If ED chose to update the Caucasus Terrain by using a third party like Orbx or Ugra, how much would you pay for it?

[plott1964]

If ED chose to update the Caucasus Terrain by using a third party like Orbx or Ugra, how much would you pay for it?

Edited October 10, 2024 by plott1964

[MAXsenna]

If ED chose to update the Caucasus Terrain by using a third party like Orbx or Ugra, how much would you pay for it?

Only the terrain? Not buildings etc?

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Dangerzone]

Me personally - I'd be happy to pay $15 to get the map upgraded and be more modern - but only on the provision that players with only the existing map can still fly with players on the new map (just with the old textures) for instance. 

When I fly Caucuses', it's often with people who don't own too many terrains, and would probably not buy Caucuses, or with new players that I'm introducing to DCS, etc. If they were still able to fly on the old map, and I fly on the new map, but both together - that would be fine, and I'd definitely be interested in upgrading.

But if the new one was separate and not compatible in MP with people that only had the old one, I'd probably still be flying on the old one for compatibility, so would be less inclined.

Edited October 10, 2024 by Dangerzone

[cfrag]

That map would have to coexist and work with free Caucasus, else it pre-empts a lot of multiplayer playing. To make matters worse, it would also have to be 1:1 compatible with existing Caucasus missions - when mission creators lovingly and carefully place an object in one Caucasus map, it must be as accessible, visible and consequential in the other. If, for example, you place an ambush at a farm near a bridge, those farm buildings must be very similar, the bridge must be there, and all units must have the same arc of fire (and be targetable) as in the other map. In short: that new map would have to be near-perfect old map. There could be an extension to, say the Crimean peninsula or Turkey that's not reflected in current Caucasus. Well, there goes interplayability...

Another point: Caucasus is my go-to map for performance. DCS's performance in Syria, Sinai, Kola, SA and Afghanistan is abysmal in VR. Sure, an update to my rig is due. Until then, I like having at least one map that works well enough (since around May, Caucasus is also tanking on my computer) 

Edited October 10, 2024 by cfrag

[Tom Kazansky]

3 minutes ago, cfrag said:

Another point: Caucasus is my go-to map for performance. DCS's performance in Syria, Sinai, Kola, SA and Afghanistan is abysmal in VR. Sure, an update to my rig is due. Until then, I like having at least one map that works well enough (since around May, Caucasus is also tanking on my computer) 

+1

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

A new version of the Caucasus map would likely use a (much) higher resolution terrain mesh, which would by definition break all user-created campaigns and missions in that map that use custom placement/movement of ground objects.
The update ED did for DCS 2.5 was likely the extent of what was possible in that regard.

It is still one of  my favourites areas to fly over and I'd love to see an updated version of it (that looks more true to life than our current version, especially the mountains and dried up river beds), but the amount of work it would take is something most people underestimate I think.

We're better off using custom terrain textures such as Barthek's.

[YoYo]

1 hour ago, plott1964 said:

If ED chose to update the Caucasus Terrain by using a third party like Orbx or Ugra, how much would you pay for it?

 

Only if Crimea was added. Currently the map is still great, I use the mod from Bartek and mod for trees and nothing new is needed for me.

[Lace]

No from me.  The Caucasus map is irrelevant for the majority of units in DCS (except some of the legacy LOMAC stuff).  It makes no sense from a NATO/BLUEFOR perspective, and only really exists due to DCS's long legacy and Russian links.  Honestly I think NTTR would be a better default/free map as it is where a lot of real-world training takes place, and would make a better setting for all the module specific training missions.  REDFOR units are secondary in DCS, and due to document accessibility and political pressure, this is unlikely to change.

Kola is my go-to green map now, and probably will be for the foreseeable future.  Maybe the Cold War Germany map will tempt me away.  I have no need for the Caucasus map.

 

[Gunfreak]

I very rarely use Caucasus because it looks so bad. Granted with the new effects added the last year. The forests actually look very good. Especially a few thousand feet up. But built up areas, fields and textures just don't do it for me. Yesterday I flew the a10 on Caucasus relearning some stuff and flew low over a field. On maps like Syria, Kola, Normandy 2. The jet wash interacts great with the grass and shrubbery. But flying over thst field in Caucasus. The grass didn't so much blow from the jet wash, as it more shook. I'd happily pay 20-40 for a really well made Caucasus update. But since it seems impossible to have detailed Ukraine. I'd ask they move the map further east or south. And simply not cover the Ukraine part. Spending time and resources on redoing the map. When 1/3 simply can't be fixed because of political reasons, seems a waste.

Edited October 10, 2024 by Gunfreak

[MAXsenna]

No from me.  The Caucasus map is irrelevant for the majority of units in DCS (except some of the legacy LOMAC stuff).  It makes no sense from a NATO/BLUEFOR perspective, and only really exists due to DCS's long legacy and Russian links.  Honestly I think NTTR would be a better default/free map as it is where a lot of real-world training takes place, and would make a better setting for all the module specific training missions.  REDFOR units are secondary in DCS, and due to document accessibility and political pressure, this is unlikely to change.
Kola is my go-to green map now, and probably will be for the foreseeable future.  Maybe the Cold War Germany map will tempt me away.  I have no need for the Caucasus map.
 

Absolutely this! Even if I payed for NTTR, I wish ED would make it free.
Would also love if the training missions for the Viggen were doubled up for the Kola map. I do know that will require extra work. I'll make a wish one day.
Onky reason for me to pay extra for Caucasus, would be expansions in every direction. Most importantly, West and North-West.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[draconus]

Can't find 0$ option. Pass.

[bies]

It belongs to "Maps Wishlist", not to "Core Wishlist" though.

[Silver_Dragon]

No thanks, Caucasus need maintain free.

[LucShep]

57 minutes ago, draconus said:

Can't find 0$ option. Pass.

Ditto.

[Beirut]

5 hours ago, cfrag said:

 

Another point: Caucasus is my go-to map for performance. 

 

 

Yes. Exactly my thought. Everyone has it, it looks pretty good, and it works like a charm.

 

Much rather see NTTR get some love, and I would be happy to pay for that.

[Gierasimov]

Caucasus by Ugra Media - 30 USD, if it was OrbX - 0 USD, current Caucasus looks better than Kola in many places

[BIGNEWY]

Folks just remember this is a wish post from a user, it is not something that is planned or going to happen, before people get to bent out of shape with replies  

 

moved to map wish list area

[UWBuRn]

If includes Crimea would be one of the few terrains i would pay for. Completely unrelated to current events, i really miss Crimea from LOMAC days.

[Silver_Dragon]

Krimea has actualy a "Not Go".

[MAXsenna]

Krimea has actualy a "Not Go".

That's what he said. He knows it's a "no go". While even so, he wishes and would pay for it if it was a "go".

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[plott1964]

8 hours ago, MAXsenna said:

Only the terrain? Not buildings etc?

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk
 

Everything. Like Syria, Normandy, South Atlantic, etc...

2 hours ago, Gierasimov said:

Caucasus by Ugra Media - 30 USD, if it was OrbX - 0 USD, current Caucasus looks better than Kola in many places

Pretty sure Kola is still in the oven.

2 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Folks just remember this is a wish post from a user, it is not something that is planned or going to happen, before people get to bent out of shape with replies  

 

moved to map wish list area

LOL! Did I stir things up?

Look at the numbers ED. This could be a profitable endeavor.

[Silver_Dragon]

27 minutes ago, plott1964 said:

LOL! Did I stir things up?

Look at the numbers ED. This could be a profitable endeavor.

The caucasus has free...

[plott1964]

10 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

The caucasus has free...

 

[MAXsenna]

8 hours ago, plott1964 said:

 

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk
 

Edited October 10, 2024 by MAXsenna

[cfrag]

1 hour ago, plott1964 said:

Look at the numbers ED. This could be a profitable endeavor.

I'm often mystified why people seem to believe that ED have not done that (looked at the numbers) and haven't yet come to a conclusion. I believe that they probably already have done both - it's quite possible that the result is just not what we had hoped for. 

The obvious, "even more profitable" idea (based on your suggestion) would be to make a free, much better Caucasus to lure in even more players by putting forward your best foot (a fantastic free Caucasus). 

Don't get me wrong: your suggestion could be profitable, agreed. It just may be that it's not likely to be profitable, and it is therefore prioritized accordingly. Maybe ED did not find someone who would want to invest in such an endeavor, take the risk (which would be big). 

I'm all for a better Caucasus. To me, this is not obviously "free money"; I see it as a financial loss more probably. So unless ED are prepared to finance a loss leader, this is a non-starter to them. I have no insights into ED's inner workings, so above is just an educated guess.

Edited October 10, 2024 by cfrag