DCS: Cold War Germany - preview

[C525]

On 4/7/2025 at 7:18 PM, MAESTR0 said:

Thank you for your support. We are glad to see that you like the map and this gives us even more desire to improve it. It is very nice when you remember the places where you served or walked as a child. The map is very large and we want to recreate everything, but we have to think about resources and your SSD/HDD. And like any of our maps, it does not stand still and is constantly evolving: it will be improved and refined, including according to user requests.

Today we will answer some questions and tell you a little about what we added:
@Swiso Yes, most of the buildings are destructible. Many with detailed damage models. The rule with original objects is the same - we don't bomb them

@KarlRadek thanks for the information about the quarries. I want to say that this place is already under reconstruction: water is pumped out of the lakes and instead of them there will be quarries, like at that time.

There were many requests from you about air defense locations. We had them, but at your requests we increased the number of these places and now they will not only be near large bases. Thanks to everyone who sent in SAM info

@Rick Mave   Ersatzpisten - they are located mostly south of phase 1, in phase 3 territory, but we can already say - don't worry, you'll be able to land on the road.

@C525 today the shelters in Büchel look like this:

@MAESTR0 thank you so much for the update on the shelters. Watching the Livestream, the inside of the Shelters in Spang look awesome. Will the German Shelters also have open doors?

Photo shows Shelters from ETSN, but should be the same for almost all FRG Airbases

 

[OneEyeRoss]

I am impressed with the flight around Fulda!  Really nice.

And knowing it is coming out in APRIL!!!!!  Take my money!!

 

[Bremspropeller]

@MAESTR0 not sure if the Luftganza aircraft at Tegel and Tempelhof are static or part of the scenery: There should be no Luftganza airplanes in CW-Berlin, since all IGS (Internal German Service) service was limited to western Allied Flag carriers - mostly Pan Am and BEA/British Airways. Air France exited the IGS market early on.

Luftganza - as were all other german airlines - was prohibited from servicing CW-Berlin.

The Pan Am lounge (the original one) close to Bahnhof Zoo supposedly was an awesome place to hang out...

 

==== Edit ====

The building which can be seen in the Huey video right at the beginning on the left side (Luftganza 727 facing it) was never there at this time - looks more like Terminal C, which was only built in the late 2000s:

Spoiler

 

See here before Terminal C was built - the Huey takes off right next to that regional jet next to the parking lot:

 

Edited April 14 by Bremspropeller

[WolfCat]

10 hours ago, MBot said:

A shame we don't have a RAF Harrier GR.3. Imagine the nice Harrier field sites that Ugra would have done for this map

Maybe ED will do it after they finish with the F-15C...

Edited April 14 by WolfCat

[flanker1]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb Northstar98:

Couple things I noticed on the stream by Wags

• At 24:36, you can see a helipad and training range in the forest on the approach path to runway 25 of Damgarten. He flies over it at 30:00. As far as I can tell this completely fictional - the only thing that should be there is a forest and the outer marker beacon. In 1985 satellite imagery nothing can be seen apart from the forest and a small clearing for the marker beacon, ditto for a 1969 satellite image.
• There is an EWR site (FuTK-332) near Saal about 7 km to the north-north-east of Damgarten, which should have a grass helipad, but it's unmarked on the map and doesn't appear to be present. There's also an SA-3 site practically adjacent to this site that also doesn't appear to be present (the area appears forested when it should be fields). Both are clearly visible in this satellite image.
• Damgarten has an SA-3 site (541st OZRD) which doesn't appear to be present (see 29:35, the area appears to only have a single road is more densely forested - accurate for modern day, not so accurate for the timeframe). It's clearly visible in this image and this image.

Hopefully these can get corrected. I'm of course not expecting a 1:1 recreation, but I'm more open to things missing (as I can always remove trees and put an SA-3 site there, satisfying points 2 and 3), but I have more of a problem with things being present when they shouldn't, especially things like the training range in #1, especially when real military sites in the area don't appear to be present.

Thank you for the great investigation and research, and yes - if all the effort has already been made and the claim is obvious to depict the environment and epoch as accurately as possible - then please recreate the historical military installations and places exactly where they were. There were truly enough of them, so nothing has to be added or omitted.   

[Smith]

Everything looks so good. It is the perfect map choice. It will be my favorite map.

But I really hope that they  fix the brown dirt around all the airports someday. Or at least i hope a modder can make the textures a bit more green around the airports.

[Lord_Pyro]

19 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

 

==== Edit ====

The building which can be seen in the Huey video right at the beginning on the left side (Luftganza 727 facing it) was never there at this time - looks more like Terminal C, which was only built in the late 2000s:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

See here before Terminal C was built - the Huey takes off right next to that regional jet next to the parking lot:

 

Same could be said about the war of the nations memorial in leipzig. Thats clearly the modern post 2000s one.

 

But i guess that's because they use some assets from their flightsim maps instead of creating period correct ones from scratch.

(Leipzig has also no marina near that monument, as shown in the video )

 

But lets not forget that we talk about a sim which at the end of the day is still some kind of game and not a historical document, so i'm fine with that an am just happy to see my hometown represented in dcs. Thats far more than most users here can say at the moment

19 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

 

==== Edit ====

The building which can be seen in the Huey video right at the beginning on the left side (Luftganza 727 facing it) was never there at this time - looks more like Terminal C, which was only built in the late 2000s:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

See here before Terminal C was built - the Huey takes off right next to that regional jet next to the parking lot:

 

Same could be said about the war of the nations memorial in leipzig. Thats clearly the modern post 2000s one.

 

But i guess that's because they use some assets from their flightsim maps instead of creating period correct ones from scratch.

(Leipzig has also no marina near that monument, as shown in the video )

 

But lets not forget that we talk about a sim which at the end of the day is still some kind of game and not a historical document, so i'm fine with that an am just happy to see my hometown represented in dcs. Thats far more than most users here can say at the moment

[ESA_maligno]

What about Soviet nav aids ? East German bases with TACAN? .....

Is that true?

 

 

Edited April 15 by ESA_maligno

[Northstar98]

19 minutes ago, ESA_maligno said:

What about Soviet nav aids ? East German bases with TACAN? .....

Is that true?

 

 

Yeah, should ideally have PRMG and RSBN systems, not TACAN. The inclusion of TACAN at these airfields is a post-reunification thing.

This site has quite a few of them:

https://www.mil-airfields.de/de-rpt/ddr-funkfeuer-rsbn-de.htm

[cfrag]

Just now, Northstar98 said:

The inclusion of TACAN at these airfields is a post-reunification thing.

I know it's an anachronism, and people may dislike their existence. Personally, I like the fact that TACAN is present, as I'm not trained in Eastern nav procs.

[Hiob]

In the end, it's a G A M E and therefore needs to be accessable for as many players as possible. There are tons of things that aren't "perfect" in regards to realism. I don't mind all kinds of nav aids. The more options the better. I can always choose to ignore them. (Maybe there can be or already is an option in the ME to disable them from case to case).

I'm just happy we get a PROPER green map. Only thing left to wish for is 'Nam. But Ugra needs a new project soon(tm) - so....who knows.....   

[ESA_maligno]

OK; i see…; Caucasus it’s the only accuracy map about navs aids jijijiji

The l39 will not be able to use the na s aids of its own airfields; but an A10 of the enemy if....; how crazy; but everything is to please the children

[draconus]

2 hours ago, Hiob said:

Only thing left to wish for is 'Nam.

Oh, so you need 'Nam map because you can't play pretend using Caucasus or some other green map? Either it is just a game or we strive to make it realistic simulation. If it's about a Cold War depict it as it was, without fictional modern additions.

Edited April 15 by draconus

[Hiob]

2 minutes ago, draconus said:

Oh, so you need 'Nam map because you can't play pretend using Caucasus or some other green map? Either it is just a game or we strive to make it realistic simulation. If it's about a Cold War depict it is as it was, without fictional modern additions.

I said wish, not need.
Caucasus is an awesome map. My second in line after Syria actually. And with user made texture updates it still holds reasonable well. But it is showing its age. Germany Map is awesome. And I'm more than happy with it.

Still we all have our pet desires, no? Mine is Vietnam Map + Intruder. Both in the highest possible fidelity. 

[Tarres]

12 minutes ago, ESA_maligno said:

OK; i see…; Caucasus it’s the only accuracy map about navs aids jijijiji

The l39 will not be able to use the na s aids of its own airfields; but an A10 of the enemy if....; how crazy; but everything is to please the children

And the new 9.12a only VFR. No RSBN corrections for the nav system.

Even FC3 makes use of basic PRMG (29/25/27)

Edited April 15 by Tarres

[Hiob]

The point I was trying to make is, that I won't go comparing and complaining if some valleys and rivers are missing for the sake of practicality and if there are modern nav aids, that I can choose to not use, I won't be bothered. More options - great.

[ESAc_flankercobra]

A map where, apparently, Warsaw Pact aircraft were finally going to be accommodated and it turns out that they are only designed for NATO aircraft..., no more doing instrumental procedures with the MiG21, L39 or the future MiG29... and we will have to continue as in the time of LOMAC...

[Tarres]

@ESAc_flankercobra 21 uses a proprietary sistem based on on a lua file. So in the end you can place any navaid in any place.

For the 39 and the 29, and to a lesser exent the “Soviets” fc3, you are right.

[Northstar98]

1 hour ago, cfrag said:

I know it's an anachronism, and people may dislike their existence. Personally, I like the fact that TACAN is present, as I'm not trained in Eastern nav procs.

There is a TACAN unit as a placeable unit.

There isn't RSBN and PRMG as a placeable unit.

You are already catered for even if the NAVAIDS were realistic, but given that there isn't an RSBN or PRMG unit anybody who wants to use Eastern Bloc aircraft at Eastern Bloc airfields is not catered for.

57 minutes ago, Hiob said:

In the end, it's a G A M E and therefore needs to be accessable for as many players as possible.

Having it the way that it is reduces accessibility.

There is a TACAN unit, there isn't an RSBN or PRMG unit. So anybody who wants to use Eastern Bloc aircraft at Eastern Bloc airfields, should do what exactly?

This isn't just some pedantic thing (as if realism was a bad thing to begin with), it tangibly impacts gameplay (including whether or not you can even do things like instrument procedures at all).

57 minutes ago, Hiob said:

There are tons of things that aren't "perfect" in regards to realism.

I don't see anybody here demanding perfection.

And? What's your point?

57 minutes ago, Hiob said:

The more options the better.

This results in the opposite.

57 minutes ago, Hiob said:

I can always choose to ignore them.

Shame you don't want to give people the choice to use the NAVAIDs that should be there...

Edited April 15 by Northstar98

[Hiob]

@Northstar98 I think you missed my point. I'm not opposing eastern Nav aids. I'm all for it, I just don't have any knowledge about them so I don't comment on them. I was just opposing the idea, that Tacan is a problem because it is not time/era appropriate.

[Tarres]

Well, flying a “western” airplane you can rely on tacan and tacan offsets in order to make an attack/interception… in the eastern bloc countries.

It’s the third map with this problem. But the first that places ils and tacan in “eastern” military airbases

Edited April 15 by Tarres

[Northstar98]

23 minutes ago, Hiob said:

I was just opposing the idea, that Tacan is a problem because it is not time/era appropriate.

Because realism is somehow a bad thing here?

[cfrag]

Just now, Northstar98 said:

Because realism is somehow a bad thing here?

I believe the feeling is that realism is a nice-to-have, not conditio sine qua no.

[Hiob]

Just now, Northstar98 said:

Because realism is somehow a bad thing here?

Stop trying to twist my words please. Realism isn't inherently bad. I never said this. I AM NOT oppsing your wish for eastern technologiy featured in maps. 
 

[flyingcyrus]

This map is a real masterpiece regarding the way cities are rendered, as weel as communication lines, forest... But, IMHO, Ugra could do some additional work on countryside textures. green is a bit saturated, and brown fields seem to all have the same tint. Some more extra textures (not hundreds but let say a dozen) would be of great benefit, and I don't think the extra diskspace would be an issue.

Anyway, great job Ugra !