DCS Global Map?

[TeeJay82]

Is ED planning on building a complete global map? like fsx has. i know its a combat simulator, but it also works great as a "Just fly from A to B sim" and tbh, i dont need it to be detailed down to the last grass straw, as long as i manage to navigate in the airspace i know, through lakes, roads and cities i dont need a massive level of detail... and for further DCS expansions, just do what 3rd party expansions for FSX does... use a basic world map and just detail the operation areas a bit more... fsx`s ORBX would be the perfect thing to compare it with... just a wishful thought :P

[RogueRunner]

Is ED planning on building a complete global map? like fsx has. i know its a combat simulator, but it also works great as a "Just fly from A to B sim" and tbh, i dont need it to be detailed down to the last grass straw, as long as i manage to navigate in the airspace i know, through lakes, roads and cities i dont need a massive level of detail... and for further DCS expansions, just do what 3rd party expansions for FSX does... use a basic world map and just detail the operation areas a bit more... fsx`s ORBX would be the perfect thing to compare it with... just a wishful thought :P

 

99% sure this will never happen.

[Sticky]

For me detail is MUCH more important than size. I like the size and detail we have now in EDs sims. I would like some totally new area, but still, with the same or better level of detail. But not something like FSX. For me the quality of the two (FSX and EDs latest) is so far apart it cant even be compared. Keep up the good work and please dont lower your standards ED!!

[Boberro]

I bet on quality - terrain must be better for choppers. I think the grass will give much deeper immersion for Black Shark ;]

[claud]

no need too.. make terrians as it goes.. like in falcon 4.0 u can have korea agean ODS etc..

 

and u switch between them as u see fit..

 

so making such a huge investment is a waste of time.. why bother really its not like u gonna fly a 3,000 mile sorite... u might but lets say it will be once every 100 flights ( and even that is borderline insane :D )

 

so investing so much in this is not a good idea.

 

better invest it in DCS:VIPER :D

[amalahama]

It'd be nice global terrain with low resolution/detail maps, together with high detail zones where campaigns are based. Something similar to FSX/X-plane. We have to begin thinking in DCS:B-1B, you know... ;)

 

Regards!!

[Eddie]

. why bother really its not like u gonna fly a 3,000 mile sorite.

 

Speak for yourself ;)

[element1108]

Love the idea, but would be a huge waste of resources IMHO. 99% of that sky, airports cities and roads won't be used to enough to warrent the effort. There are still places in fsx I've not yet seen and will probably never see.

 

Fighter ops is claiming a global map, so if that ever sees the light of day youmay find it there. I'd much rather ED concentrate on new modules and avionics/engine updates than laying out a few hundred thousand global airports.

 

I won't complain though if it ever happens you can be sure of it. :D

[SUBS17]

Global terrain is a good idea for DCS as it opens up the Aircombat to its fullest potential. I think its quite possible that ED could add Global terrain if they wanted too and I would not be surprised if it became the next thing that all sims have. Currently there is FSX and Xplane plus FO in development which are going to have this feature. With Google Earth and other sources I can imagine that it'll be someday in DCS. The advantages are that Virtual Squadrons could be based in home countrys, you could have conflicts and dynamic campaigns running Globally and alliances could add politics to the way in which wars are fought online. It would be good to have the SDK released so that people can expand DCS further into ship and tank combat and possibly even FPS. With FSX you can download terrain mods which make it very close to how it looks IRL so even if EDs too buisy to make the terrain more detailed I'm sure someone would probably make some payware or freeware terrain mods. Also if they did expand into a Global map they should also tap into the void left by FSXs devs and make civ aircraft as well.

[Protos]

Global terrain is a good idea for DCS as it opens up the Aircombat to its fullest potential. I think its quite possible that ED could add Global terrain if they wanted too and I would not be surprised if it became the next thing that all sims have. Currently there is FSX and Xplane plus FO in development which are going to have this feature. With Google Earth and other sources I can imagine that it'll be someday in DCS. The advantages are that Virtual Squadrons could be based in home countrys, you could have conflicts and dynamic campaigns running Globally and alliances could add politics to the way in which wars are fought online. It would be good to have the SDK released so that people can expand DCS further into ship and tank combat and possibly even FPS. With FSX you can download terrain mods which make it very close to how it looks IRL so even if EDs too buisy to make the terrain more detailed I'm sure someone would probably make some payware or freeware terrain mods. Also if they did expand into a Global map they should also tap into the void left by FSXs devs and make civ aircraft as well.

 

+1

wow .... I think this is the first post of yours I have ever agreed with. Well said.

[EtherealN]

I hope you guys realize that there is a lot more involved to global terrain than just "creating" it. There are very specific reasons why this is a lot harder to do with combat simulators than it is in civilian ones. ;)

[Protos]

World detail has to do with engine capabilities. Since apparently there is supposed to be a new engine in the works .... now seems like a reasonable time to bring it up. Also its not a question of difficulty, just commitment. The technical challenges have long ago been conquered.

[EtherealN]

Sorry to say this, but Protos: I think I can see that you are not a software engineer. ;)

 

I'd say there are probably very specific hurdles involved due to the fact that things have to actually fight on the terrain, and do so in a predictable manner and in a way that the computer can handle. Completely aside from the detail of generating the terrain, that is, to a sufficiently detailed degree that it is both qualitative and "good enough" to allow ground interdiction missions (which I guess would be the objective of having such a radically expanded map) to have any point.

[Protos]

Sorry to say this, but Protos: I think I can see that you are not a software engineer. ;)

 

I'd say there are probably very specific hurdles involved due to the fact that things have to actually fight on the terrain, and do so in a predictable manner and in a way that the computer can handle. Completely aside from the detail of generating the terrain, that is, to a sufficiently detailed degree that it is both qualitative and "good enough" to allow ground interdiction missions (which I guess would be the objective of having such a radically expanded map) to have any point.

 

Nope. I do hardware.

 

And for me the point of terrain in a flight sim is not to allow ground interdiction missions (thats a tertiary concern, not primary) but to provide immersion and realism for air combat battles. I don't need my cycles being used to fight ground ai on a mountainside. I fly so I can fight in the AIR ;)

[element1108]

World detail has to do with engine capabilities. Since apparently there is supposed to be a new engine in the works .... now seems like a reasonable time to bring it up. Also its not a question of difficulty, just commitment. The technical challenges have long ago been conquered.

 

Technical challenges of a global map have not been conquered in a combat sim. Commitment and financial respnsibilty must always find balance. If it took ED 5 years to develope a global map vs or 3 modules...I would put my money on the fact most would want the 3 modules (insert favorite modules here).

 

Most are satisfied operating in the area of conflict and for a10 we're getting nellis plus an expanded map which is pretty cool.

[Sarge55]

What? No concern for the AG proponents? I'm shocked...

 

Ground interdiction missions are very important. Don't know the split between AG and AA but I'm sure it's pretty balanced.

[Feuerfalke]

Global terrain is a good idea for DCS as it opens up the Aircombat to its fullest potential.

 

Really? Which aircombat planes do you know of, that travel around the world for a fight?

 

 

X-plane and FS-series are civilian aircraft simulators that are designed to simulate long-range flights, intercontinental flights or simply sight-seeing-tours in your own neighborhood or at any place of interest.

 

DCS is designed to simulate air-to-air combat or air-to-ground combat. As combat usually takes place in a rather limited area, the current system is much more suited for this simulation than a world-map.

 

 

Naturally the interests of both categories are largely different.

[Sticky]

Nope. I do hardware.

 

And for me the point of terrain in a flight sim is not to allow ground interdiction missions (thats a tertiary concern, not primary) but to provide immersion and realism for air combat battles. I don't need my cycles being used to fight ground ai on a mountainside. I fly so I can fight in the AIR ;)

 

If you are only flying your sims air-to-air and not air-to-ground then you are really missing out bigtime.

[element1108]

You can pretend your over anywhere in the world in an air battle, it's when you're moving mud you see roads, landmarks that identify a specific region.

[Eddie]

Protos mud moving is the whole point of any air force. Air to air only exists to enable friendly a-g missions to be carried out and prevent the enemy doing the same. An air force's reason for existence is to support ground forces.

 

The ability to have ground units on the terrain and a-g missions is not just important, it's essential.

 

A-A is a means to an end, not the end itself.

[EtherealN]

So, Protos, do I understand you correctly in that your wish is for ED to completely abandon all strike aircraft and only do pure fighters?

 

Are there even any "pure fighters" beside the F15C? :P

 

EDIT: +1 Eddie. I can't rep you again but recognition where it's due. And I say this as a member of an F15C squadron. ;)

Edited July 23, 2010 by EtherealN

[element1108]

A/A is an ego boost, definitly won't win a war. Wars will alwatlys be won and lost on the ground.

[EtherealN]

A/A isn't an "ego boost". It's a "job". Just the same as A2G is a "job". Both do it for the guy on the ground.

 

No-one gets into either IRL if their motivation has anything to do with ego. Airquake Online may be different in some cases, but don't make the mistake of generalizing.

[element1108]

War is an ego boost, ;). All aspects of a war are jobs and essential in order for the efforts to be effective. I was being sarcastic. ;) should have put a wink in there. Everybody knows air to air "flyboys" are egocentric to some extent ;).

Edited July 23, 2010 by element1108

[Moa]

If by 'egocentric' means they're confident and back themselves, then yes, they are egocentric.

 

If by 'egocentric' you mean selfish, petulant, reckless, disrespecting of authority, and arrogant as they are portrayed in film and TV then no, they are not egocentric. Every military pilot I've met (and I was one) is nothing like they are portrayed by the US entertainment industry (incidentally, they're not particularly good looking either - but they *are* awesome at what they do).