DCS: Afghanistan FAQ

[Cab]

12 minutes ago, Beirut said:

 

Or pretend you're a guy sitting at home in his pajamas flying airplanes on his PC and having fun.

 

Works for me. 

[sergkar]

On 3/28/2024 at 7:46 PM, NineLine said:

People download missions for things they don't own all the time by not reading the description or the description not stating this. Its just another thing that we will all have to deal with as is appropriate. 

I don't want to stir, but if it's happening "all the time" you clearly haven't dealt with it.

[fagulha]

1 hour ago, joker62 said:

You could ask ED if they include Zaranj airport in the Persian Gulf map, which is already established for the Afghanistan map, so it will also be present in the PG map. The mission could be:

PG map: takeoff from carrier, landing in Zaranj.

Afghanistan map: take off from Zaranj to fly wherever you want.

Honestly, it doesn't make sense and it's not worth it, at least for me (and even if I love carrier based planes): from the carrier to Zaranj about 400 NM of desolate terrain.

Usually to transfer from one map to another in my deployments i use a trigger "Load Mission" (when i reach that point dcs loads the mission on another map in the air) at the end of one map so i can start in one map and end in another map. It´s not ideal but it is my way to overcome this subject.

[Kharrn]

Thank you ED for the opportunity to create fictional scenarios or reenact missions from my own knowledge in the long timespan given with this awesome terrain. Looking forward to get hands on the northern part to recreate some CAS flights i was lucky to observe from the ground (TACP and FAC driver (wheeled) in 2008 near Kunduz/Mazar)

@BIGNEWY @NineLine

i have to beg you to please forward this request:

please please please include more airports out of country. Even if they might only be low qual, i would love to see Termez, Mary, Dushanbe or Quarshi. For myself those dont even have to be very accurately modelled, i just need a strip to start and land on.

e.g. Termez was intensily used by Germany as a logistical and personell "hub". A Hercules did transfer myself to Kabul and Kunduz from there.

e.g. Dushanbe was used in the evac (NEO then MilEvakOp) from Kabul afaik. When Taliban took back control.

 

Thank you for forwarding to the dev team in advanve!

 

K

[Don Rudi]

1 hour ago, Grundar said:

The tech is based on Normandy 2.0

Normandy 2.0 is by Ugra, do you have a source to share that Afghanistan is based on it?

[rob10]

1 hour ago, sergkar said:

I don't want to stir, but if it's happening "all the time" you clearly haven't dealt with it.

People need to take a bit of responsibility for checking things like this IMHO.  If they don't bother to read (and I've seen them come to the forums to complain they bought something they couldn't use when it's in bolded red letters in the description warning them) it's their own fault.  ED can only do so much if people aren't willing to try and help themselves.

[Silver_Dragon]

2 hours ago, Grundar said:

So to sum it up; DCS Afghanistan is much cheaper to buy in the pre-sale, will be less discounted in early access and then heads up to full price on release. Southwest is to be released first in high detail and you can just choose to buy that area as high detail only at a further discounted price (and in the future the other areas will also be offered in a similar fashion).  Regardless everyone gets the full map expanse they may just have differing areas of high detail (the areas they purchased or the full map).   The tech is based on Normandy 2.0 which means terrain will be the same (elevations, distances) between all the versions. The finer detail will be different - ie citys may lack textures and a refined appearance but still have major features/buildings in low resolution areas - can still have a SAM site, depot etcetera.  

The tech has based on TDK (Terrain Develop Kit) by ED. 3rd parties only building maps (expand, rebuild, etc) but not have capabilities to redone technology, that has on the ED side, with control the features on the core.

[joker62]

1 hour ago, fagulha said:

Usually to transfer from one map to another in my deployments i use a trigger "Load Mission" (when i reach that point dcs loads the mission on another map in the air) at the end of one map so i can start in one map and end in another map. It´s not ideal but it is my way to overcome this subject.

As everyone prefers. Mine is just a simple suggestion in favor of those who want a sea coast from the Afghanistan map. Considering that adding a coastline to this incoming map would have an impact on performance, as already clarified by NineLine, it seemed logical to propose this possibility, because:

- Zaranj is an airport already present on the incoming map of Afghanistan

- based on geographical coordinates, Zaranj can be added to the Persian Gulf map (as highlighted in my screenshot)

- both maps are created by ED, which also holds the rights (for modifications, additions or changes).

So anyone (who wishes) can fly from the carrier to Zaranj with the PG map. And from Zaranj to all Afghanistan with this map. It could be a real possibility. That's all.

[NineLine]

Please note the addition to the FAQ:

Please note: The low vs high res areas will be analogous (similar) to what we have with Normandy 1944 and Normandy 2.0 Upgrade option.

Thanks!

[Minsky]

1 hour ago, joker62 said:

Considering that adding a coastline to this incoming map would have an impact on performance

*Allegedly

1 hour ago, joker62 said:

So anyone (who wishes) can fly from the carrier to Zaranj with the PG map. And from Zaranj to all Afghanistan with this map.

I'm afraid this fictional pit stop won't cut it for people who wish to simulate the real ops.

[ouky1991]

@NineLine  

What is the target performance for this map? Can you compare it to any existing map (FPS wise)?

[rfxcasey]

 I know saying this won't change anything but I'm just going to say it anyways, and I'm sure I'll get a lot of heat in return, but I'm not a huge fan of this guessing game us customers are having to navigate, allow me to explain. If you take the chance and pre purchase a newly releasing map like Afghanistan, you get it at a sizable discount, but another anticipated map, like Kola peninsula surely won't release until a previous map is out of pre purchase status and hence no longer discounted. Maps, and modules for that matter, typically don't seem to go on sale till at least a year if not two or so once they are released so we consumers are left with the conundrum of choosing to take a chance on the pre purchase and subsequent discount of a map that upon release we may not be happy with for various reasons or waiting for a following map that may or may not be all we hoped for.

 Since reviews and side by side comparisons of, for example, Afghanistan, Iraq and Kola peninsula won't be possible with still being eligible for pre purchase discount, it seems the customer is put in an awkward position of rolling the dice to a certain degree or, if they do purchase a map after said reviews are available, feeling like they got a bit of a raw deal. Not to mention the hard drive space required and potential investment of more/bigger SSD drives which can be hundreds of dollars and require system reconfiguration considerations often. Realizing the space requirements are just the nature of the beast, still, even with the 5TB of space on my system I've found myself uninstalling DCS maps I don't fly often to make room for other modules and programs. It would just be nice to know if a map or module is something I'm actually going to like and use on a regular basis before purchasing in lieu of a sizable discount offering. I'd much prefer if that whole "pre purchase" discount model be done away with and prices adjusted accordingly, making the maps one set price a few dollars cheaper and forgo the "pre purchase" crap shoot. And now, splitting maps into individually purchasable sections just seems to exacerbate the issue. Then there is always the consideration of how many other folks are actually going to buy and fly a particular map. Persian gulf in particular I somewhat regret purchasing especially in comparison to Syria and Sinai.

 Trust me, I've spent plenty on DCS World and I support ED and its partners, I just don't like being put in a position where I have to make tough choices. The money could always be put toward something we'll use more like hardware or aircraft modules.

 I don't know, perhaps I am splitting hairs here but it just makes me feel kind of weird having to play this hype game. That said, I won a free Apache module in a contest before it was actually released, which offsets my cringe factor a bit, but still. I thought I'd fly it a lot more than I do. I know several folks who fly it almost exclusively.

And yes, I pre ordered the F-4 Phantom II though there is little chance of regret regarding that module.

Edited March 30, 2024 by rfxcasey

[Rudel_chw]

10 minutes ago, rfxcasey said:

Not to mention the hard drive space required and potential investment of more/bigger SSD drives which can be hundreds of dollars and require system reconfiguration ..

 

This is a bit of an exaggeration ... like you, I'am also in need of upgrading my storage if I pretend to increase the number of DCS maps that I own, but a 2 TB NVME SSD drive costs in my country less than US$ 120 (tax included) ... hardly "hundreds".

 

To avoid a reconfiguration I intend to use a tool like Acronis, to clone my current C drive onto the new one ... of course Acronis is not free and I use it because I already have it, but there are free alternatives (see: https://www.pcworld.com/article/2210819/how-to-clone-a-hdd-to-an-ssd-for-free-on-windows.html )

 

[rfxcasey]

On 3/28/2024 at 2:54 PM, NineLine said:

Nope, the coast is too far. It would impact performance not to mention it would be a hella long flight. 

I find it interesting and counterintuitive that less actual scenery, i.e. sea, would cause worse performance. Any chance of getting a technical explanation as to why that is?

40 minutes ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

This is a bit of an exaggeration ... like you, I'am also in need of upgrading my storage if I pretend to increase the number of DCS maps that I own, but a 2 TB NVME SSD drive costs in my country less than US$ 120 (tax included) ... hardly "hundreds".

 

Speed comes at a price and I always put DCS world on the fastest drive I have, same goes for Microsoft Flight Simulator and other sims. Having several drives of various capacity and capabilities while also considering motherboard limitations, i.e. the number of M.2 slots available and their associated capabilities means you're left with inevitable decisions that have to be made. If your motherboard only supports 2 M.2 SSD drives do I eliminate a 2TB M.2 SDD to replace with a 4TB M.2? Do I purchase a PCI-e expansion card so I can have more than 2 M.2 drives capability? I think you're oversimplifying the issue in relation to your particular system and considerations. It's often not a simple as just buying another 2TB M.2 SSD, popping it in and and letting it roll.

Edited March 30, 2024 by rfxcasey

[Rudel_chw]

4 minutes ago, rfxcasey said:

I think you're oversimplifying the issue in relation to your particular system and considerations.

 

You are correct, I was assuming that my use case would be typical, that's why talking about hundreds of dollars for a storage expansion seemed a bit much on my view. 

[sirrah]

8 hours ago, joker62 said:

You could ask ED if they include Zaranj airport in the Persian Gulf map, which is already established for the Afghanistan map, so it will also be present in the PG map. The mission could be:

PG map: takeoff from carrier, landing in Zaranj.

Afghanistan map: take off from Zaranj to fly wherever you want.

Honestly, it doesn't make sense and it's not worth it, at least for me (and even if I love carrier based planes): from the carrier to Zaranj about 400 NM of desolate terrain.

Why land at all?

Just split your mission up in 3 parts if you persist on carrier ops+Afghanistan and use the "load mission" function from the ME.

One can start from PG map on a carrier, fly in the direction of Afghanistan (following waypoints), and then at some point just auto load the next mission (Afghanistan map). Mission 2 you'll start airborne, drop your bombs, return towards PG, auto load PG mission, land on carrier.

(oh and add some AAR to make the boring long trip bearable)

 

If the player stays reasonably close to the intended waypoints and altitude, the transition between missions is quite good (I know because I tried it with Sinai and Syria maps)

 

(Ok true, this only works for SP)

[YhandisH]

9 hours ago, Beirut said:

 

Or pretend you're a guy sitting at home in his pajamas flying airplanes on his PC and having fun.

 

Works for me. 

I’m actually a guy at the park in a tuxedo, flying airplanes on his iPad. So, can’t relate. 
 

In all seriousness, having “fun” is relative. If in some bizarre twist super carrier was eliminated, I would uninstall DCS. It’s the same as people who don’t like flying helicopters or strictly fly helicopters. 

Please try to understand, some of us like specific forms of aviation. F-15s, F-4Es, or land locked maps do not move the needle for me. At all. And telling me to like what you like is generally asinine. 
 

“Come on, man. Like the movies and music I like….” That’s not how that works. I despise country music, but I understand others like it. It’s not my place to tell them not to like it. Even if they’re some dude sitting at home in PJ’s. (Side note: I don’t change until I’m absolutely going to bed; I’ve been blindsided too many times by random events in the middle of the night). 

 

Edited March 30, 2024 by YhandisH

[Mike Force Team]

Mike Force Team purchased the Afghanistan Map.  Our fixed wings and rotary look forward to flying on in when it is available.

Mike Force Team

[Beirut]

2 hours ago, YhandisH said:

Please try to understand, some of us like specific forms of aviation.

 

I'm inclined to think every single person here likes specific forms of aviation. That said there are certainly many who like non-specific forms of aviation as well. 

 

I wonder if those who like non-specific forms of aviation consider that a specific form of aviation? 

[draconus]

On 3/29/2024 at 2:01 PM, BabisGR said:

I want all to be in LOW. Would that be possible?

You can buy at least 2 map parts and disable the module (part of the map) you're going to fly in the next mission. That way you'll fly in Low quality area except that small central part (available to all map parts) that will always be High quality.

[zerO_crash]

@NineLine  @BIGNEWY
 

Will Afghanistan have climate-respective conditions? (Sand storms, etc...)

[draconus]

23 hours ago, Minsky said:

If all this empty space is such a burden to DCS engine, then why didn't they start optimizing the map by cutting it?

Please don't give them stupid ideas or they gonna jump to that exact conlusion.

[freehand]

The want machine keeps wanting.

[DisplayName]

14 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

This would bump up the mission-building value way more than covering the same area in the west.

Strongly disagree. 

Mission development would be significantly enhanced with the development of the Western side of the map to include Mary (1521st Centre for Combat Employment) - This is especially important with both the MiG-23 and full-fidelity MiG-29 on its way to us within DCS.

Developing the Western side of the map (Mary) would result in a map that is capable of hosting historically feasible missions for both RedFor and BlueFor. It would also enable the long military history of Afghanistan to be rightfully and correctly represented instead of having the Afghanistan map simply be nothing too much more than a virtual bombing range for BlueFor.

Whether Mary is to be added exclusively to the full Afghanistan map (if at all), or a future sub-map for people that just want a cost effective alternative to fly their MiG-23 and MiG-29 within a community of like minded enthusiasts, I do believe that Mary is an absolute must have - noting as well that the FC3 MiG-29 already has the liveries of Mary.

I have attached two pictures showing the MiG-23 and MiG-29 with their unique nose art that was found on aircraft posted to Mary. 

 

[NineLine]

4 hours ago, zerO_crash said:

@NineLine  @BIGNEWY
 

Will Afghanistan have climate-respective conditions? (Sand storms, etc...)

We already have the ability to add sand storms in the Mission Editor, we are working on new fog and I hope we will see new dust effects as well for things like storms. 

11 hours ago, ouky1991 said:

@NineLine  

What is the target performance for this map? Can you compare it to any existing map (FPS wise)?

Little too early to say, active development maps can float around as things are added and optimized. We want it to run similarly to maps like Syria and the like. With improvements we have made for maps recently we hope it will run well for most as most maps do now. Thanks.