Low/Medium/High Altitude shots from the Persian Gulf Map! - Page 5 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-13-2018, 07:32 PM   #41
Ala13_ManOWar
Senior Member
 
Ala13_ManOWar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Spain
Posts: 1,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Revelation View Post
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
Ala13_ManOWar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2018, 07:42 PM   #42
Revelation
Senior Member
 
Revelation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wilson, NC
Posts: 1,794
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ala13_ManOWar View Post
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 | 27" Asus ROG 1440p | i7-6700k @4.54GHz | ASROCK Extreme7+ | 32Gb @3GHz DDR4 | 512Gb SM951 M.2 SSD | GTX 1080Ti | H100i AIO CPU Cooler
Revelation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2018, 12:23 PM   #43
Ramsay
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,019
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Revelation View Post
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
Quote:
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.
Ramsay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2018, 07:46 PM   #44
Ala13_ManOWar
Senior Member
 
Ala13_ManOWar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Spain
Posts: 1,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Revelation View Post
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 .


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
Ala13_ManOWar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2018, 08:12 PM   #45
Revelation
Senior Member
 
Revelation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wilson, NC
Posts: 1,794
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsay View Post
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....
Quote:
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 | 27" Asus ROG 1440p | i7-6700k @4.54GHz | ASROCK Extreme7+ | 32Gb @3GHz DDR4 | 512Gb SM951 M.2 SSD | GTX 1080Ti | H100i AIO CPU Cooler
Revelation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2018, 12:04 PM   #46
Ramsay
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,019
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsay View Post
...
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.



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,
__________________
i7 860 @2.8GHz , 12GB DDR3 , GTX1050Ti 4GB, 2+4TB HD, MSFFB2 joystick, X52 Pro Thottle, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080

Last edited by Ramsay; 05-09-2018 at 12:07 PM.
Ramsay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2018, 04:32 AM   #47
strikerdg
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 65
Default

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
strikerdg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2018, 01:41 AM   #48
Backy 51
Member
 
Backy 51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: FL240
Posts: 785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by strikerdg View Post
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 …
__________________
I don't need no stinkin' GPS!



SPECS:
Spoiler:

INTEL i7-6700 - 32GB RAM
GeForce 1070 GTX FE on Samsung 40" 4K UHD TV
Corsair K70 RGB and TrackIR 4 Pro

TM Warthog and Cougar MFDs w/CH Pro Pedals
Win 10 Pro 64-bit on 1TB M.2 SSD



HANGAR:
Spoiler:

A-10C AV-8B F-5E F-18C F-86 FC3 Hawk M-2000 P-51 UH-1
FW-190 MiG-15/21
Nevada Normandy Persian Gulf TACView WWII Assets
Backy 51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:39 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.