Jump to content

Low/Medium/High Altitude shots from the Persian Gulf Map!


NineLine

Recommended Posts

I know its WIP but I think the shores doesnt seem realistic. It would be better to add some light green sea tones to shores for depth sense.

I mean this: dubai-39699597-1508946889-ImageGalleryLightboxLarge.jpg


Edited by c@sper

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks really greate but I wonder if the transition between sand/grass and runway or streets in general is WIP?

Looks a bit weired when there is zero sand on the runway, not even on the edges... yeah I know... very minor :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After watching the live stream today it really makes me hope the ED team is gonna make some headway into their night lighting issues. This map and the cities in it could look just amazing lit up at night IF they can ever get their engine to render lights correctly. Dubai should be dazzling at night. Such huge potential if only they could fix their issues. It will be a real shame if these cities are eternally dark from lack of engine ability.

 

I hope if in the current engine(T4 or T5 whichever it is) they just cannot achieve the proper look/function of water and lights they look at improving their core engine to make such things possible. Those should have been part of it's design mandate from the start. I really worry as it appears these things were not really considered much when it was being designed from the outset from all appearances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Map Looks just fine. But its really , i mean really tiny to modern combat operations. So i hope that expansion will come soon (even low quality one)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oculus CV1, Odyssey, Pimax 5k+ (i5 8400, 24gb ddr4 3000mhz, 1080Ti OC )

 

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Map Looks just fine. But its really , i mean really tiny to modern combat operations. So i hope that expansion will come soon (even low quality one)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Map usable size comparison. Caucuses black area includes the Black Sea. I used the same 40 mile ruler to scale the maps (Persian Gulf used screen shot from Wags stream), not scientific but gives a general idea of the map sizes. Like Wags said in his stream, they "hope" to expand the Persian Gulf map eventually.

 

RS98hM.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Map Looks just fine. But its really , i mean really tiny to modern combat operations. So i hope that expansion will come soon (even low quality one)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Well they changed the name from Strait of Hormuz to Persian Gulf. It's bound to get bigger. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Map usable size comparison. Caucuses black area includes the Black Sea. I used the same 40 mile ruler to scale the maps (Persian Gulf used screen shot from Wags stream), not scientific but gives a general idea of the map sizes.

Thanks, gives an idea of the size of the terrain mesh/texture size but I found the raw silhouettes a little hard to interpret so made my own comparison with a guess at the 3D asset boundary.

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=182440&stc=1&d=1523585884

 

Wow, the 2018 Persian Gulf map is much smaller than the 2016 map overlay seen during development.

1525034623_SkyVectorMapComparision2018livestream.thumb.jpg.f7298662a40afed7a5967a0600aeb99c.jpg

2064792284_DCSMapComparision2018.thumb.jpg.7fbeeda4bbdff127501455aee8da03f7.jpg


Edited by Ramsay
Live Stream of the 1st April 2018 showed a much smaller region than I used (from 2016)

i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 64GB DDR4, RTX4070 12GB, 1+2TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 4+1TB SSD, Winwing Orion 2 F-15EX Throttle + F-16EX Stick, TPR Pedals, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, the 2018 Persian Gulf map is much smaller than the 2016 map overlay seen during development.

 

No. What you saw during development is the aeronautical chart for the Persian Gulf. Just like with NTTR the aeronautical chart extends well outside of the "game map."

Win 10 Pro 64Bit | 49" UWHD AOC 5120x1440p | AMD 5900x | 64Gb DDR4 | RX 6900XT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note: This post is a little off topic, as my intention was to compare the "Persian Gulf" map to DCS's other maps to help make an informed choice in purchase.

 

I'm sure it'll be a good map for many types of aircraft operations.

 

No. What you saw during development is the aeronautical chart for the Persian Gulf.

A section of Aeronautical chart was shown inside the Mission Editor and was a similar size to the Caucasus map. I was therefore hopeful the "Strait of Hormuz" would be a similar size to the the Caucasus map but with less detail and with 3D assets/land bases focused around the "Strait of Hormuz"

 

Just like with NTTR the aeronautical chart extends well outside of the "game map."

 

The "Persian Gulf" ME map shown in the 1st April 2018 stream, was a square, I expect it defines the "game map", like the Normandy map.

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=182511&stc=1&d=1523643927

 

IMHO the hard edges of the small map will make long range carrier operations somewhat limited.

 

I had hoped that the "Strait of Hormuz" map would included extended portions of the Persian Gulf/Gulf of Oman and ED's re-branding of the "Strait of Hormuz" to "Persian Gulf" had me hopeful that, although the area of 3D detail would be smaller than the Caucasus, enough would have relief/texture to model RL carrier OP's and ranges.

 

However, the map "is what it is" and is unlikely to expand much, if any. As long as prospective purchasers know what the map covers, they can make an informed choice, as to it's suitability.

 

 

The 3d asset boundary is also somewhat deceiving since Turkey and southern Georgia aren't really part of the fully detailed area on the Caucasus map as it's just trees but no buildings/infrastructure.

 

Yes, but you can still fly through the tree lined valleys, follow rivers or place your own assets there i.e. FARPs, Carrier Groups, etc. there is even a user mission that uses the Kerch Strait as a Falkland Islands substitute, despite the fact that one side of the strait has no 3D assets at all.

292951161_NormandyWesternBorderScreen_180413_180815.thumb.jpg.20fa87ed60bb659c387c34331eebbacd.jpg


Edited by Ramsay

i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 64GB DDR4, RTX4070 12GB, 1+2TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 4+1TB SSD, Winwing Orion 2 F-15EX Throttle + F-16EX Stick, TPR Pedals, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "Persian Gulf" ME map shown in the 1st April 2018 stream, was a square, I expect it defines the "game map", like the Normandy map.

 

What was shown on the April 1st stream is there. It was simply zoomed out to include a lot of the low-res terrain. You can still utilize those areas, they just won't be "pretty." This is the same situation if you open up NTTR in the ME and zoom all the way out.

 

IMHO the hard edges of the small map will make long range carrier operations somewhat limited.

No it won't. The Hornet already has short legs and cannot travel around the entire map with three bags and not refuel. Also see my previous reply about the low-res areas.

 

I had hoped that the "Strait of Hormuz" map would included an extended portions of the Persian Gulf/Gulf of Oman and ED's re-branding of the "Strait of Hormuz" to "Persian Gulf" had me hopeful that, although the area of 3D detail would be smaller than the Caucasus, enough would have relief/texture to model RL carrier OP's and ranges.

Wags already indicated that they are exploring the idea of expanding Persian Gulf Map. They have not made a decision on whether they will or not. Even if they have had decided, they would have to delay the Persian Gulf Map by months to add what you are asking.

Win 10 Pro 64Bit | 49" UWHD AOC 5120x1440p | AMD 5900x | 64Gb DDR4 | RX 6900XT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They said they were exploring the idea and not that it was going to happen.
Well and that's good. I mean, previously they didn't even thought about it despite some people asking, either Normandy, Nevada or Caucasus expansion. If they already think about it with Persian Gulf luckily it could happen at some point. The join with Afganistan map, almost also gathering Georgia and Syria as (it was Wags?) somebody said, is a terrific idea IMHO. It would be the first really big operations area in DCS.

 

 

S!

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well and that's good. I mean, previously they didn't even thought about it despite some people asking, either Normandy, Nevada or Caucasus expansion. If they already think about it with Persian Gulf luckily it could happen at some point. The join with Afganistan map, almost also gathering Georgia and Syria as (it was Wags?) somebody said, is a terrific idea IMHO. It would be the first really big operations area in DCS.

 

 

S!

 

We don't know if they were considering expanding long before they announced they were thinking about it. They have to weigh performance and graphics. Heck, look at the people complaining about the performance in 2.5 where if they have 32GB of ram, it'd be a non-issue.

 

They once said the new terrain technology *could* allow them to stitch maps together; I'd love to see that happen, so I am in complete agreement with you there. My previous posts are simply to help temper expectations as we, as a community, like to let our imagination run wild sometimes.

 

Also keep in mind, that 99.999999% of missions do not use the full map of any terrain. I constantly hear people complaining about having to fly 15+ mins to get to the AO. Imagine the cries if people had to fly 2 hours just to get to the AO.

 

Now I look forward to that, most people will not enjoy it. They especially won't enjoy it when they flew 2 hours and get shot down right away.

 

That is something else ED takes a look at. So I want to see them continue with the maps in the size we are getting with the hopes of one day stitching them together for a larger map.

Win 10 Pro 64Bit | 49" UWHD AOC 5120x1440p | AMD 5900x | 64Gb DDR4 | RX 6900XT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it won't. The Hornet already has short legs and cannot travel around the entire map with three bags and not refuel. Also see my previous reply about the low-res areas.

The map shown in the stream looks to be about 350 nm across (East to West), so cruising at 350 knots, it'll take about an hour to fly from one map edge to the other.

 

In Normandy 44, you want to keep about 50 nm from the 'edge of the world' but it's less of an issue over land as IMHO the default ground textures do a good job when flying at altitude.

 

The 2016 'Strait of Hormuz' map was about 650 nm wide, so with the addition of one or two detailed islands in the Persian Gulf, it looked better for East-West carrier operations with perhaps a distant shore line/relief visible in the haze but unsuitable for a ground war.

 

I'm sure there'd have been complaints that only the Strait of Hormuz was detailed but the original map seemed a good compromise for carrier operations without asking ED to do excessive amounts of work.

 

US Navy Fact File: F/A-18 General Characteristics, C and D models

Range: Combat: 1,089 nautical miles (1252.4 miles/2,003 km), clean plus two AIM-9s

Ferry: 1,546 nautical miles (1777.9 miles/2,844 km), two AIM-9s plus three 330 gallon tanks.

i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 64GB DDR4, RTX4070 12GB, 1+2TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 4+1TB SSD, Winwing Orion 2 F-15EX Throttle + F-16EX Stick, TPR Pedals, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't know if they were considering expanding long before they announced they were thinking about it. They have to weigh performance and graphics. Heck, look at the people complaining about the performance in 2.5 where if they have 32GB of ram, it'd be a non-issue.

 

They once said the new terrain technology *could* allow them to stitch maps together; I'd love to see that happen, so I am in complete agreement with you there. My previous posts are simply to help temper expectations as we, as a community, like to let our imagination run wild sometimes.

 

Also keep in mind, that 99.999999% of missions do not use the full map of any terrain. I constantly hear people complaining about having to fly 15+ mins to get to the AO. Imagine the cries if people had to fly 2 hours just to get to the AO.

 

Now I look forward to that, most people will not enjoy it. They especially won't enjoy it when they flew 2 hours and get shot down right away.

 

That is something else ED takes a look at. So I want to see them continue with the maps in the size we are getting with the hopes of one day stitching them together for a larger map.

Yeah, of course you're right. We just don't know yet and we only know about good wishes for a future, not to mention even if they actually do expand and join maps together it will be in a distant future given the amount of work and time usually ED expends in every development. But that idea is just great and it would be astounding if we manage to see it some day, so they thinking about it is a good start. Just hope to see it before I die :lol: .

 

 

S!

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The map shown in the stream looks to be about 350 nm across (East to West), so cruising at 350 knots, it'll take about an hour to fly from one map edge to the other.

 

In Normandy 44, you want to keep about 50 nm from the 'edge of the world' but it's less of an issue over land as IMHO the default ground textures do a good job when flying at altitude.

 

The 2016 'Strait of Hormuz' map was about 650 nm wide, so with the addition of one or two detailed islands in the Persian Gulf, it looked better for East-West carrier operations with perhaps a distant shore line/relief visible in the haze but unsuitable for a ground war.

 

I'm sure there'd have been complaints that only the Strait of Hormuz was detailed but the original map seemed a good compromise for carrier operations without asking ED to do excessive amounts of work.

 

US Navy Fact File: F/A-18 General Characteristics, C and D models

 

You include very poor examples for range.

 

This is more realistic, let alone the load outs you will see in multiplayer....

Combat radius, interdiction, hi-lo-lo-hi 290 nm

Combat endurance, CAP 150 nm from aircraft carrier 1 h 45 min

Win 10 Pro 64Bit | 49" UWHD AOC 5120x1440p | AMD 5900x | 64Gb DDR4 | RX 6900XT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
...

The "Persian Gulf" ME map shown in the 1st April 2018 stream, was a square, I expect it defines the "game map", like the Normandy map.

...

However, the map "is what it is" and is unlikely to expand much, if any.

 

Boy, was I wrong - I think ED have found their "as good as or better than the free Caucasus Map" solution.

 

82283e74b4d0149a206195dbaf6ff9d13d688ff3.jpg

 

Now, if only my potato PC could run well with more than 40 AI units, I'd be able to populate it with realistic amounts of AAA and SAM's, :lol:


Edited by Ramsay

i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 64GB DDR4, RTX4070 12GB, 1+2TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 4+1TB SSD, Winwing Orion 2 F-15EX Throttle + F-16EX Stick, TPR Pedals, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if this has already been covered but has anybody else brought up that the visibility in that region is terrible? All of the videos I have seen show clear beautiful skies and water but having flown there year round I can tell you it should be a brownish haze most of the year until high altitude. I’m sure visibility can be reduced in settings but the sandstorms and pollution and overall environmental sin the area should default to much worse visibility than we have seen. Although the videos look beautiful they appear unrealistic if that’s what people are going for here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if this has already been covered but has anybody else brought up that the visibility in that region is terrible? All of the videos I have seen show clear beautiful skies and water but having flown there year round I can tell you it should be a brownish haze most of the year until high altitude. I’m sure visibility can be reduced in settings but the sandstorms and pollution and overall environmental sin the area should default to much worse visibility than we have seen. Although the videos look beautiful they appear unrealistic if that’s what people are going for here

 

 

Playability vs. Realism … it's been said many times. I equate the DCS Community to golf. We have duffers, scratch handicappers and professionals. You can't build one course to perfectly please all players. Say that three times fast and give me the spin recovery boldface in between each iteration … :music_whistling:

I don't need no stinkin' GPS! (except for PGMs :D) :pilotfly:

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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