I think these airfields are the centrepoint of the entire Channel map. They are the most interesting airfields to work from in DCS right now.