Iraq Preview & Pre-Order

[BIGNEWY]

Folks a reminder, please keep to the rules when posting. 

We have already submitted some wishes and requests to the team about Iraq, so thank you for everyone who has reached out to myself or Nineline already.

The IRAQ FAQ can be found here 

and the wish list area is here 
https://forum.dcs.world/forum/1213-wish-list/ 

 

thank you 

[AKULA_OPTIMUS]

Will H3 airbase have different modeling that the one present in the Syria map, or it is the same?

[bigrudie]

Can you finish Afgan first? Or just fix the game? Also deleting comments isn't cool...

 

Edited October 19 by bigrudie

[MAXsenna]

4 minutes ago, bigrudie said:

Can you finish Afgan first? Or just fix the game? Also deleting comments isn't cool...

 

 

Different team. We were told this when we first learned of the Iraqi map, and were reminded of this yesterday. Pausing work in the Iraqi map for that team, will have zero influence on the Afghani map.

[Lace]

1 hour ago, MAXsenna said:

Different team. We were told this when we first learned of the Iraqi map, and were reminded of this yesterday.

See, this is the line I have issue with.  I'm assuming ED have a pool of terrain content talent.  I'm sure there is more than a little cross-over of skills between the Iraq, Afghan, Central Germany, etc. teams and the fact that there are (at least) two 'teams' is only due to ED wanting it that way.  I think people are questioning the wisdom of having many teams working on parallel development, rather than one well-managed team focusing on one product at a time.  We hear the same about the aircraft models too.  I know an SME on one particular platform's systems might be no use on another, but the coding guys, texture artists, etc are surely all transferable, it's just a matter of allocating them to the right places.

It's easy to criticise, I know, but It seems from the outside, ED have too many plates spinning, and some of them are starting to fall. 

I hope I'm wrong and when released Iraq is amazing and vindicates ED and the poorly received launch of Afghanistan, at which point I will be happy to buy it.  But right now, it sounds like I am not alone in having reservations.

[MAXsenna]

10 minutes ago, Lace said:

I think people are questioning the wisdom of having many teams working on parallel development, rather than one well-managed team focusing on one product at a time.

I've never made a map, while teams can get too large in other businesses. Then it makes sense to expand and teach/bring up junior members, if we want more maps faster. Pretty sure a huge team wouldn't accomplish that. 

[Lace]

4 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

I've never made a map, while teams can get too large in other businesses. Then it makes sense to expand and teach/bring up junior members, if we want more maps faster. Pretty sure a huge team wouldn't accomplish that. 

No, it might not get us more maps, but it might get the ones we already have finished properly.

[rob10]

1 minute ago, Lace said:

No, it might not get us more maps, but it might get the ones we already have finished properly.

I agree with MAXsenna's comments.  While you might not have people tripping over each other with map development (especially things like creating different airports), but there is going to be a sweet spot maximum after which the returns of adding more are meaningless.  Assuming ED has enough people to hit that and have people left over, it makes sense to have multiple maps on the go.
My guess is that this is different to plane development where the optimum maximum number before people get in each others way is likely lower, but also I'd guess that the map making skills required are a lot more "generic" so it's probably a lot easier to hire a bigger pool of people on that side than say for flight model.

[MAXsenna]

No, it might not get us more maps, but it might get the ones we already have finished properly.

Same thing if you ask me. We have a saying in Norway. The more cooks the greater the mess. Of course that will depend on the management of the team.

Edit: ED has also stated previously, that they have "found a way" to make maps quicker, so makes sense to have more teams. I wonder how much AI is part of that.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[rob10]

19 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Edit: ED has also stated previously, that they have "found a way" to make maps quicker, so makes sense to have more teams. I wonder how much AI is part of that.

Which is a whole different kettle of fish, but 1st draft of Afghanistan using whatever the new methods are IMO flopped badly enough that I'm holding off on Iraq until I see if they can make it actually look acceptable to me.  And I'm not a helo driver complaining about down low.  Kola managed to improve to a decent place, so I have hope, but I feel burned enough by Afghanistan that I'll hold off this time.

[paura19]

1/2 map. 2/2 no date. No Iran.
No additional ground asset pack (Infantry is so old). = same for Afghanistan. Add to wish list.
And You presented, that this is too much E.A. even for northern part.

Maybe in 3 years. So for me NO for now.

[exhausted]

5 hours ago, bigrudie said:

Can you finish Afgan first? Or just fix the game? Also deleting comments isn't cool...

 

 

we have a winner

20 minutes ago, paura19 said:

1/2 map. 2/2 no date. No Iran.
No additional ground asset pack (Infantry is so old). = same for Afghanistan. Add to wish list.
And You presented, that this is too much E.A. even for northern part.

Maybe in 3 years. So for me NO for now.

this is reasonable, I might rethink purchasing until I see what comes of it. We all remember how Afghanistan was released.

[Beirut]

19 hours ago, MAXsenna said:

Oh, 'C'mon! Better scratch that itch and get an additional drive!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk
 

 

He's not the only one. My 1TB DCS-only drive is too full for another map. Gonna need a 2TB. 

 

moneymoneymoneymoneymoney.................................

[LuseKofte]

All These Maps and updates made me uninstall msfs and Great Battles due to lack of storage. No doubt that video showed a very gorgeous scenery. 
I am tempted. But it have to wait. I am not totally onboard with the negativity around several social platforms though. It is my escape from reality world we talk about. I am pretty dependent of it’s existence. 
Not saying things do not deserve criticism, but direct hostility I am against

[cheg]

On 10/18/2024 at 6:19 PM, ChuckJäger said:

I feel like it may be time to wait, I have pre-purchased almost every ED module - After the drama and the game of brinkmanship that's been played with my money between ED and the other developer, I just don't feel comfortable investing more until I see more in the way of ensuring that my investment will be sound in the future. 

I love ED, ED's product and the capabilities we have with it - I am very, very excited to see where it goes.. but after more than 15 years of using this sim, I am worried given the last year.

I know I'll get called a troll, I'd invite anyone who thinks so to read my other posts on this forum.  I usually feel like it's best to keep my opinion to myself but the silence here has been deafening. 

 

I agree to your assessment. I feel there is a big focus on new features rather then finishing old things. As well goes the same on the topic of bugs, where some trivial bugs are not fixed for 5-6 months now and are pretty basic game features.

[YoYo]

10 hours ago, LuseKofte said:

All These Maps and updates made me uninstall msfs and Great Battles due to lack of storage. No doubt that video showed a very gorgeous scenery. 
I am tempted. But it have to wait. I am not totally onboard with the negativity around several social platforms though. It is my escape from reality world we talk about. I am pretty dependent of it’s existence. 
Not saying things do not deserve criticism, but direct hostility I am against

Exactly. Additionally, I suggest asking yourself the question - "to have or not to have". Even if something is being developed, in my case it's better to have it. Why? Because it is my main hobby with which nothing can compete. 

As for disk space - this is generally starting to be a problem for some people, which I wrote about a long time ago. The strategy of releasing maps means that unfortunately several of my friends have already given up on purchases due to disk space. I personally bought a 4GB NVMe drive after the release of the Kola map just for DCS, although going by the current course, it may turn out to be too little in 3-4 years. Maybe by then the whole Earth will finally appear, which will make disk space more predictable, and the next maps will possibly be a nice addition. I would gladly pay for the whole Earth. If such a map was about 1TB (based on autogens), that would also be good news for people, because they would be able to estimate what they need more accurately. However, it does not change the fact that currently for DCS you basically need at least 2TB if you want to have everything plus upcoming addons in 2025 (my DCS currently takes up 890GB), and then Iraq and East Germany will be added to that. So probably another 180-250GB. I would also suggest a Launcher upgrade (suggestion for @Flappie ) that could indicate where add-ons are installed (this is possible), something like the ORBX Central client for MSFS. This way you can manage disk space and install larger maps on different disks.

 

Edited October 20 by YoYo

[Lau]

Eagerly awaiting for the Spherical Earth with photo sat & 1m mesh resolution, allowing customers to choose resolution for sat pictures and terrain mesh according to specs. That information and content is now a days almost free on the web.

The price tag for map development vs result seems high. Often when you join a virtual squadron you are required to have a list of maps, that price tag + modules is getting out of the way for many of us. Not saying we should not keep it for those that can afford such level of development but, I would be in favor to a more economically driven solution and I deeply hope that it would come in the form of a Spherical Earth.

Donwload only the areas of interest and more if you can afford it with extra storage. Space vs a lower level of development considering that we do not need every object to have a damage model and so forth.

Open up the possibility for users to develop and share 3D structures with damage models and soon all areas of interest will be populated for free.

When civilian sims got interested in combat activities, I was happy placing destroyable assets & units on the Earth, according to mission planning, I knew not all structures simulated had a damage model but that the combat area of interest would after some editing work that is. Navigation and Real Weather conditions where challenging but the shear space around you was threlling and so immersive.

DCS world used to be free and ED concentrated in High Tech payware modules, I miss these times.

ED decided to go down the road of dedicated teams for each map, that would be a dream if the same could happen with airframes, allowing for a project to be started and hope to see it complete, then and only then we can move to more products and I will happily use all my bank account to buy them, yes all of them !

[Mainstay]

What also worries me is some of the assest in the game are so old… they look completely outdated which is a big no no. Why not bring all these models up to date first over the whole sim. 
 

Even the FC3 planes and the SU25(T) are so out of shape (;)) you would think let’s go and put some effort in that. 
 

Same goes for weapons and missiles.

Put a whole team on that and at least you get an even playfield again looking at model quality et cetera. 
 

Im not even gonna talk about ATC, bugs, Vulkan, dynamic campaign and all other sorts of quality of life stuff. 
 

DCS is at a point where it looks like ED wants to pump out as many as new thingies as possible but the craplist grows and grows and is dragging everything down. I think it’s called technical debt but I’m no programmer… 

Come on ED I have pumped enough money into your business for years and years where we can say time for a big clean up

[hollow]

7 minutes ago, Mainstay said:

What also worries me is some of the assest in the game are so old… they look completely outdated which is a big no no. Why not bring all these models up to date first over the whole sim. 
 

Even the FC3 planes and the SU25(T) are so out of shape (;)) you would think let’s go and put some effort in that. 
 

Same goes for weapons and missiles.

Put a whole team on that and at least you get an even playfield again looking at model quality et cetera. 
 

Im not even gonna talk about ATC, bugs, Vulkan, dynamic campaign and all other sorts of quality of life stuff. 
 

DCS is at a point where it looks like ED wants to pump out as many as new thingies as possible but the craplist grows and grows and is dragging everything down. I think it’s called technical debt but I’m no programmer… 

Come on ED I have pumped enough money into your business for years and years where we can say time for a big clean up

Star Citizen of flight sims? I'm affraid it might turn into a feature creep. I've poured lots of money into all sorts of modules, terrains and campaigns but called it a day until I see some further progress on early access (the majority of the modules) first. Afganistan in its really poor state was a turning point for me.

Edited October 20 by hollow

[draconus]

On 10/18/2024 at 6:03 PM, Graphics said:

Our mission creators are preparing a variety of missions for our most popular aircraft.

Does it include F-15E? For sure it's one of the most popular aircraft.

Thank you for including the sea, Kuwait, West coast and Bahrain. Guess it will be my new favorite map in 2025

What about US bases in Qatar? Pretty important in any of the PG maps.

[exhausted]

13 minutes ago, draconus said:

Does it include F-15E? For sure it's one of the most popular aircraft.

Thank you for including the sea, Kuwait, West coast and Bahrain. Guess it will be my new favorite map in 2025

What about US bases in Qatar? Pretty important in any of the PG maps.

Sheik Isa Air Base, Bahrain -- home of the 3rd MAW during ODS. Mandatory, needs to be included.

[Steel Jaw]

More desert...maybe some more westpac?

[Lionel Mandrake]

Trust me bro, we're not desperate for cash, you gotta believe me bro, we just like releasing things bro, bro please buy our hyped up product that "certainly won't take 5 years" to finish bro, please bro we just need your passion and support but it's not about the cash bro. 

Eagle Dynamics, 2024. 

 

Honestly it's just pathetic at this stage ED. You deserve every bit of criticism and more.

Edited October 21 by Lionel Mandrake

[Jedkwak]

ED please spend some more resources on the core game.. while a new launcher is good I’d really like finished modules and a more stable platform. This is such a great game but with each update it seems to be getting more buggy and unstable. You guys are on the verge of greatness with DCS please don’t squander it.

[Gierasimov]

So, WoT is the primary focus of ED right now, with Afghan and Iraq, with a new Abrams, MRAP, and... and three T technicals. 

No IEDs, no Ts, no other assets. Both theatres had boots on the ground, and were mostly focused on door-to-door fighting or otherwise urban warfare. 

eye candy is surely appreciated, I like the trailers, but then I come to empty map in mission editor and start putting things together...