Deployment to ....

[golfsierra2]

... where ?

 

In FC 2.0, there will be no Crimean Peninsula anymore, so where do the squads and wings deploy to ?

Edited March 14, 2010 by golfsierra2

[GhostDog]

... where ?

 

In FC 2.0, there will be no Crimean Peninsula anymore, so where do the squads and wings deploy too ?

 

:huh: I don't follow. Perhaps you're using the word "deploy" in a different sense than I understand it.

[thaFunkster]

He means where geographically will it be set...

[jpm1]

i heard that it wasn't about all the peninsula , just around Sevastopol , it's the same map as BS (unless i missed something)

Edited March 14, 2010 by jpm1

[thaFunkster]

Yeh, I think it is the BS map...

[GhostDog]

From the faq:

 

- New terrain area to include much of Georgia. This will be same map as used in DCS: Blacks Shark. As such the Crimea has been replaced with the addition of Georgia.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=782974&postcount=2

[monotwix]

Certain things are irreplaceable.

Delete and substitute usually works:

 

[thaFunkster]

That's great!

 

So its basically an expansion of the Lock On map??

[monotwix]

Only if you can expand with it.

[golfsierra2]

:huh: I don't follow. Perhaps you're using the word "deploy" in a different sense than I understand it.

 

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/deploy

 

Deployment in the meaning of the military term, basically that is the same as relocating units.

So, if your unit is based at let's say Belbek, where is it moving to in FC 2.0 ?

[GhostDog]

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/deploy

 

Deployment in the meaning of the military term, basically that is the same as relocating units.

So, if your unit is based at let's say Belbek, where is it moving to in FC 2.0 ?

 

There are no squadrons or wings in FC other than the ones that the mission designer creates. It would be entirely up to the mission designer.

[jpm1]

don't know if you're talking of online squadrons but looks like that if the game's gonna change , what's very likely gonna be the case , you'll have to adapt

[Vekkinho]

I'll choose Sochi, it's nice in the summer and you can go skiing to Krasnaya polyana during winter!

[pauldy]

With Crimea or without it.. western jets still don't have any "Realistic" places to deploy in the Black Sea Theater...

 

So the very, very, very distant bet for me would be Georgia.... ;)

[T-Bone]

Nothing is unrealistic in this world. 30 years ago nobody would have every expected NATO based in Iraq and Afghanistan either.

[jpm1]

Nothing is unrealistic in this world. 30 years ago nobody would have every expected NATO based in Iraq and Afghanistan either.

 

not wrong

let's not forget that the map restrictions aren't due to ED but to hardware

[T-Bone]

500km x 500km seems to be the limit for moderately object dense maps ATM.

[Vekkinho]

Nothing is unrealistic in this world. 30 years ago nobody would have every expected NATO based in Iraq and Afghanistan either.

 

You failed to count in CIA

 

;)

[Vekkinho]

500km x 500km seems to be the limit for moderately object dense maps ATM.

 

And that's more than enough if U ask me.

 

I'd rather have map selector in the future so one can chose between developed theaters than expanding current map further only to include Israel, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan...

 

Point of having such enormous map is only good with DCS:B-2 module...and it's very unlikely module to hold your breath for!

[GGTharos]

^^^^

 

Not necessarily true when it comes to realistic missions. A fighter like an F-15 or F-16 can and will fly 200-400nm just to get to its CAP point, usually with air refueling available. A 500kmx500km map is not enough to make this happen. You need 2000x2000 to really, really have all the room required to simulate the most realistic of any missions.

 

IMHO.

Edited March 15, 2010 by GGTharos

[T-Bone]

The actual map displayed in DCS/LOMAC FC is actually closer to 800km x 1100km as it encompases the entire Black Sea Region. The detailed map is finite though because of the large number of objects like rivers, roads, buildings, farms, airbases, etc so its comfined to mostly Russia and Georgia.

 

I agree there should be support for larger maps, but I'm comfortable with having a map pulldown list like in IL-2. In older games like Janes F-15, the maps were so large that some flights took 5+ hours... I'm not sure how many of us have that much time to devote on a weekend with real life obligations ;)

[T-Bone]

^^^^

 

Not necessarily true when it comes to realistic missions. A fighter like an F-15 or F-16 can and will fly 200-400nm just to get to its CAP point, usually with air refueling available. A 500kmx500km map is not enough to make this happen. You need 2000x2000 to really, really have all the room required to simulate the most realistic of any missions.

 

IMHO.

 

I think if you really want a map for long distances, an island hopping map like the Ryukyu, Aleutian, or Spratly islands would be ideal because of the low object count and abundance of water.

[T-Bone]

not wrong

let's not forget that the map restrictions aren't due to ED but to hardware

 

Is this because 32 Bit operating systems can only use 2 GB of RAM? (Or 3GB with the Windows XP 3GB switch?)

 

Maybe in the future DCS can make the move to 64 bit and allow for larger maps.

[GGTharos]

That is one idea - another one is falklands, for example.

 

But that is 'for now' ... I am (hopefully) looking a bit into the future when larger maps (in terms of objects I guess) can be handled as well :)

Note that large maps supply more than just a long flight; you have a diverse terrain where you can pick where you'll build your battles, or alternatively perhaps it will allow a very large full scale campaign to be supported. 5 hour flights are not strictly necessary, but for realistic scenarios having the ability to do this sort of thing is definitely desirable.

 

I think if you really want a map for long distances, an island hopping map like the Ryukyu, Aleutian, or Spratly islands would be ideal because of the low object count and abundance of water.

Edited March 15, 2010 by GGTharos

[GGTharos]

Is this because 32 Bit operating systems can only use 2 GB of RAM? (Or 3GB with the Windows XP 3GB switch?)

 

Yes and no. Actually XP can address a lot of RAM, but MS wants you to pay a license fee to give you the extended memory capability. The 2GB cap is thus fairly artificial.

 

Maybe in the future DCS can make the move to 64 bit and allow for larger maps.

 

ED are certainly working towards it, but it will take a while. This is what I had in mind when i asked if you could create regions that you can later stitch together :)