DCS: Normandy 1944 Map

Will the map work with 2.5?

Yes it will.

what about planes. Can you fly any planes that you have purchased or that came in the dcs world 2.5?

Ok thanks.

Are there any missions or campians in Normandy map

If you ask strictly about WWII-era content, there are two official, payware campaigns produced by Bunyap (so good quality is a given), a handful of typical single missions per each warbird (cold start, takeoff, free flight etc.) and some unofficial, user made missions, available in the downloads section. Mind you, most of them require purchasing WWII assets pack, plus it's impossible to say how many of the older ones are compatible with 2.5-2.5.1.

Don't know if there are any modern-planes-over-Normandy missions out there, but if there are, I doubt it's many of them.

That being said, I would not recommend buying the map just yet. It's poorly optimized, its development came almost to a stop and so did development of the WWII asset pack. You might want to pick it up next year if/when it offers more complete experience.

That's why I said "almost". I do know things are cooking up behind the scenes and I read any related snippets in newsletters with interest, but in the end, from customer's point of view all of it is irrelevant.

From customer's point of view a year is going to pass soon since the map+pack release and within this timeframe the map have had only one bigger yet rudimentary update published for it, the ground units part of the pack had only a few added, while air part had zero. Unless someone follows the newsletters and forum very closely like we do, it all resembles the very definition of "abandonware".

In the same time, certain Moscow based game-studio-that-shall-be-not-named managed to release a new, feature complete part of their WWII franchise, with one map of similar size, better visual quality and superior performance, plus a relevant pack of AI air and ground units. Although flyable planes in DCS do require much more resources and development time for obvious reasons, the AI units can be comparable in both platforms and this is where ED's excuses or internal project management issues stop being valid when customers plan their next purchases.

This is where things are getting dangerous. You've said some time ago that ED is competing only with itself. In my opinion THAT is "simply not a true statement" when talking about Normandy & warbirds part of this franchise. If you follow other boards you know that for last three months many customers from here have been redirecting their money to current and the recently announced upcoming project of that studio. And these are not cheap products either.

Even if the other company guys don't consider themselves to be ED's direct competition, the fact is the money ends up in their pockets, rather than Wags' and Chizh's.

Unless somehow ED are so rich already that they can light off cigars with 100-buck notes and simply ignore that wave of pre-purchase funds going away from them, then fine, it's their business. Otherwise I don't see how they can turn Normandy into an attractive and more profitable product in the long run.

I strongly believe WWII project could sell much better, though, and keep bringing more people from other platforms in, if it offered more complete experience, more clearly defined plan for the near future, and more disciplined execution thereof - something which competiton does provide more or less, while ED seems to struggle. I'm sure Normandy+AP sold OK as it was long awaited and hyped release, good for them, but ED can't rely solely on "initial-sales-cashgrab" tactics of mainstream AAA studios in this particular branch of their product tree if they want it to become long-term-healthy and even more profitable.

As for my post you probably refer to, I don't have to drive-away new, potential customer. Sadly, the product in its current form does it "effectively" enough by itself. I just can't lure someone into a purchase by butt-licking and sugercoating - if there are "warts and all" in the product, one has to mention them as well. You can mark my word that when planned and advertized units of AP get implemented eventually and if the map gets more optimization and fixes from Ugra-Media some day, I'll be advocating for these. For the time being, though, I can't honestly do it.

We'll have to agree to disagree on "the end game" I guess. ED might be the champs in aircraft systems and FM modelling, but you know very well that there has to be a well crafted "background" to use these aircraft, ESPECIALLY in the market niche of WWII-oriented combat flight sims. What's the point of buying expensive, clickable A/C and learning to operate it when there's not much to do with it afterwards? While waiting for upcoming improvements and addons, I use warbirds in DCS for VFR+aerobatics only and still get a hefty amount of enjoyment out of it, but I'm not a typical combat-oriented player.

For combat-oriented players, both SP and MP, there's nothing that DC does that cannot be done in other platforms (again, I'm talking strictly about the background of everything outside of plane systems and FM), but unfortunately there's plenty they can do while DCS, as of Spring 2018, still cannot. It's an issue that's coming back over and over again in various places of the net and after comparing this particuar aspect to other sims, it's difficult to defend DCS in its current state with a straight face. The ironic expression of "Digital Cockpit Simulator" that can be found on the net didn't come out of nowhere. True, WWII guys in DCS are in better situation than F-86 and MiG-15 guys, but still quite a bit behind modern A/C pilots.

Sure, WWII things are being worked on and things will be released some day, but by the time it happens, will current customers still care, and will there be enough new ones willing to come here, or will they choose to fly over virtual Ardennes instead?

The bottom line is - as far as WWII setting is concerned, ED does not operate in business vacuum anymore, which already causes a big chunk of money to go elsewhere as we speak. In my opinion that cannot be healthy either for them or for us, not in this niche segment of videogaming industry.

Excellent post Art :thumbup: Pretty much sums up my feelings regarding DCS as it stands and I would imagine the feelings of quite a lot of others here too.

SD

My own feelings regarding things similar to this discussion (I'm not really emotionaly bothered by this particular one) tend to be calmed quite substantial by good communication from responsible parties, in this case Ugra-Media (not ED, nor forum mods). With more communication, at least ones a week, and hopefully recognition in bug reports and other related threads, questions answered when possible and so on (see Heatblur), even if not much new information is added. That way everyone get a feeling to be involved, listen to and valued as customers. A potential area of improvement of massive proportion with low to medium effort for Ugra-Media.

Just my 2 cents.

ED does not operate in business vacuum anymore

No, they don't. But if you want your aircraft realistic instead of "press E to w1n t3h w4r", ED's still the only game in town. Alas, they're currently spread kind of thin with the PG map and the Hornet and whatnot, so the WW2 stuff just has to wait... but it's coming for sure :thumbup:

All these items have been acknowledges, and work is being done on them.

Well not on a the map according to lastest news. That has to wait until Syria is done.

Hello everyone,

I agree with Holton181. Mainly, the frustration is because there's no sharing and no view of what is done except for roughly an object every two month.

ED really understood how to communicate now (we see it for some months with F18 and Persian Gulf Map) maybe after seeing Heatblur or Razbam doing it with great success and the mass of happy pilots following their news. Right now it just looks like Ugra-Media took their 50 bucks and returned in the deepest room of their cave. I KNOW that it's not the case. But it's how it looks for most pilots.

My complete squadron (50+ pilots...) is really annoyed with that. I try to tame them and tell them to be patient, as you do NineLine, but sometimes it's a hard job. :D I know it's the same in other squadrons I know...

I think it's a thing of today's time: you can't work in complete shadow anymore when you do that kind of stuff. Not in "early access" era. Not in 2018. Or it's going to be a commercial suicide. Ugra-Media has to understand that if people buy their product because they believe in the project in the alpha phase and it looks like it's will never be developed, they won't be able to sell well their new products, as air combat simulation world is a really small one and everybody is talking to each other.

As it is know, I know a lot of pilots (my whole squadron is the best exemple I can see) who won't buy Syria map knowing that it does come by the same devs that did Normandy. Not before it is finished.

I seriously think UM could gain the support of everyone by just sharing a bit of the progress and what they do, even if it's juste once a week, even if it is just talking of what their difficulties are, so it doesn't look so dead from the outside.

This is my point of view, and I seriously wish success for/to Ugra-Media.

I think that Rolluptito has hit the nail on the head. In my squadron of 38 active members, only four or five are still flying DCS and the majority have stated that they will not be coming back to DCS because of the communication.

I can provide some specific examples when I get home but in general it has been statements along the line of "they are working on it and there will be news when there is something to report" only to find out later that they have not been working on it but have been working on something else that now takes precedence.

Straight forward, honest transparent communication would go a long way to regain trust from the WWII community.

Thank you for this thread and conversation. I was getting ready to pull the trigger on the Spit and the Normandy Map. I am coming over from the FSX/P3D environment. I have logged nearly 2000 hours over the past 10 years in a DC3 with a well known DC3 virtual airline.

Was also getting ready to buy a TM Warthog Hotas and Throttle to sit next to my CH yoke, THQ and pedals. I was looking for a TH Warthog profile in the hopes of beginning to tame the Spit right off the bat with the TH Warthog Hotas and Normandy.

Still might yet. At least I know now what I’m getting into. I must admit the draw of the A10C is also in my veins, but piston slappers have always been my first love. I’m a real pilot, although I have not flown in some years, I have flown real tail draggers.

Thanks for these thoughts. They will help me decide the probability, pace and direction as I re enter DCS world.

I had made a go of it a year ago, collecting a mass amount of tutorials, guides and videos. But… IRMA decided to make landfall right over the top of the house last fall and everything kinda fell apart. Just getting DCS 2.5 downloaded now.

Still undecided on first focus, Spit or A10C.

Does a Warthog Hotas profile for the Spit exist. If there is or is not one it will help me decide. I really want to buy this Hotas, but this thread made me stop and evaluate the situation.

Would appreciate any thoughts from Art-J or anyone else. Thanks!

Radial9

There are better choices for Hotas's out there. Thrustmaster Warthog is not worth the price as the movement mechanism in the joystick is plastic and has caused a lot of headaches.

Other joysticks have metal/ball bearings axis and are 1000% better. Google or look on this site for information on other setups.

Laz

@ Radial9:

The Spit is the most tricky bugger to learn to fly in DCS amongst other warbirds because of its extreme controls sensitivity, but I like flying it just for the sake of flying nevertheless (DCS with it's limited WWII content at the moment, became my "poor mans P3D" for general non-combat flying and it's pretty good at it) The upcoming addons for the plane, shown in yesterday newsletter will make it even more interesting, while this week's update for Normandy map brought it much closer to acceptable visual and performance levels. You might want to consider buying them when some good season promo begins.

That being said, I started enjoying the Spit much more only after extending my standard Warthog stick extra 30 cm. Sure, technically the plane was flyable before but just not that fun. Much better now.

No idea about Warthog profiles for the Spit, because I don't use profiling software or profiles for anything. There's not much to assign anyway, as it's a very simple, not to say primitive plane to operate, with less systems to handle than in remaining warbirds.

I can say that after disassembly, sanding, regreasing and extending, Warthog became a good stick for me and it's here to stay, but I agree it's overpriced out of the box, with sloppy internal build quality affecting its performance. Boutique sticks from Russia are vastly superior in mechanical design (and thus more expensive, rightfully so), but produced in limited quantities and somewhat more difficult to import to the West.