Jump to content

Kuwait/Iraq/Iran Map... Most logical next map.


Baco

Recommended Posts

I was reminded today how much I would kill for an F9F Panther/F9f-6Cougar Module to go head to head with the Mig-15 so I could live out my Bridges of Toki Ri dreams.

 

Yes.

 

And to go with it, F4U-4 and/or -5 Corsair. Maybe smuggle the F2H Banshee in because that's the actual aircraft that was used in the action Toko-Ri was based off of.

 

Korea makes so much sense, less technical aircraft, dwindling SMEs, some aircraft airworthy in private hands, re-use of WW2 assets to include tanks, vehicles, and ships. It just makes SENSE.

 

Already have two modules, and nowhere for them to realistically clash in the conflict that made them famous.

Heatblur Rivet Counting Squad™

 

VF-11 and VF-31 1988 [WIP]

VF-201 & VF-202 [WIP]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bring desert on. because we don't have enough with nevada, pg and syria

FC3 | UH-1 | Mi-8 | A-10C II | F/A-18 | Ka-50 III | F-14 | F-16 | AH-64 Mi-24 | F-5 | F-15E| F-4| Tornado

Persian Gulf | Nevada | Syria | NS-430 | Supercarrier // Wishlist: CH-53 | UH-60

 

Youtube

MS FFB2 - TM Warthog - CH Pro Pedals - Trackir 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8GB limit?

 

The base spec for the sim is 8GB of RAM, my understanding is that every object in the map takes away from the 8GB, so you hit a point where you cant add more detail without needing more base RAM

Hornet, Super Carrier, Warthog & (II), Mustang, Spitfire, Albatross, Sabre, Combined Arms, FC3, Nevada, Gulf, Normandy, Syria AH-6J

i9 10900K @ 5.0GHz, Gigabyte Z490 Vision G, Cooler Master ML120L, Gigabyte RTX3080 OC Gaming 10Gb, 64GB RAM, Reverb G2 @ 2480x2428, TM Warthog, Saitek pedals & throttle, DIY collective, TrackIR4, Cougar MFDs, vx3276-2k

Combat Wombat's Airfield & Enroute Maps and Planning Tools

 

cw1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To critique the proposal itself, as far as I can see it includes not a single Coalition air base for Desert Shield/Desert Storm. I think it also includes no Iranian air base from the Iran-Iraq war. As such the proposed map would be fairly useless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that is acriticism I can take. yes I agree that I have no idea where teh military bases are, my proposal was merely geogrphical. And well OK then Not posible. Bases too far away. Lest keep flying the caucasus as vietnam LOL...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this simulator/game, there seems to be an obsession with almost perfect reality. The

 

aircraft/maps must be an exact representation of the actual object. The song is, a price is

 

paid for this perfection and nothing less is acceptable. ( Which becomes very subjective

 

contrasted to the printed information from numerous sources.) Endless mind-numbing

 

useless dialog and arguments are posted. I think to narcotized the virus home-bound,

 

entertainment challenged, aeronautical gifted into aircraft geographical nirvana.

 

 

IMHO Laz

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its True..

There is a saying in my country that goes like this:

 

Something "Perfect" is enemy of something "Good".

 

Meaning that trying to achieve perfectión, you dont even reach a good enough level, because you squander your resources and never get anything done...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True dat..I fly hundreds of missions against narcotics in the mountains, the LGB vs Party in Clear and Present Danger but in the Caucuses, no problems here and agree with the sand map, enough already!

 

 

With the Falkland Islands and the new Pacific Islands there will be some nice sea maps.

 

 

Perhaps an alternative would be to use the WW2 map and create modern airfields and cities or update the Caucuses.

 

 

And my final word on this today, I truly think before any new maps are created, unless third party, they need to be more interactive.

 

 

By this I mean, proper destructible buildings with people interacting with buildings (ie. Civilians and Soldiers can enter and try and hide, better damage systems, potentially the ability to replace a mapped building with a mission building so there are not thousands of interactive buildings per map) and importantly, sea environment including Subs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that is acriticism I can take. yes I agree that I have no idea where teh military bases are, my proposal was merely geogrphical. And well OK then Not posible. Bases too far away. Lest keep flying the caucasus as vietnam LOL...

This thread is built on the wrong premise. Let me fix it.

First your map is 400km, it should be 450nm, over twice as large, so you could have US airbases and Iranian ones, probably Bagdad, the "secret" nuclear research and manufacturing at Natanz, Bandar Bushehr in the bottom right. Plus the area in the south of Iraq is less interesting than the surface of the planet Mars (and probably less hospitable) Half the map is unoccuppied, but the dense stuff is the Euphrates valley from the sea to Bagdad.

 

This nets you:

Iran: Dezful Airbase just a pixel off your original square in the top right corner - major contributor in Iran-Iraq war, Kermanshah, kindda level with Bagdad. I know less about this one.

Saudi Arabia: RAS Mishab, Al Qaisumah, King Khalid MC and enough flat areas for FARPs and ofc the "floating airbases".

 

The reason not to include this region is because too many players cannot AAR, according to that thread where they need it automatically done for them. Plus, the distances for combat missions were huge. Tankers forward deployed into Iraq and Fighters and bombers came from much further afield (other side of Saudi, Dubai, Qatar etc).

 

War just isnt exciting enough for GW1, people dont want 4hr flights, they want arcade DCS for 30mins max. Even the serious guys can handle 2hrs max before their wife nags them or their bladder needs emptied! This is the trouble, people ask for things but they dont understand. It's not what they want. Thats why people keep asking for Afghanistan map, which is so boring. PG was a great hotspot, well picked. Not sure Korea is a good idea. Europe is "object impossible". I think Boznia might be a good future pick.

desertStorm.thumb.jpg.ce27e0a4850b451925c60cd49d7c47b2.jpg


Edited by Pikey
  • Like 2

___________________________________________________________________________

SIMPLE SCENERY SAVING * SIMPLE GROUP SAVING * SIMPLE STATIC SAVING *

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it could be integrated into the current map I would disagree, Id rather see it than the missing items mentioned recently from tjhat map but until then Id rather see something new.

Hornet, Super Carrier, Warthog & (II), Mustang, Spitfire, Albatross, Sabre, Combined Arms, FC3, Nevada, Gulf, Normandy, Syria AH-6J

i9 10900K @ 5.0GHz, Gigabyte Z490 Vision G, Cooler Master ML120L, Gigabyte RTX3080 OC Gaming 10Gb, 64GB RAM, Reverb G2 @ 2480x2428, TM Warthog, Saitek pedals & throttle, DIY collective, TrackIR4, Cougar MFDs, vx3276-2k

Combat Wombat's Airfield & Enroute Maps and Planning Tools

 

cw1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

....

 

War just isnt exciting enough for GW1, people dont want 4hr flights, they want arcade DCS for 30mins max. Even the serious guys can handle 2hrs max before their wife nags them or their bladder needs emptied! This is the trouble, people ask for things but they dont understand. It's not what they want. Thats why people keep asking for Afghanistan map, which is so boring. PG was a great hotspot, well picked. Not sure Korea is a good idea. Europe is "object impossible". I think Boznia might be a good future pick.

 

Couldn't agree more. Afghanistan is going to be hella boring as far as flying goes. Syria looks like it is going to be well done, kinda concerned about how well it will run with a full on mission/multiplayer. I would think and older Korea (1950) might be doable though. Boznia would be a good pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is built on the wrong premise. Let me fix it.

First your map is 400km, it should be 450nm, over twice as large, so you could have US airbases and Iranian ones, probably Bagdad, the "secret" nuclear research and manufacturing at Natanz, Bandar Bushehr in the bottom right. Plus the area in the south of Iraq is less interesting than the surface of the planet Mars (and probably less hospitable) Half the map is unoccuppied, but the dense stuff is the Euphrates valley from the sea to Bagdad.

 

This nets you:

Iran: Dezful Airbase just a pixel off your original square in the top right corner - major contributor in Iran-Iraq war, Kermanshah, kindda level with Bagdad. I know less about this one.

Saudi Arabia: RAS Mishab, Al Qaisumah, King Khalid MC and enough flat areas for FARPs and ofc the "floating airbases".

 

The reason not to include this region is because too many players cannot AAR, according to that thread where they need it automatically done for them. Plus, the distances for combat missions were huge. Tankers forward deployed into Iraq and Fighters and bombers came from much further afield (other side of Saudi, Dubai, Qatar etc).

 

War just isnt exciting enough for GW1, people dont want 4hr flights, they want arcade DCS for 30mins max. Even the serious guys can handle 2hrs max before their wife nags them or their bladder needs emptied! This is the trouble, people ask for things but they dont understand. It's not what they want. Thats why people keep asking for Afghanistan map, which is so boring. PG was a great hotspot, well picked. Not sure Korea is a good idea. Europe is "object impossible". I think Boznia might be a good future pick.

 

I must agree with this Analisys...

 

But then again Vietnam also had long flight time to the Theater of Operations if you fly Airforce... But yeah I get the point.

 

Well I will settle for ANY new map, I just thougth this might be easier and faster to build tnan let ssay Nam, or Korea...

 

By the way I dont thinth that even in teh 50s the full theater of Korea could be rendered in one single map.. but maybe we coukld have four maps or three.. north center south.. who kows.. but it looks like at the moment no one is interested in making it....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most logical next map would be this area...

 

Would alowd a compleate simulation of desert Shield, Desert Storm,

+ a lot of the main battles of the Irak Iran War

 

And part of the Invasion of Irak and even what if counter ISIS operations, even thow the areas depicted were not afected that much.

 

Think how does that match to this:

 

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even the serious guys can handle 2hrs max before their wife nags them or their bladder needs emptied!

 

1) You send spouse to do something else, be it gardening, night with her friends, buy her a full weekend in some spa place etc.

 

2) You use bags to empty your bladder when you are flying... What? Are you saying that you don't want realism? :huh:

 

Europe is "object impossible". I think Boznia might be a good future pick.

 

I don't think it is "impossible", as we have already the Channel and Normandy.

 

Possibly someone could make the Fulda Cap or some other location just somewhere in the Germany etc. Make it to even be somewhere in 70's time and it would be great even if as "just 450 x 450 km" for higher details and higher resolution terrain (all the small hills, rock faces etc).


Edited by Fri13

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By this I mean, proper destructible buildings with people interacting with buildings (ie. Civilians and Soldiers can enter and try and hide, better damage systems, potentially the ability to replace a mapped building with a mission building so there are not thousands of interactive buildings per map) and importantly, sea environment including Subs.

 

We don't need complex modeling, but having a infantry mount buildings is important. Have them basic rules to be followed.

 

- 8-way directions, so you can set infantry defend/engage specific building faces if not all.

- Have option to have infantry on roofs (spotted more easily, capable open AA fire etc from there).

- Have option to have infantry in cellar for low angle engagements.

 

And then of course have infantry to follow move near the buildings or get to defensive positions in corners etc.

No need for seeing them in windows or balconies an such. The rooftop is enough.

 

What comes to civilians, while I would like to have them included so that you get penalized from killing them etc. So you need to be sure about your launch/firing. It is just too high PR problem for ED. It would need to be hard coded to be so that no matter what, killing one civilian is just NO GO.

The idea of civilians is just such a can of worms for all kind legal, PR etc problems that it is just better to leave them simply out.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't need complex modeling, but having a infantry mount buildings is important. Have them basic rules to be followed.

 

- 8-way directions, so you can set infantry defend/engage specific building faces if not all.

- Have option to have infantry on roofs (spotted more easily, capable open AA fire etc from there).

- Have option to have infantry in cellar for low angle engagements.

 

And then of course have infantry to follow move near the buildings or get to defensive positions in corners etc.

No need for seeing them in windows or balconies an such. The rooftop is enough.

 

What comes to civilians, while I would like to have them included so that you get penalized from killing them etc. So you need to be sure about your launch/firing. It is just too high PR problem for ED. It would need to be hard coded to be so that no matter what, killing one civilian is just NO GO.

The idea of civilians is just such a can of worms for all kind legal, PR etc problems that it is just better to leave them simply out.

 

Interesting requests for infantry, very spot on. DCS has a lot of potential for COIN ops, but for that we really need far better infantry moddeling, specially animations for better cover under fire, and the hability to be placed in the roofs.


Edited by Stratos

I don't understand anything in russian except Davai Davai!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
...Tankers forward deployed into Iraq and Fighters and bombers came from much further afield (other side of Saudi, Dubai, Qatar etc).

 

War just isnt exciting enough for GW1, people dont want 4hr flights, they want arcade DCS for 30mins max. Even the serious guys can handle 2hrs max...

Well, that Qatar bases are almost fine to me but probably no carrier went into the Gulf then. Since you ruined my dreams of best map suited for the Tomcat, please tell me which area should I wish for now :)

  • Like 1

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst I can see the logic of that section of desert (not least because Iranian Tomcats cleaned Iraqs clocks there), Ideally Id like North Cape. Because youc an fly any of the Soviet jets there plausibly, because you can fly the F16, F18, F14, any carrier aircraft we can get there, and if you build the map with a bit of Sweden, you have some good operating locations for Viggen. Its lightly populated, its got fantastic terrain. The only extraordinary thing is they havent already committed to doing it yet.

 

 

Id like Central front, but you couldnt do all of it. Even the Northern half you would have major cities like Hamburg, possibly even Copenhagen. Im not sure DCS can take that strain yet.

 

 

 

The other alternative is a new version of Caucasus, featuring the Transcaucasus military district and Northern Turkey. Id pay for that happily, because its the next best thing to Central Front, and you can fly damn near anything you like there on both sides.

 

 

So many good ideas, so little time. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

YES we waaaaaaaaaaaaaaant this MAP :thumbup:

 
icon modules dcs small.png
 
My Liveries : Download Here       IIF Project : Click here       My Discord : Isaac#5625       Iranian DCS Community Discord Channel : Click Here
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
My Gear :

CPU: i5 7500 @ 3.8GHz | Mainboard: ASUS STRIX H270F Gaming | Ram: 32gig 2400 | GPU: ASUS DUAL GTX 1060 6G OC | Monitor: ASUS VG278HE 27" 144Hrz | Headtracker: Open Track + DIY Clips | HOTAS : T.16000M | Mouse & Keyboard: ROG IMPACT II & Cooler Master Devastator 3

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

WISH LIST Maps : Iraq and West of IRAN  | Vietnam 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

We got part of it in Syria, but it is important we get Bushehr, Shiraz, Isfahan, Tabriz as part of Iran while we get west of Iraq in Syria Map and Whole Iraq in extended PG map
Isfahan is the home of Tomcats
Tabriz, Hamedan, Bushehr, Ahwaz .. was the main home of the Tigers and Phantoms during Iran-Iraq war

map.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

With all due respect, don't we already have enough maps with dry/desert areas? How about a nice lush forest area instead, tropical or continental? Or a more arctic setting? This is not only DCS:Middle East, and while this is a beautiful region, we already have quite a lot to play with, with the current maps. Not perfect, but better than tropical areas or colder areas that are absolutely not represented today. 

  • Like 4

AMD R7 5800X3D | 64GB DDR4 3200MHz | RTX 4080S 16GB | Varjo Aero | VKB Gunfighter Pro Mk3 + STECS + pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...