Missing Navy bases

[YoYo]

It would be nice to add the missing submarines bases that were already present in the late 1980s to the map. EA I know, but Id like to collect all missing navy bases from this map.

RU. Ara bay (+ some Akula, Kilo Class pls):

https://earth.google.com/web/@69.38260803,32.78484637,21.73720765a,2500.16575827d,35y,-0h,0t,0r/data=OgMKATA

RU. Nerpichya, Bolshaya Lopatka (+ some Akula and Kilo class pls)

https://earth.google.com/web/@69.43665008,32.3877235,10.57832115a,4833.2177485d,35y,-0h,0t,0r/data=OgMKATA

Feel free to complete these lists too.

Edited May 5, 2024 by YoYo

[Northstar98]

Yes to the naval bases but I'm going to give a no to non-functional, purely decorative, scenery object ships and submarines:

1. It's a lot easier to add stuff in the mission editor than to delete a scenery object (especially as that can sometimes result in collateral damage, deleting other objects in the vicinity unintentionally - if I want to replace a scenery object submarine with one from naval units or static objects, I'll first have to delete the scenery object, which will likely delete the pier it's moored to and I probably won't be able to delete one without deleting the other. 
2. Scenery object ships and submarines typically don't have damage models EDIT: actually, on most maps, there's an alive state and a dead state but that's it (on this map though, at least from what I've heard (barge of salt) this doesn't seem to be the case on this map), unlike static objects or naval units. If you were to do a mission where you're to strike a ship or submarine in port, you'd be better off using a static object or a naval unit (they're also easier to work with and provide greater flexibility as far as triggers are concerned).
3. Scenery object ships and submarines should ideally instead be functional units that directly impact gameplay.

Edited May 6, 2024 by Northstar98
clarity, correction on #2

[Silver_Dragon]

10 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

1. Scenery object ships and submarines should ideally be functional units that directly impact gameplay.

None Scenery object ships ans submarines has none funtional, has only atrezzo, from the caucasus map times. Has builded outside of the SDK.

[Northstar98]

5 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

None Scenery object ships ans submarines has none funtional, has only atrezzo, from the caucasus map times. Has builded outside of the SDK.

Yes, I know scenery object ships and submarines aren't functional.

The point is that, instead of being made into a non-functional, purely decorative scenery object, they should be made into a functional naval unit or a static object we can place.

Edited May 5, 2024 by Northstar98
spelling

[Silver_Dragon]

22 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Yes, I know scenery object ships and submarines aren't functional.

The point is that, instead of being made into a non-functional, purely decoartive scenery object, they should be made into a functional naval unit or a static object we can place.

ED never has implement put funtional naval units or static objects on a map by defect. The harbours need get clean the dock, to put by the mission editor the propper object and ED implement a harbour funtionality, no put them "by defect" on maps...

22 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Yes, I know scenery object ships and submarines aren't functional.

The point is that, instead of being made into a non-functional, purely decoartive scenery object, they should be made into a functional naval unit or a static object we can place.

TDK has not have the funtionality of the SDK....

On fact.... a low poly Delta IV has none justice. I preffer a usable / static Delta IV on the mission editor to make missions propper attack missions vs a static low shape on a map.

Edited May 5, 2024 by Silver_Dragon

[Northstar98]

5 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

ED never has implement put funtional naval units or static objects on a map by defect. The harbours need get clean the doct, to put by the mission editor the propper and ED implement a harbour funtionality, no put them "by defect" on maps...

TDK has not have the funtionality of the SDK....

You're not listening to what I'm saying.

I'm not after functional naval units placed by default on the map. I haven't implied that anywhere.

I'm after empty harbours, without purely decorative ships and submarines.

Instead of making models and using them for non-functional, purely decorative ships and submarines, make them into static objects, or even better, functional naval units. That way:

• I can place stuff where I like, without needing to bother myself with deleting scenery objects, which may result in adjacent scenery objects being removed unintentionally.
• I can more easily utilise these objects as mission objectives and for triggers, having them directly impact gameplay.
• We have more assets to flesh out scenarios.

Edited May 5, 2024 by Northstar98

[Silver_Dragon]

24 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

You're not listening to what I'm saying.

I'm not after functional naval units placed by default on the map. I haven't implied that anywhere.

I'm after empty harbours, without purely decorative ships and submarines.

Instead of making models for non-functional, purely decorative ships and submarines, make them into static objects, or even better functional naval units. That way:

• I can place stuff where I like, without needing to bother myself with deleting scenery objects, which may result in adjacent scenery objects being removed unintentionally.
• I can more easily utilise these objects as mission objectives and have them directly impact gameplay.
• We have more assets to flesh out scenarios.

That is the actual problem... 

Make objects to the TDK, has diferent with build a static object to a the SDK (EDM).... has diferent objects with diferent Luas and propperties, the only common part has the 3D max object. The problem... none of 3rd parties has exported your 3d models to a propper "assets pack"... ED put some caucasus object on the mission editor, but the other maps as NTTR, The Channel, Persian Gulf or marianas, never put none of them on the DCS editor, and yes, has many atrezzo, with will export, but the quality show on the map has very "poor" compared with a normal editor object.

The main problem, make the same work twice.... ones to integrate and make funtional to the TDK to put on maps, and export the same object (Making all necesary animations, damage models, etc) to EDM, build the propper lua... and integrate into DCS World has some ussable assets. An many of the "old" objects, need remade and redone to get some plausible on DCS World maps.

And yes, that require your propper post on the Wishlist section.

Edited May 5, 2024 by Silver_Dragon

[MAXsenna]

@Northstar98
Windmills buddy, windmills!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Gonzo33]

It would be nice to have the piers at least, so that one can populate them to the heart's content in the mission editor. Does anyone know if:

1. Orbix plans to add the missing naval bases, at least the piers / basic infrastructure

2. If anyone has designed small piers as static objects (to be added where people like in the mission editor). I have not found any

While I love having maps detailed, I would argue that Orbix has gone slightly overboard with the Delta submarines. There are more such boats in drydock in the Kola map than Russia actually has of them....  I would love to see them remove these from the basic map, and add them as static objects, (also  Akula and Victor-III class boats)

Just my two cents