DCS: Normandy 2.0 preview

[GUFA]

3 hours ago, Doughguy said:

This level of detail is certainly nice, but dcs is a flight sim.... not a FPS...

 

2 hours ago, draconus said:

Don't forget about Combined Arms.

 

1 hour ago, RafaPolit said:

And hellictopters.

On 11/4/2022 at 3:24 AM, DD_Fenrir said:

What would be better going forward for ED is to make every asset in a map, be it texture, tree, or building model contain a metadata field of what dates it should appear

No I think the opposite works better, DCS Builds the Land-form + air & water interactions. The 3rd Party then builds the unique features as a layer over the Map "Blank".

[Silver_Dragon]

5 minutes ago, GUFA said:

 

 

No I think the opposite works better, DCS Builds the Land-form + air & water interactions. The 3rd Party then builds the unique features as a layer over the Map "Blank".

ED actually has not a FPS or a vehicle team... only can wait someday start some of them.

[GUFA]

2 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

ED actually has not a FPS or a vehicle team... only can wait someday start some of them.

Just pointing out that DCS intentions are to include the other Domains as well

[Silver_Dragon]

Just pointing out that DCS intentions are to include the other Domains as well

ED intentions actually has not confirm nothing. And that require open complete branches into DCS, as build someday a naval module. A complete dedicated teams with need build on the core first squeleton pieces to start something.

Enviado desde mi RNE-L21 mediante Tapatalk

[GUFA]

1 minute ago, Silver_Dragon said:

ED intentions actually has not confirm nothing. And that require open complete branches into DCS, as build someday a naval module. A complete dedicated teams with need build on the core first squeleton pieces to start something.

Why make Combined Arms & Supercarrier then? Aren't these modules TACIT signals from DCS to the community? I'm not saying DCS is headed into 1st person shooter territory just that land & sea have always been intended to play a role

[Silver_Dragon]

Why make Combined Arms & Supercarrier then? Aren't these modules TACIT signals from DCS to the community? I'm not saying DCS is headed into 1st person shooter territory just that land & sea have always been intended to play a role

First: CA coming from previous 2010 JTAC military UK Army trainer, approved to release with some changes as CA entertainment module. That never was planned or designed as a realistic vehicle /tank / FPS module, and never was the required DLLs to a 3rd party or a mod team build anithing as a module or Mod into DCS Word. ED has confirmed from some 5-7 years ago, they don't have a dedicated ground environment /realistic module team (talked on a previous post). On a old Wags interview, ED team confirmed they don't any plans to build a FPS, only if a private / military approach them to build some of them. All guond environment missions realistic phisics, armor, sensors, weapons and other etc to making them.

Second: Supercarrier module has centered only on aeronaval operations, include the landing officer \ CAG \ Briefing room and carrier crew, with on a future can help to implement control towers \ Briefing rooms and base crews on land bases or Farms. And that has a API on develop, with can help 3rd parties to build oun propper carrier functionality. The same situation with builds some similar to a FPS.

None of them has centered on build DLLs to making ships or subs modules, missing all necesary tools to build CICs, bridges, sensores or weapons operator posts. Other has realistic sonar and naval radar, ESM, ECM, ECCM, jammer and decoys, and a long etc, as propper damages as armour fires and flooding, etc.

That is the actual situation on some DCS environments

Enviado desde mi RNE-L21 mediante Tapatalk

[GUFA]

5 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

CA entertainment module. That never was planned or designed as a realistic vehicle /tank / FPS module,

Point out to me where I have ever said DCS world is developing FF Land or Sea modules. All I have said is that land & sea is playing a part.

5 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

None of them has centered on build DLLs to making ships or subs modules, missing all necesary tools to build CICs, bridges, sensores or weapons operator posts. Other has realistic sonar and naval radar, ESM, ECM, ECCM, jammer and decoys, and a long etc, as propper damages as armour fires and flooding, etc.

I don't think doing FF warship modules is ever going to be practical. I think pulling 200+ players to man a FF warship module is an impossibility, let alone 3500+ for a CVN. I think the point is that DCS World is a game that could possibly bridge between Simulator & Strategy Genres. With Air being the Simulator part & Land/Sea the strategy part

[Silver_Dragon]

11 hours ago, GUFA said:

I don't think doing FF warship modules is ever going to be practical. I think pulling 200+ players to man a FF warship module is an impossibility, let alone 3500+ for a CVN. I think the point is that DCS World is a game that could possibly bridge between Simulator & Strategy Genres. With Air being the Simulator part & Land/Sea the strategy part

Actually, the Land and sea has only stubs. CA has 5% necessary to the land environment and supercarrier has a 0 on the naval environment... You not need 200 players on a ship... you have very interesting simulatos as "Silent Hunter / Dangerous Waters" with recreate very well the ship funtionality. The main problem, missing them in the core to build them.

Enviado desde mi RNE-L21 mediante Tapatalk
 

Edited November 5, 2022 by Silver_Dragon

[draconus]

17 hours ago, RafaPolit said:

And hellictopters.

First thing on my mind but it's WW2, so not a real target map for rotor heads.

[MAESTR0]

Salut les aviateurs!
Mesdames et Messieurs, today we are walking around Paris.

In Paris, more than 20 original objects have been recreated on the Normandy 2 map, including: Eiffel Tower, Arc de Triomphe, Champs Elysees, Louvre, Notre Dame de Paris, as well as the main railway stations, the hippodrome, and the underground metro. We tried to do everything so that DCS users could plunge into the atmosphere of the world's cultural capital.

 Notre-Dame de Paris

Hotel des Invalides

Palais du Luxembourg

Pont Alexandre III

Gare-Saint-Lazare

Paris Gare du Nord

 

 

 

 

@Magic Zach  @Fred901 @DD_Fenrir and everyone who cares about airfields. Thank you! We have added 5 airfields (Orly, Deadland, Friston, Poix, Triqueville)  and they will be in early access. 

We will add 5 and continue this work so that the total number of airfields will be more than on the Syria map.
Today we publish screenshots of two of them. Thanks for the support!

Orly (original airfield)

Friston (regular airfield)

Edited November 5, 2022 by MAESTR0

[Tenebrae Aeternae]

Okay.. so i´m starting to turn towards the "this will be a really cool map" direction.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

The videos on Paris are awesome. Some folks say nonetheless that grass is still a bit on the way too lighter side of phosphorescent green .

[Fred901]

The city of Paris and its monuments are very well done! Congratulations ! I worked for a year in Paris and visited all these buildings and I can say that you did a good job!
For Paris-Orly it is well done. For Friston it's not quite that. Friston was an ELG (Emergency Landing Ground) so no hangar and no fence around the airfield, just temporary facilities (tents, wooden barracks) and two Over Blister Hangar for aircraft maintenance.

RAF Friston:

In red, Blister Hangar

Edited November 5, 2022 by Fred901

[Reflected]

Fantastic job on the city, this map is going to be great. 
 

however, I really hoped Normandy 2 would address the problem of Normandy 1 having really bright green landscape textures, but those screenshots look the same to me. 

[Kiwi_Viper]

1 hour ago, Reflected said:

Fantastic job on the city, this map is going to be great. 
 

however, I really hoped Normandy 2 would address the problem of Normandy 1 having really bright green landscape textures, but those screenshots look the same to me. 

yeh i agree its too cartoonish greens need to be deeper not iridescent.

bee great for your campaings mate  love em all 

[Rapierarch]

14 hours ago, MAESTR0 said:

We tried to do everything so that DCS users could plunge into the atmosphere of the world's cultural capital.

Well this looks promising. What is the specs of the computer running this demo?

[bell_rj]

Great work, but please please please fix the bright green colouring of the fields.

[DD_Fenrir]

Regarding RAF Thorney Island:

This shows the hangar locations:

And one of the few pictures I can find of the hangars:

 

These are C type hangars; the hangar type generally measured 300 feet (91 m) in length, with a width of 152 feet 5 inches (46.46 m), and a clear height of 35 feet 4 inches (10.77 m). They came in a few variants but the ones at Thorney Island seem to be a 1938 arrangement. Similar models can be seen at Scampton and Northolt:

[Magic Zach]

20 hours ago, MAESTR0 said:

Salut les aviateurs!
Mesdames et Messieurs, today we are walking around Paris.

In Paris, more than 20 original objects have been recreated on the Normandy 2 map, including: Eiffel Tower, Arc de Triomphe, Champs Elysees, Louvre, Notre Dame de Paris, as well as the main railway stations, the hippodrome, and the underground metro. We tried to do everything so that DCS users could plunge into the atmosphere of the world's cultural capital.

 Notre-Dame de Paris

Hotel des Invalides

Palais du Luxembourg

Pont Alexandre III

Gare-Saint-Lazare

Paris Gare du Nord

 

 

 

 

@Magic Zach  @Fred901 @DD_Fenrir and everyone who cares about airfields. Thank you! We have added 5 airfields (Orly, Deadland, Friston, Poix, Triqueville)  and they will be in early access. 

We will add 5 and continue this work so that the total number of airfields will be more than on the Syria map.
Today we publish screenshots of two of them. Thanks for the support!

Orly (original airfield)

Friston (regular airfield)

 

I'm so, SO glad you guys are responding so well to feedback!  This is truly looking like it's going to be perhaps the BEST map in DCS!

[Barrett_g]

Another vote for toning down the green here… it needs to be a darker, maybe browner green.

[twistking]

1 hour ago, Barrett_g said:

Another vote for toning down the green here… it needs to be a darker, maybe browner green.

i agree. one thing is the base colour, which many have pointed out is a bit on the bright green side. i don't think it needs much, just a tiny little bit less green to mute it a little bit.
the other thing is that the grass is very uniform, like a well maintained english garden. it would maybe help to have some rough patches mixed in. either brownish dirt areas, or at least some areas of less healthy grass (a dryer look.. again more yellow/brown i guess)...

i think another important aspect to the uniformity is a lack of paths and dirt areas that are suitable for placing assets like fortifications (bunkers, radars etc). it looks very bad to place -for example- a german radar site on perfectly green grass, or a freshly plowed farmland. it needs some patches of roughed up earth, some dirt path or similar to make those scenes more believable. this was a big problem in normandy 1.0 so i hope that this can be improved for 2.0...
(the god old caucassus map does this quite well actually. despite it's age and general lack of detail, it has random brown patches and dirt paths as part of the grass textures. far, far from perfect, but it helps a bit when placing units in the open...

[Spuks]

Major and most needable airfields in France for Normandy battles are shown in this map, i think

Edited November 6, 2022 by Spuks

[Beirut]

11 hours ago, bell_rj said:

Great work, but please please please fix the bright green colouring of the fields.

 

That green is a bit... green.

[Seaside]

Wow !!!!

[RafaPolit]

On 11/5/2022 at 9:11 AM, draconus said:

First thing on my mind but it's WW2, so not a real target map for rotor heads.

This is exactly my complaint about the "scope" and "versatility" of the map. If all helicopters are "out of the equation" of the map usefulness, it's not a versatile map.  I agree there were none during WWII.  But then it wouldn't make sense to fly a modern jet over it either?