Jump to content

A wish for what NOT to get.


DmitriKozlowsky

Recommended Posts

Please, no more sand boxes. Yes, I gather those maps are from real world simulation projects for government and organizations, that are downgraded for civilian use. There's gotta be other more interesting locales, like Aegean. A potential hot spot conflict , not directly involving West, but India and China over Sri Lanka. Straits of Malacca  .  Awesome we are getting Falklands and Kola, which are mountains and cold weather.  Do North-Central Europe and region of Baltic. A modern re-run of War Of Pacific (Chile-Bolivia-Peru). Perhaps an urban heavy terrain. North Sea and Denmark Straits. Kuril Islands (RUssia and Japan), Bering Strait (Russia and USA+Canada+NATO), Iceland, Panama Canal, Bering Strait, Equatorial Africa, Southern Africa

Now we are getting Sinai. Hooray. Another sandbox with a coastline. 

What ever area is chosen, please let it not be another desert.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have zero issues with deserts and welcome more. I don't think DCS's map list could even be considered complete without an Iraq map that also features Iran and Saudia Arabia. It's not even like all deserts are the same, so I don't get why this complaint comes up.

  • Like 11

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

Please, no more sand boxes. Yes, I gather those maps are from real world simulation projects for government and organizations, that are downgraded for civilian use. There's gotta be other more interesting locales, like Aegean. A potential hot spot conflict , not directly involving West, but India and China over Sri Lanka. Straits of Malacca  .  Awesome we are getting Falklands and Kola, which are mountains and cold weather.  Do North-Central Europe and region of Baltic. A modern re-run of War Of Pacific (Chile-Bolivia-Peru). Perhaps an urban heavy terrain. North Sea and Denmark Straits. Kuril Islands (RUssia and Japan), Bering Strait (Russia and USA+Canada+NATO), Iceland, Panama Canal, Bering Strait, Equatorial Africa, Southern Africa

Now we are getting Sinai. Hooray. Another sandbox with a coastline. 

What ever area is chosen, please let it not be another desert.

I am with you. Dcs the digital combat simulator not desert combat simulator. I want Korea next.


Edited by upyr1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Exorcet said:

It's not even like all deserts are the same, so I don't get why this complaint comes up.

 

Actually, I'm with the OP on this matter .. I'd welcome more diversity: a Korea 1951 map .. we have the Mig-15 and F-86 as flyable, add a few AI units like B-29, IL-10, F-80, H-19,  C-119 and we are set to create really nice missions for that map; or a Vietnam 60s map, get it in time with the F-4 and F-8, we already have the MiG-19 and Mig-21 .. I'd love to have that map. No more desert on a long while please.

  • Like 3

 

For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra

For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600X - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1

Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Exorcet said:

I have zero issues with deserts and welcome more. I don't think DCS's map list could even be considered complete without an Iraq map that also features Iran and Saudia Arabia. It's not even like all deserts are the same, so I don't get why this complaint comes up.

Yeah, I've got the same sentiment about deserts too, the three desert maps we have in DCS (Persian Gulf, Nevada and Syria) are quite varried and have quite the different "feel" between them, definitely adds to the immersion if you're role-playing a certain era or mission.

I'm also all for desertic looking maps as long as they had significant aerial conflicts take part in them, I'm very content with Sinaï which brings the Arab Israeli wars to the table, on that streak, the two other desert maps I'd definitely want would be Iraq and Afghanistan. However, these are about all the desert maps I would be interested in, and seeing how they aren't that far between each other (especially the Sinaï and Syria maps), my main concern would be to have these maps eventually connect.

  • Like 2

Full fidelity su27/mig29 ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, notproplayer3 said:

Yeah, I've got the same sentiment about deserts too, the three desert maps we have in DCS (Persian Gulf, Nevada and Syria) are quite varried and have quite the different "feel" between them, definitely adds to the immersion if you're role-playing a certain era or mission.

I'm also all for desertic looking maps as long as they had significant aerial conflicts take part in them, I'm very content with Sinaï which brings the Arab Israeli wars to the table, on that streak, the two other desert maps I'd definitely want would be Iraq and Afghanistan. However, these are about all the desert maps I would be interested in, and seeing how they aren't that far between each other (especially the Sinaï and Syria maps), my main concern would be to have these maps eventually connect.

I think Eagle needs to hold off on another desert map until they can link all the Middle East maps together. Right now here is my map wishlist. In any order 

  • Fulda gap anything Europe and old war- two variants an early variant for the F-86 and MiG-15 and a later variant for everything else (some ocean for carrier ops would be nice)
  • Korea -1950s and possibly modern 
  • Solomon islands for the F4U
  • WW II Caucus for the I-16
  • Kursk/ Ukraine for the I-16, (any new Red AF module would be welcome)
  • Italy - WW II
  • Vietnam- 3 or 4  eras here 1950s for the F4U ( Dien Bien Phu), 1960s map, late 1970s map for the China Vietnam war, and modern for the Flanker
  • Spain for the I-16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, Syria isn't really desert. Parts of it are, but most of the detailed part of the map is Mediterranean. Afghanistan would be more mountains than desert. As it happens, huge swatches of actual desert have an important advantage: higher performance. Cities are hard, jungle is hard. Marianas are a very performance-heavy map because of that. They're also easier to make. Plus, there's the fact Middle East is usually in some sort of turmoil, making it easy to set scenarios there. As a VR pilot, performance is important to me. Vietnam, I would love, but would likely have trouble running.

Sooner or later we'll get the entire world. How will the hardware cope, I don't know, but ED has to have an idea. Until we get Vulkan and multicore, I'm happy with flying over sand and water. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

I'm happy with flying over sand and water. 

 

There was a time when I would purchase every new Map as soon as they appeared, in fact I prioritized terrains over new aircrafts, as each new Map improved every aircraft that I already had

 

... but nowadays, for me the situation is inverse, I will most likely not purchase Sinai, nor Kola ... nor Afghanistan if it comes out next), I'm now prioritizing the new aircrafts and so my savings will go towards the Phantom, Corsair Eurofighter and MB339, as I already have more than enough Maps.

 

For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra

For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600X - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1

Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll buy Kola one day, because I love BD's and Reflected's campaigns too much to pass on it (I bought MiG-19 purely for the BD campaign that came with it). Short term, I'm prioritizing planes too, but that's because I ran out of space on my primary SSD and can't install any new terrains, anyway. 🙂 So I hope I can upgrade that one before Kola is out. I'd like to get Sinai, however this will depend on whether there will be any quality campaign project that picks that up.

The Phantom and Eurofighter are, if not instant, then as soon as money permits buys. HB also produces quality SP content in house. Eurofighter, in particular, I'd expect to go well with Kola, I also expect to see the Viggen there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

I'm prioritizing planes too, but that's because I ran out of space on my primary SSD and can't install any new terrains

 

Agree ... that's a factor too .. I have a 1 TB SSD drive with just Windows + DCS and nowadays I only have 270 GB free on it, so not many more terrains would fit without having to upgrade drives again. It just reinforces my decision to pass on any new terrain and focus on what I already have, nowadays having a blast with Mirage F1 + Syria; while as soon as the MB.339 gets released I will pair it with the South Atlantic Map.

 

For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra

For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600X - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1

Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, upyr1 said:

I think Eagle needs to hold off on another desert map until they can link all the Middle East maps together. Right now here is my map wishlist. In any order 

  • Fulda gap anything Europe and old war- two variants an early variant for the F-86 and MiG-15 and a later variant for everything else (some ocean for carrier ops would be nice)
  • Korea -1950s and possibly modern 
  • Solomon islands for the F4U
  • WW II Caucus for the I-16
  • Kursk/ Ukraine for the I-16, (any new Red AF module would be welcome)
  • Italy - WW II
  • Vietnam- 3 or 4  eras here 1950s for the F4U ( Dien Bien Phu), 1960s map, late 1970s map for the China Vietnam war, and modern for the Flanker
  • Spain for the I-16

Someone need remember 3rd parties map teams select your projects, no the comunity... And ED dont go to "Ban" 3rd party maps.

- ED has no plans to a Vietnam / Korea / Central Europe Cold War / East front WW2 map (yet), by laking propper assets units (by russian forums).
- Remember old LN was a plan to build Iwo Jima and never get a map team.
- The same situation with HeatBlur and your planned Baltic / Mid Atlantic maps.
- Was some rumors about Aviodev maps and build a modern Spain Peninsular / Gibraltar Straigh / Canary Island map... but the same, no a "map team".

Spanish Civil War require a team to build all the SCW assets, the same with a DAK / Italian theater map with missing all WW2 Italian units.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Someone need remember 3rd parties map teams select your projects, no the comunity... And ED dont go to "Ban" 3rd party maps.

- ED has no plans to a Vietnam / Korea / Central Europe Cold War / East front WW2 map (yet), by laking propper assets units (by russian forums).

 

They need to start on the assets 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/13/2022 at 5:53 PM, Rudel_chw said:

 

Actually, I'm with the OP on this matter .. I'd welcome more diversity: a Korea 1951 map .. we have the Mig-15 and F-86 as flyable, add a few AI units like B-29, IL-10, F-80, H-19,  C-119 and we are set to create really nice missions for that map; or a Vietnam 60s map, get it in time with the F-4 and F-8, we already have the MiG-19 and Mig-21 .. I'd love to have that map. No more desert on a long while please.

Allowing more desert maps doesn't mean we can't have diversity. I just feel like saying they're all the same, or that we have enough is like saying the Black Sea map is reason to not have Korea, they both have trees and water after all. The devs making maps are also independent. Saying no to desert maps probably means less maps overall for no good reason. Furthermore, it leaves out an Iraq War map.

  • Like 3

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Exorcet said:

Allowing more desert maps doesn't mean we can't have diversity. I just feel like saying they're all the same, or that we have enough is like saying the Black Sea map is reason to not have Korea, they both have trees and water after all. The devs making maps are also independent. Saying no to desert maps probably means less maps overall for no good reason. Furthermore, it leaves out an Iraq War map.

I really don't want another desert map but I'll probably buy the right one(who am I kidding I have everything), I would like to see Eagle and the other developers work on other theaters. IMHO ED needs to think about a PVP ecosystem for each modules. That would involve the following 

  • Theater associated with the module
  • An opfor
  • ai assets for the theater

I get it will be a while before we get a Vietnam map, the jungle will make our CPUs melt. So I'm assuming Eagle and the other developers have been focused on desert because the maps are less resource intensive. Out of the new maps that have been announced I am happier about the Kola Peninsula map. While I am not sure if how much of the map, if any will be Sweden, I see it as a home for the Viggen. So I'm hoping to see some more cold war assets

Next  Like @Rudel_chw I really want a Korean map as well as Red for assets for the Korean war. We have the F-86, F-51, MiG-15 and the F4U is coming out we have a passable line up.

Also as I keep stating we need something for the I-16 as it is an ignored module.  

Now back to the issue of Desert Maps, if we get another one, let's say an Iran/Iraq map  could ED at least introduce some technology which connects all the Mid East maps? 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, upyr1 said:

They need to start on the assets 

Why? and how? ED has a complete list on assets ToDo from 2021, include reworking big aircrafts and other assets from Lomac/FC plus new assets, meanwhile the WW2 Assets Pack team has continue developing ETO asset and I suspicious can build some PTO units (Nick Grey like a F6F and BoB modules). Has more plausible with a 3rd party build a WW2 east front / Korea / Vietnam propper assets.

5 hours ago, upyr1 said:

I really don't want another desert map but I'll probably buy the right one(who am I kidding I have everything), I would like to see Eagle and the other developers work on other theaters. IMHO ED needs to think about a PVP ecosystem for each modules. That would involve the following 

  • Theater associated with the module
  • An opfor
  • ai assets for the theater

I get it will be a while before we get a Vietnam map, the jungle will make our CPUs melt. So I'm assuming Eagle and the other developers have been focused on desert because the maps are less resource intensive. Out of the new maps that have been announced I am happier about the Kola Peninsula map. While I am not sure if how much of the map, if any will be Sweden, I see it as a home for the Viggen. So I'm hoping to see some more cold war assets

Next  Like @Rudel_chw I really want a Korean map as well as Red for assets for the Korean war. We have the F-86, F-51, MiG-15 and the F4U is coming out we have a passable line up.

Also as I keep stating we need something for the I-16 as it is an ignored module.  

Now back to the issue of Desert Maps, if we get another one, let's say an Iran/Iraq map  could ED at least introduce some technology which connects all the Mid East maps? 

 

You like a "clone" of the competence, but ED and 3rd parties never has build "complete ecosystems" modules. In fact, has more plausible the ED/RAZBAM movements, contract personal to build assets with own assets teams, no more.

The actual assets teams:
- ED: DCS World assets team (planned 2021 list equipment + other assets). WW2 assets team (ETO / PTO? units).
- Aernes: None
- Deka: Chinese units pack
- Heatblur: Late Cold War UsNavy / Sweden units
- IndiaFoxtEcho: None
- Magnitude 3: PTO WW2 Units
- MilTech5: None
- OctopusG: None
- OnReTech: None
- Orbx: None
- Polichop: None
- Razbam: South Atlantic Units
- Ugra Media: None


Edited by Silver_Dragon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with a lot of places where conflict occurs. With some exceptions . Is that those places are not worth fighting over! A patch of sand is worthless, unless it is sitting on top of huge oil or gas deposit. Sinai is valuable for Suez Canal. Which is worth fighting for. Straits of Malacca is worth fighting for.  But mine is an American world view.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Why? and how? ED has a complete list on assets ToDo from 2021, include reworking big aircrafts and other assets from Lomac/FC plus new assets, meanwhile the WW2 Assets Pack team has continue developing ETO asset and I suspicious can build some PTO units (Nick Grey like a F6F and BoB modules). Has more plausible with a 3rd party build a WW2 east front / Korea / Vietnam propper assets.

I really don't give a fine flying flip who does it. I'd just like to see it. With the F4U coming out, I expect to see the WWII asset pack to get some ships that served in both theaters, followed by PTO specific assets. I also expect the F6F will be the next Pacific asset after the f4U. I really think if Octopus G has the resources that it would be a smart move to work on a Kursk or Spanish civil war map. I believe Razbam has mentioned a Cold War asset pack. I don't know their schedule or if that is still being planned   

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

You like a "clone" of the competence, but ED and 3rd parties never has build "complete ecosystems" modules. In fact, has more plausible the ED/RAZBAM movements, contract personal to build assets with own assets teams, no more.

As I said earlier who exactly builds  given asset or map is irrelvent, however I do expect them to build something workable for the different modules. The ultimate test for whether an eco system works is can you build a multiplayer mission with the historical mode on using factions/nations that are likely to operate in a given theater. 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is roundabout what Sinai is supposed to look like.

nile-river-delta_1big_modis_nasa.jpg

Lotsa sand, but also a couple of green patches and a bit of water. It could be worse. What's really worse in my book is that we're supposed to play on this map in a 2000s timeframe.

We need more CW assets to play with - no matter which map we're playing on.

  • Thanks 2

So ein Feuerball, JUNGE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, upyr1 said:

I really don't give a fine flying flip who does it. I'd just like to see it. With the F4U coming out, I expect to see the WWII asset pack to get some ships that served in both theaters, followed by PTO specific assets. I also expect the F6F will be the next Pacific asset after the f4U. I really think if Octopus G has the resources that it would be a smart move to work on a Kursk or Spanish civil war map. I believe Razbam has mentioned a Cold War asset pack. I don't know their schedule or if that is still being planned   

M3 by now, none talk about ships outside the Us carrier yet, and Octopus G has a team of 1 or 2 crew, building maps require new personal to learn a new program with take time (the TDK) and start from the scratch to develop a map... I dont expected OctopusG move to a SCW with none of the present know anything about the conflict with interwar aircrafts and early germans and italian aircrafts (none present on DCS), and Kursk has outside of the I-16 timeline. Has more plausible Far East Khalkhin Gol battles at 1939 (with M3 assets pack), or a Winter War 1940 / Barbarosa and Continuation war 1941.

The RAZBAM "Cold War assets pack" has actually frezze, and has centred on SAW assets.


Edited by Silver_Dragon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

M3 by now, none talk about ships outside the Us carrier yet, and Octopus G has a team of 1 or 2 crew, building maps require new personal to learn a new program with take time (the TDK) and start from the scratch to develop a map... I dont expected OctopusG move to a SCW with none of the present know anything about the conflict with interwar aircrafts and early germans and italian aircrafts (none present on DCS), and Kursk has outside of the I-16 timeline. Has more plausible Far East Khalkhin Gol battles at 1939 (with M3 assets pack), or a Winter War 1940 / Barbarosa and Continuation war 1941.

The RAZBAM "Cold War assets pack" has actually frezze, and has centred on SAW assets.

 

The 1943 battle would be out of the I-16's time line, but ideally we would get assets for both Operation Barba Rosa and operation Citadel.  there was combat in both periods in South West Russia and Northren Ukraine. 

As for the cold war asset pack- I know Razbam is working on the South Atlantic right now. I don't have any complaints there-it builds the eco system I am always going on about.  However, do you know what will they do after the South Atlantic?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

The 1943 battle would be out of the I-16's time line, but ideally we would get assets for both Operation Barba Rosa and operation Citadel.  there was combat in both periods in South West Russia and Northren Ukraine. 

As for the cold war asset pack- I know Razbam is working on the South Atlantic right now. I don't have any complaints there-it builds the eco system I am always going on about.  However, do you know what will they do after the South Atlantic?

RAZBAM none talk about a new project map. They continue working to complete the SAM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

This is roundabout what Sinai is supposed to look like.

nile-river-delta_1big_modis_nasa.jpg

Lotsa sand, but also a couple of green patches and a bit of water. It could be worse. What's really worse in my book is that we're supposed to play on this map in a 2000s timeframe.

We need more CW assets to play with - no matter which map we're playing on.

I doubt we are gonna get a map of what is almost entire natin of Egypt. It'll be Sinai penninsula with Red Sea and Gulf of Aqaba. May some edge of map territory of Jordan and Saudi Arabia. In short. sand, hills, and sparce coastlines. Doubtfull we will see Nile delta, as that gas to include cities of Alexandria and parts of Cairo. Huge amount urban data. A riverine delta environment would be a new type of spectrum of warfare in DCS.  Developers love deserts becouse all they need is elevation data from radar ground mapping satelites. From that they get elevation and texture maps. That can be mixed with some procedural shaders. The scatter some sparce shrubs, and model the roads. But Nile river delta is highly densely populated urbanized terrain mixed with agricultural, and industrial aeas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...