Europe Wishlist Thread

[Northstar98]

On 6/1/2021 at 4:35 PM, Kazansky222 said:

 

That is really cool, I had no idea there were so many. Heres a cool little resource that shows some maps with SAM placement in East Germany as well.

 

http://geimint.blogspot.com/2008/08/ddr-air-defense-cold-war-case-study.html

Nice find, it's great that they included a comprehensive .kmz file for Google Earth - very useful.

Only issue is that it's quite difficult to find the layouts of the sites (at least where it isn't obvious, like one of the SA-5 sites).

Edited October 16, 2022 by Northstar98
formatting

[Moriarty]

This is an outstanding idea

[inconnudiscret]

+1 for this map

[Jeroen1974]

+1,

 

I hope ED will create the Balkan map

[Xilon_x]

Extreme oriental point of italy strategic and military point.(ADRIATIC SEA)

 

 

 

[Xilon_x]

 

 

[bies]

There are 2 WWII maps (Normandy and Channel)

for 9  WWII modules existing and developed (Spitfire IX, P-47, P-51, Bf-109K, FW-190A, FW-190D, I-16) + (Mosquito, F4U-1)

 

There are 5 modern maps (Hormuz Strait, Syria, Nevada, Caucasus, Marianas)

for 10  2005-2010 modules (F/A-18C, F-16C, A-10C, Ka-50, JF-17, AV-8B ) + (Kiowa Warrior, AH-64, EF, Strike Eagle)

 

There are 0 (zero) Cold War maps

for 32  Cold War from Korea to Desert Storm modules (MiG-15bis, F-86F, MiG-19P, MiG-21bis, F-5E, L-39, C-101, F-14A, Mi-24, Gazelle, Mi-8, Huey, Mirage F.1) + (F-4E Phantom II, Fiat G.91, MiG-23MLA, MiG-17, A-6 Intruder, A-7 Corsair, Bolkov 105, Sea Harrier, OH-58 Kiowa, MiG-29A, Su-17, F-8 Crusader, F-100 Super Sabre, A-1 Skyraider, Tornado IDS) + low fidelity A-10A, Su-25A, Su-27S, F-15C, MiG-29A

 

 

 

About 2/3 of all DCS modules - released and during development - represent Cold War era and they have at this point 0 (zero) proper maps, this period is massively underrepresented.

Maybe one of proper Cold War map like Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Fulda Gap, North Europe divided Germany etc. as the future map for DCS.

Edited January 23, 2023 by bies

[Northstar98]

The only Cold War map we have at present is the Caucasus map, though as a map it's not far off being wholly unsuitable for Cold War gone hot scenarios that are more in line with RL (the map is almost completely surrounded by WARPAC territory, and the only BLUFOR territory has no airbases).

As for my takes:

• Germany (preferably northern and central areas - comprising the Northern German Plains and the Fulda Gap) - only problem is such a map would be gigantic while being object dense.
• NATO Northern Flank (this would also be a massive map, but less dense in objects), though it would have to stretch at least as far as Bodø to Severomorsk.
• GIUK Gap/Iceland (this could be made a massive map, and is easily the most feasible of the 3, being like the Marianas, but without the object density).

In the latter 2 cases though, I wouldn't be satisfied if we kept the flat Earth model we use now, especially when the latter 2 would have a heavy naval focus.

Edited October 24, 2021 by Northstar98
formatting

[WarbossPetross]

48 минут назад, Northstar98 сказал:

The only Cold War map we have at present is the Caucasus map, though as a map it's not far off being wholly unsuitable for Cold War gone hot scenarios that are more in line with IRL (the map is almost completely surrounded by WARPAC territory, and the only BLUFOR territory has no airbases).

 

As for my takes:

• Germany (preferably northern and central areas - comprising the Northern German Plains and the Fulda Gap) - only problem is such a map would be gigantic while being object dense.
• NATO Northern Flank (this would also be a massive map, but less dense in objects), though it would have to stretch at least as far as Bodø to Severomorsk.
• GIUK Gap/Iceland (this could be made a massive map, and is easily the most feasible of the 3, being like the Marianas, but without the object density).

In the latter 2 cases though, I wouldn't be satisfied if we kept the flat Earth model we use now, especially when the latter 2 would have a heavy naval focus.

For the northern map I suggest the Baltic Sea. It's pretty large even if you count without the Gulf of Bothnia, but it's mostly sea, and there's plenty of action to be had there in pretty much any historical or alternate timeline, the siege of Leningrad alone providing enough Warhammer-grade action to account for nearly the entire WW2 timeline (granted, that would necessitate two asset versions, sue me). Not much to go wrong there.

[Northstar98]

On 8/6/2021 at 1:29 PM, WarbossPetross said:

For the northern map I suggest the Baltic Sea. It's pretty large even if you count without the Gulf of Bothnia, but it's mostly sea, and there's plenty of action to be had there in pretty much any historical or alternate timeline, the siege of Leningrad alone providing enough Warhammer-grade action to account for nearly the entire WW2 timeline (granted, that would necessitate two asset versions, sue me). Not much to go wrong there.

I would love a Baltic map, and I put it in the same league as Germany as maps I really want to see, my only only concern is to get all of the major players in (especially their major airbases), the map would have to be very large, including plenty of land area.

Plus we start running into issues with assets as we start to go more naval, though there's also air defence RADARs not present.

Edited October 24, 2021 by Northstar98
formatting

[Lace]

3 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Germany (preferably northern and central areas - comprising the Northern German Plains and the Fulda Gap) - only problem is such a map would be gigantic while being object dense.

 

According to my very rough Google Earth measurements, a map covering East and West Germany would be about the same size as the current Syria map.  A 1986 version should be less object dense than modern Germany, in terms of major cities at least, though certainly more dense than the current SoH and Syria maps..

 

I'm sure it must be on ED's long term plan somewhere (it has to be surely...?), perhaps they are just waiting for the hardware to catch up in order to do these types of map justice?

[WarbossPetross]

06.08.2021 в 18:00, Lace сказал:

 

According to my very rough Google Earth measurements, a map covering East and West Germany would be about the same size as the current Syria map.  A 1986 version should be less object dense than modern Germany, in terms of major cities at least, though certainly more dense than the current SoH and Syria maps..

 

I'm sure it must be on ED's long term plan somewhere (it has to be surely...?), perhaps they are just waiting for the hardware to catch up in order to do these types of map justice?

That also begs for a 1940-s version, you know... And a La-7 that may or may not come someday.

 

[Northstar98]

On 8/6/2021 at 4:00 PM, Lace said:

According to my very rough Google Earth measurements, a map covering East and West Germany would be about the same size as the current Syria map.  A 1986 version should be less object dense than modern Germany, in terms of major cities at least, though certainly more dense than the current SoH and Syria maps..

And that's the problem, to get the whole area that means a lot of objects, and we can't really skimp on terrain mesh resolution either.

Personally, while it is one of my dream maps (alongside the Baltic), I think it would be better to start out smaller, such as the GIUK Gap (with Iceland, the southern tip of Greenland, the Faroes and maybe the Shetland islands being the only landmasses) - the good thing here is that it offers a decent Cold War gone hot theatre (though with the main emphasis being on carrier battlegroups and amphibious operations) with several key areas (Iceland has NASKEF, which was also used by the 57th FIS and both the Faroes and the Shetland Islands have RADAR stations), but outside of one area (Reykjavík), the whole area is sparsely populated with objects, such a map would be mainly terrain mesh and textures.

Only thing is, I really would like the flat Earth model DCS currently uses to be replaced with a spherical one.

The NATO northern flank, would be more of a balanced approach, but only if it stretches from Bodø to Severomorsk, which will give us a major airbase (mostly for Norwegian F-16A/B aircraft) as well as several major AV-MF bases. It's much more populated, and has more land area.

Both maps are also in dire need for BLUFOR Cold War naval assets, though there's plenty missing for REDFOR too.

Edited October 24, 2021 by Northstar98
formatting

[Lace]

24 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

 

And that's the problem, to get the whole area that means a lot of objects, and we can't really skimp on terrain mesh resolution either.

 

Personally, while it is one of my dream maps (alongside the Baltic), I think it would be better to start out smaller, such as the GIUK Gap (with Iceland, the southern tip of Greenland, the Faroes and maybe the Shetland islands being the only landmasses) - the good thing here is that it offers a decent Cold War gone hot theatre (though with the main emphasis being on carrier battlegroups and amphibious operations) with several key areas (Iceland has NASKEF, which was also used by the 57th FIS and both the Faroes and the Shetland Islands have RADAR stations), but outside of one area (Reykjavík), the whole area is sparsely populated with objects, such a map would be mainly terrain mesh and textures.

 

Only thing is, I really would like the flat Earth model DCS currently uses to be replaced with a spherical one.

 

The NATO northern flank, would be more of a balanced approach, but only if it stretches from Bodø to Severomorsk, which will give us a major airbase (mostly for Norwegian F-16A/B aircraft) as well as several major AV-MF bases. It's much more populated, and has more land area.

 

Both maps are also in dire need for BLUFOR Cold War naval assets, though there's plenty missing for REDFOR too.

 

GIUK gap would be great, but DCS is not a naval combat simulator, and in order to incorporate the non-carrier based air assets, we would need to expand to include Scotland for Lossie and Kinloss, maybe even down to Leuchars.  Norway too, even right up to mainland Russia.  Otherwise the REDFOR will all be air-started Bears and Backfires.  It would end up as a huuuge map, or just lots of cold water.

 

 

As you say a better option would be the Kola Peninsula and the Barents sea to the north.  You could still include Norway, Finland (and maybe the far north of Sweden too to allow the Viggen to be operated from it's native frozen lakes and roads) and the Russian naval and air bases around Murmansk/Severomorsk.  Still plenty of water like GIUK, but with the option of some ground warfare to support, and a smaller, less densely developed geographic area, like the maps we currently have.

[Northstar98]

On 8/9/2021 at 3:40 PM, Lace said:

GIUK gap would be great, but DCS is not a naval combat simulator, and in order to incorporate the non-carrier based air assets, we would need to expand to include Scotland for Lossie and Kinloss, maybe even down to Leuchars. Norway too, even right up to mainland Russia.  Otherwise the REDFOR will all be air-started Bears and Backfires.  It would end up as a huuuge map, or just lots of cold water.

SF2 had a GIUK gap map (though only including Iceland), though SF2 had also a much more comprehensive unit set-up. The way it did it was with air-started Bears/Backfires/Badgers/Blinders, with a Soviet amphibious force already taking the north-east (operating from smaller land bases around Iceland), it then had a Soviet CBG to the south-east and a US CBG + amphibious forces approaching from the west, with the goal of repelling the Soviet CBG and retaking Iceland.

As for airbases, you have got NASKEF on Iceland, which was home to the 85th group/Air Forces Iceland, which among others comprised the 57th Fighter-Interception Squadron, flying (among others) the F-4C/E and F-15C/D, and is the largest airbase in the area.

As for Scotland:

• Kinloss was mostly an MPA base, mainly operating Nimrod MR.1 and MR.2/2P (which were dedicated ASW up until 1986 when the Nimrod MR.2P gained AGM-84D Harpoon IC capability).
• Lossiemouth is your strike + maritime strike base, with Buccaneer S.1/S.2B, Tornado GR.1/1A/4 and later Typhoon and Poseidon.
• Leuchars (which I used to live right next to) is an interceptor base, with the F-4K/M, and after the Cold War a Tornado F.3 then a Typhoon base.

On 8/9/2021 at 3:40 PM, Lace said:

As you say a better option would be the Kola Peninsula and the Barents sea to the north.  You could still include Norway, Finland (and maybe the far north of Sweden too to allow the Viggen to be operated from it's native frozen lakes and roads) and the Russian naval and air bases around Murmansk/Severomorsk.  Still plenty of water like GIUK, but with the option of some ground warfare to support, and a smaller, less densely developed geographic area, like the maps we currently have.

Unfortunately your area misses out Bodø by quite some margin, which is the northernmost Norwegian fighter airbase, basing the F-16A/B (later AM/BM and F-35A), and the closest Swedish airbase is the Norrbottenn Wing (F 21) based at Luleå, which is quite a bit further to the south and operated the J 32B Lansen, J 35D Draken, JA 37 Viggen and the Sk 60B, later a JAS 39 airbase.

Fortunately, you have got Severemorsk, which includes 3 AV-MF airbases. Though I imagine the area will be pretty sensitive, owing to the area being the main base for the Northern fleet, with extensive ammunition depots, submarine bases, and a submarine communications facility, among other things.

The only thing you might've missed on the REDFOR side is Olenya air base, which, like Severomorsk-1 is another AV-MF long-range aviation base.

Edited October 24, 2021 by Northstar98
formatting

[Lace]

Good info there Northstar.  If only we had the depth and breadth of units to run realistic scenarios to go with the realistic basing.  As always, some poetic licencing will be required for any map or module use.  Also, wartime dispersal will mean many units are far away from their 'normal' homes.

Edited August 9, 2021 by Lace

[Rick50]

On 8/6/2021 at 3:55 AM, bies said:

There are 2+1 WWII maps (Normandy and Channel) + (WWII Marianas) 

for 9 (7+2) WWII modules existing and developed (Spitfire IX, P-47, P-51, Bf-109K, FW-190A, FW-190D, I-16) + (Mosquito, F4U-1)

 

There are 5+1 modern maps (Hormuz Strait, Syria, Nevada, Caucasus, Marianas) + modern Falkland

for 10 (6+4) 2005-2010 modules (F/A-18C, F-16C, A-10C, Ka-50, JF-17, AV-8B ) + (Kiowa, AH-64, EF, Strike Eagle)

 

There are 0 (zero)+1 Cold War maps (1982 Falkland)

for 28 (12+11+5) Cold War [from Korea to Desert Storm] modules (MiG-15bis, F-86F, MiG-19P, MiG-21bis, F-5E, L-39, C-101, F-14A, Mi-24, Gazelle, Mi-8, Huey) + (Mirage F.1, Fiat G.91, MiG-23MLA, MiG-17, A-6 Intruder, A-7 Corsair, Bolkov 105, Sea Harrier, MiG-29A, Su-17, F-8 Crusader) + low fidelity A-10A, Su-25A, Su-27S, F-15C, MiG-29A

 

 

 

About 2/3 of all DCS modules - released and during development - represent Cold War era and they have at this point 0 (zero) proper maps, this period is massively underrepresented.

Maybe one of proper Cold War map like Korea, Vietnam, Fulda Gap, North Europe divided Germany etc. as the future map for DCS.

 

 

 

Thanks for compiling the data and then pointing out this shortcomming. 

 

My hope is that at some point soon ED will come up with a plan to help streamline the process for 3rd party devs to make maps. Assuming there are even such 3rd party devs willing to make maps.... 

 

 

[xvii-Dietrich]

6 hours ago, Lace said:

As you say a better option would be the Kola Peninsula and the Barents sea to the north.  You could still include Norway, Finland (and maybe the far north of Sweden too to allow the Viggen to be operated from it's native frozen lakes and roads) and the Russian naval and air bases around Murmansk/Severomorsk.

 

Totally agree.

 

It serves for WW2, Cold War and Modern. And, as there is a lot of wilderness, it is not going to be too heavy on the building-objects. Ref: https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/218217-arctic-map/?do=findComment&comment=4070482

Also, most map projections make "the North" look really huge. It the map projection is done properly centred on the Lat/Long of the map centre, it is not nearly so onerous. And DCS already has some large maps. Ref: https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/277533-a-size-comparison-of-dcs-maps/

 

[Northstar98]

On 8/9/2021 at 10:19 PM, xvii-Dietrich said:

Also, most map projections make "the North" look really huge. It the map projection is done properly centred on the Lat/Long of the map centre, it is not nearly so onerous. And DCS already has some large maps. Ref: https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/277533-a-size-comparison-of-dcs-maps/

Ideally we'd transition to maps that fit on the surface with a sphere, so we don't have to deal with this at all.

It would also mean we get more realistic LOS, chiefly for visual but maybe also RADAR, we get more accurate navigation, and a Lat/Long grid that is actually accurate to the coordinates.

Edited October 17, 2021 by Northstar98
formatting

[spacemishka]

A Complete Baltic Sea-Maps would be interessting. That would allow the Finns to join the party. 

[Dom82]

Cold War? In Germany? Yes i totally agree, and of course i would Kill for such a Map.

[Pak1979]

+1

[schurem]

Ooh that'll be *nice*. Make fictional Athenian and Spartan skins and refight the Peloponnese wars with modern toys. Retell the Persian wars through DCS. This map really tickles the classicist in me.

[WarbossPetross]

33 минуты назад, FlyNeX сказал:

+1

Balkans merged with Caucasus

That would be quite a stretch in more ways than one, so I'd rather have a separate Balkans map (I did enjoy that in that other F-16 simulation). That said, I would like to extend the Caucasus map to include Chechnya and Dagestan so that we could recreate the absolute Warhammer that was taking place there for fifteen years straight, seeing how we have a map of a territory on which a single shot wasn't fired in military action.

[dr.barber]

+1