Why I am not going to be buying this beautiful map anytime soon...

I think size of the map is fine for ww2 props, question is quality of the map, optimization and content that fits into it!

If it's like Normandy was (biggerst digital purchase regret i had) than i'll skip it, 40$ for map alone is greedy, add low quality and bad optimization and it's not worth buying until it gets fixed and on 50pc sale!

$39.99 for this standard of map is very very cheap IMPO. I know what it takes to build a map, 1000's of hours and i think people would be astounded to know what it takes

I'm just waiting for the bundle with the P-47 to get it. I know it is not the most historically accurate map but it can cover many years of the war and we are getting eventually Battle of Britain so this is a must. Also we can use fictional escenarios and fight over a beautiful escenario. I would have rather preferred a Central European map but if Nick and Nineline are speaking the truth about getting BoB, I better understand now their decision.

Also Nineline said that developing variants of new aircraft is getting easier as they develop more and that new 109 variants are not far away. I'm hoping we can simulate different stages of the war soon enough so as soon as the bundle is up, they will have my suport.

It won't prevent me from buying the map, but personally I'd have prefered the map to extend Normandy. Especially with the p-51D's range with tanks. Would have loved to start across the channel in Normandy and fly across and up the coast and back.

Why I am going to be buying this beautiful module anytime soon...

Indeed I already have, and the P47!

The detail in the towns looks fantastic. It is almost enough to tempt me away from the Hornet for a bit.

With all the batsh1t crazy stuff going on in the world this is a wonderful bit of escapism. Thank you ED.

You will be forever alone :(

$39.99 for this standard of map is very very cheap IMPO. I know what it takes to build a map, 1000's of hours and i think people would be astounded to know what it takes

By that logic there would be no game under 200$ out there.

You ask to value your hard work while not valuing customers hard earned money (Normandy map case)!

You will be forever alone :(

Not really, I purchased it too :)

Just purchased Channel Map now.

Will buy it as soon as it goes online on steam

Paid for and downloading as I speak....

Hello, I was just wanted to share my view and opinion on the upcoming channel map, based on what I (We?) know so far.

 

I know this map is ED's WWII baby and they've put a lot of work into it, but I believe this to be a massive missed opportunity, for all parties involved.

 

Not combining the Channel Map with the Normandy map is a let down for me and a short term prospect. Yes I know, different locations, different levels of detail.

 

The Channel Map ends roughly where the Normandy map starts. If they are to be combined this would benefit all parties involved. ED will benefit from good PR (positive reputation and good marketing), more revenue and they will make their first small step to global map. The creators of the Normandy map will benefit from revenue and most importantly, the users will benefit the most out of everyone, having the opportunity to use this huge map, create heaps of scenarios and have the access to a map a lot of other games can only envy for.

 

In my opinion, even if they just get combined and the difference in level of detail between the two areas stays the same, people will still be happy to have them under one map.

 

Both Maps could still be sold separately (at their full price). If you have none of the two maps, you can buy them combined with a discount (so not full price of both together). You can have the combined map as the primary terrain, but have the option to create missions for only one of the two sections, if you want only people with a certain map to be able to play. Think of it as having sub terrain with limited size (something like the limited size of the free weekends which included PG). In the future, using joint effort both sides of the terrain can be equalized.

 

So for the near future, I will now be investing into this, but I will be looking forward to the P-47. Hopefully my message seems reasonable and give you food for thought. Thank you for the effort you put into DCS.

Seems fair enough to me. I won't go into the why's and wherefore's because we all know why, but another point that should not affect map usage is that most ww2 planes like the Spitfire will struggle to cross the channel, get to the furthest reaches of the channel map and get home again on available fuel, which makes zipping them together moot.

However, campaign makers can still utilise both maps.

Me, I get more excited about new places to fly and see than I do about new aircraft.

So I'm happy to buy it. :)

I won't buy it now either, partially because ETO is not my thing, but mostly because of apparent performance issues. If guys with 1080TIs and up struggle with maintaining fps comparable to other maps, then it's "No Country for Old Men" with my measly 1070. Will keep an eye, however, on its further development and optimization.

Late, already bought.

S!

I bought it too..... Alone? I don't think so.

i,ve bought it yesterday & p-47 too ! fine & gorgeous , the map is fps eater even much tweaks...(i7 6700k & 1080) enhancement should become & welcome. the p-47 is great ! happy i'm :)

Just took a quick Yak-52 flight on the map and it's ******* gorgeous!

No question it's a resource hog. I have a 2060 Super, but I'm only running 8 piddly GB of RAM. I'm ordering either 16 or 32 today. Need to tweak my settings for now.

But so far, and admittedly I haven't been using it long, it's the nicest WWII map I've seen. Gonna be taking a long flight tonight.

Gorgeous map!

I will take all the maps I can get.

The Channel and Normandy maps were not combined for obvious reasons.

But I guess you don’t combine them. Instead, you flesh out the English side (Or more) in the Channel map.

Being separate certainly does not justify not buying it for me.

Since the OP felt compelled to tell everyone he will not buy in protest, I am feeling compelled to tell all The P47 and the Channel Map has been happily added to my account. Nice that another part of the world is available!

And no, not struggling with my old system. Runs fine.

I guess “the needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few”.

Just took a quick Yak-52 flight on the map and it's ******* gorgeous!

 

 

No question it's a resource hog. I have a 2060 Super, but I'm only running 8 piddly GB of RAM. I'm ordering either 16 or 32 today. Need to tweak my settings for now.

 

 

But so far, and admittedly I haven't been using it long, it's the nicest WWII map I've seen. Gonna be taking a long flight tonight.

 

 

Gorgeous map!

Indeed. Stay above 400ft or so and avoid looking at the wingtips and every thing is good. It needs a lot of optimising though esp for VR. Then again we kinda knew it would.

Yeah well.. Im on teh fence. I am a Map Slut LOL.

The more maps the merrier.

Still, If the map had been larrger to the north maybe, Some well detailed Netherlands, at least up to Rotterdam, this could also be used by early jets a What Iff 1950's 60's Cold war scenariso, or what not...

I will get it, later on I guess...

Specially when I get the mosquito, that oddly, would have benefited a LOT form a NMetehrlands map ;)

Indeed. Stay above 400ft or so and avoid looking at the wingtips and every thing is good. It needs a lot of optimising though esp for VR. Then again we kinda knew it would.

I'm willing to be patient with the map updates. If the end result is acceptably smooth FPS combat over a map that delicious, I'm willing to give it time.

Actually, I prefer a map I have to catch up to over a map that ran 100% on yesterday's rig.

Had a few hours in the map now. I need to get a Huey in the future. The map looks fantastic.

I have purchased the map and it looks fantastic. However I am one of them who are disapointed that the map does not merge with the Normandy map. I like to fly long distances and once the Mosquito is out, it would be great to have a "bigger" ww2 map. I am aware that there are different levels and flavours of detail and textures, but I would be ok with that. Hope ED will concider to merge the maps.

I'm willing to be patient with the map updates. If the end result is acceptably smooth FPS combat over a map that delicious, I'm willing to give it time.

 

 

Actually, I prefer a map I have to catch up to over a map that ran 100% on yesterday's rig.

Indeed. I am sure microsoft CFS2 would be able to run just fine on my rig with high frame rates.

I invest in the hardware in the present to better enjoy the software in the future. It is a constant game of catch up.

If my rig cannot play a new bit of cutting edge software with lots of new bells and whistles, I take the view that it is my fault, not the developers.

I just love this map.

Indeed. I am sure microsoft CFS2 would be able to run just fine on my rig with high frame rates.

 

 

 

I invest in the hardware in the present to better enjoy the software in the future. It is a constant game of catch up.

 

If my rig cannot play a new bit of cutting edge software with lots of new bells and whistles, I take the view that it is my fault, not the developers.

 

 

 

I just love this map.

Though I would say It's pretty much developers fault tbh. Having cutting edge Hardware, still struggling. Dcs engine is pretty old. The cutting edge thing you are referring to is applying bandage. We need major overhaul in game engine(which is really hard I know).

Just take an example of Another sandbox (which totally not compares to DCS). Just compare arma and DayZ, Both had similar engine. Dayz got total engine update, it's totally got high fps, new mechanics, better visuals. Even if they update arma with a new map, it'll run shitty like before and never be able to get features of dayz because it is the older engine which prohibits developers.

I just want to say new engines with new tecnologies reduces redundant functions, overheads, support new features whichare not possible in aging engine. It is like having nursery, school and college jn same building. It is messy so old stuffs break everytime new stuff comes.

Delete this post, warn or anything but deep down you know it's constructive criticism and there is much needed Engine overhaul.

Sent from my Redmi K20 Pro using Tapatalk

Well people here are happy with what they have, not really keen on improvements.

Though I would say It's pretty much developers fault tbh. Having cutting edge Hardware, still struggling. Dcs engine is pretty old. The cutting edge thing you are referring to is applying bandage. We need major overhaul in game engine(which is really hard I know).

Just take an example of Another sandbox (which totally not compares to DCS). Just compare arma and DayZ, Both had similar engine. Dayz got total engine update, it's totally got high fps, new mechanics, better visuals. Even if they update arma with a new map, it'll run shitty like before and never be able to get features of dayz because it is the older engine which prohibits developers.

I just want to say new engines with new tecnologies reduces redundant functions, overheads, support new features whichare not possible in aging engine. It is like having nursery, school and college jn same building. It is messy so old stuffs break everytime new stuff comes.

Delete this post, warn or anything but deep down you know it's constructive criticism and there is much needed Engine overhaul.

 

Sent from my Redmi K20 Pro using Tapatalk

Of course you are correct and being constructive in your criticism Sora. :)

Yes you can blame the developers for keeping an old, patched up engine running under the bonnet.. But ONLY if they refuse to do something about it.

ED have a team working to implement Vulkan right now, but it's a mammoth task apparently.