Jump to content

How does the future of DCS WW2 look if Matt Wagner is rights about a global map?


philstyle
 Share

Recommended Posts

Wags says that a "whole earth round model" is an aspiration for DCS. Given that the Normandy map is historically bound, and would not merge well with the modern maps (NTTR, Caucasus, Gulf etc..) for geographic, aesthetic and operational reasons, does this mean, effectively that DCS will not be producing any more WW2 maps?

I would expect that everyone can see some significant issues with "flying from . . the Caucasus on to Normandy" etc in such a model . . .

Obviously this "whole earth model" is probably a number of years away (so no need to panic right now), but if that is the long-term goal for DCS, then the question of other WW2 maps appearuing for us warbird customers is possibly answered already, no?

Additionally, does this mean that other historically-basde maps (Vietnam, Korea etc..) are not on the development agenda either, as they would potentially copnflict with the "whole earth model"?

Source:

On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/philstylenz

Storm of War WW2 server website: https://stormofwar.net/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I don't see a global map happen for DCS. I don't even see a use for a global map. All aircraft we have are already close to or even above their range limits fuel wise with the current map sizes, so global maps would only be interesting for long range aircraft like bombers (e.g. B-1 Lancer), and only if you enjoy flying in a straight line for several hours.

I also don't see how ~50 players should spread over a global map in multiplayer.

Intel i7-4790K @ 4x4GHz + 16 GB DDR3 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I don't see a global map happen for DCS. I don't even see a use for a global map. All aircraft we have are already close to or even above their range limits fuel wise with the current map sizes, so global maps would only be interesting for long range aircraft like bombers (e.g. B-1 Lancer), and only if you enjoy flying in a straight line for several hours.

I also don't see how ~50 players should spread over a global map in multiplayer.

 

 

 

I think you are right QuiGon.

I would hope that ED think very carefully about whether or not such a plan makes sense. Sure, civil-aviation guys might be doing 8-hour flights, but I don't know many combat-sim people who will remain airborne for anywhere near that kind of time. Concentrating the player base in a sensible map-area is one of the keys to getting a combat sim right: Too small an area, and no-one can get airborne; Too large, and it's a ghost town.

On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/philstylenz

Storm of War WW2 server website: https://stormofwar.net/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A global map would be quite a waste of energy. Larger area = less details, or they wouldn't ever be finished. I'd rather they concentrated on important missing theaters, such as Vietnam.

 

 

 

Totally agree. If the technology/ hardware can handle around 350 x 350 Nautical Miles currently (according to Wags in livestream video), then a "sensible" (Hanoi to Da Nang!) Vietnam map could be made.

On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/philstylenz

Storm of War WW2 server website: https://stormofwar.net/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There still a Map development without annoucement after Strait of Hormuz Map, possible they recreate on the of the future MAPs for WW2...

But dont think there is any more WW2 Maps is for the near Future, Battle of Bulge *Dream* :D

Once you have tasted Flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your Eyes turned Skyward.

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

9./JG27

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A global map would be quite a waste of energy. Larger area = less details

 

Well, there are some technologies that allow a lot of detail without using GBs of textures ( procedural generation of erosion data, vegetation data, roads, cities, and so on ). So "larger areas = less details" is not entirely true.

 

With such technology, you can concentrate details in some ares ( like a "persian gulf" area ) and let other areas be procedurally generated while you fly over them just to fill the gap.

 

In the long run, to me this option wouldn't be so bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To people that are against whole world map there are people that are interested in flying transport/bomber planes that would like to fly from NTTR to Caucasus or Caucasus to Persian Gulf. Just because combat radius does match the map size doesnt mean that they will waste their time on making a map like that. Ferry flights, AAR?

 

Edit : Montreux Convention for the straits of Bosphorus and Dardanelles basically forbids huge ships like US Carriers entering Black Sea. Most of the missions we are making is semi realistic already. For the people that are aiming maximum accuracy whole Earth is must.


Edited by Cytt0rak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To people that are against whole world map there are people that are interested in flying transport/bomber planes that would like to fly from NTTR to Caucasus or Caucasus to Persian Gulf. Just because combat radius does match the map size doesnt mean that they will waste their time on making a map like that. Ferry flights, AAR?

 

Edit : Montreux Convention for the straits of Bosphorus and Dardanelles basically forbids huge ships like US Carriers entering Black Sea. Most of the missions we are making is semi realistic already. For the people that are aiming maximum accuracy whole Earth is must.

 

None of this addresses the DCS WW2 problem from the OP. This is a DCS WW2 thread.

 

 

Even if it were relevant, there are no 1940s transport or even medium range bomber planes... and no-one online is even flying accross the 90km English channel at the moment, let alone 5,000km to Georgia in their P51.


Edited by philstyle

On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/philstylenz

Storm of War WW2 server website: https://stormofwar.net/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see any problem. A global "rounded" map enclosing the whole or almost whole Earth would be useful as a mean to connect the highly detailed maps we already have. I wish but we know we can't realistically expect the whole Earth to be modelled the same detail level as the maps currently in use or coming in the next future, that'd be an insane amount of work and still ED is a small team. But a mesh, with accurate coast/water, procedural low level textures as we already have, then we can fly in between the highly detailed maps we already have without breaks and loading stops… that would be great, still lowly detailed in milestones but if it's usable via ME we could place objects in a certain spot and "make the map" until a high detailed version of the area is available.

 

 

And with regards to WWII maps. Well, as it is right now Normandy isn't that different from nowadays, plus actual Normandy map doesn't feature Paris or London that would probably be the greatest differences. But it was said time ago they were thinking in a feature like time controlled maps, so selecting a date in ME the map could be updated to different features like modern day or WWII.

 

 

I mean, I don't see that coming in any short period of time, but finally "rounded" highly detailed maps, joined together without "stitches" by a global map useable though low detailed but without loading gaps, and feature changing by selecting date in mission editor… Come on people, that'd be AWESOME and I don't see half a problem with that. Well, yeah, I see a problem, we don't have it yet… :lol:

 

 

S!


Edited by Ala13_ManOWar

"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

Even if it were relevant, there are no 1940s transport or even medium range bomber planes... and no-one online is even flying accross the 90km English channel at the moment, let alone 5,000km to Georgia in their P51.

 

For me, the benefit would not be the increased geographic area for point to point flights, but rather the geographic diversity of a world map. I'd continue to build missions (multiplayer) with similar geometries to what we've got. I just want some more hills / mountains / islands with unique airstrips.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A global map would be quite a waste of energy. Larger area = less details, or they wouldn't ever be finished. I'd rather they concentrated on important missing theaters, such as Vietnam.

 

I dont agree, I think it would be great to tie some of these maps together, you guys only know about Normandy, but what if you get another piece of dirt close to Normandy, now stitch it to a globe and your detailed play area grows. Also realize that if Wags is talking about it, they just didnt think of it.

SigDCSNew.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A global map can still be set to a time and date. I suspect a method of limiting airframes by era might be a very simple way of solving the WW2 and modern thing.
Not only WWII, but modern Korea and 1950 one for instance. Same for any other shared theatre in the globe. I guess that would mean a lot of work, but dreaming of having it is free… :pilotfly:

 

 

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

To me the thought of a global map is not bad if you can somehow streamline it so it wont be so taxing on the hardware.

 

I also don't see how ~50 players should spread over a global map in multiplayer.

 

I can understand the concern, but I think the the creativity of the mission/s maker can keep think things concentrated within a certain area to keep things interesting. I think a dynamic campaign generator along with some sort of battlefield manager would come in handy to activate/deactivate areas for operations. What do I know really? That was just some off the wall, out of the box thinking. I do think there could be some real possibilities with a "global map" though.

Intel i5-9600K @ 3.7GHz

Gigabyte Z370XP SLI Mobo

G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4

GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 2070 8GB 256-Bit GDDR6(Assume the latest driver version)

Thermaltake Water 3.0 Certified Liquid Cooling System

Windows 10 Professional

Oculus Rift-S /TrackIR 5 in case VR dies

Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog w/ Thrustmaster T-Flight Rudder Pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me the thought of a global map is not bad if you can somehow streamline it so it wont be so taxing on the hardware.

 

 

 

I can understand the concern, but I think the the creativity of the mission/s maker can keep think things concentrated within a certain area to keep things interesting. I think a dynamic campaign generator along with some sort of battlefield manager would come in handy to activate/deactivate areas for operations. What do I know really? That was just some off the wall, out of the box thinking. I do think there could be some real possibilities with a "global map" though.

 

Totally agree, ED can give us the area to play, but mission builders and content creators need to make it interesting and keep people focused where they need to be.

SigDCSNew.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would expect it to be like other World model solutions

 

Lower quality textures/objects, some land marks, Airfields, radios, etc.

 

But things like NTTR, Normandy, Caucasus, Persian Gulf, will be in higher detail.

 

Aka Scenery add-ons.

 

That way when you fly out of bounds, you are given a realistic representation of the terrain/water features etc.

Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill,

X470 Taichi Ultimate, 2x R7970 Lightnings Crossfired @ 1.1/6.0GHz,

3x ASUS VS248HP + Hanns·G HZ201HPB + Oculus HMD,

Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs, CH Fighterstick+Pro Throttle+Pro Pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding time vs geography,

 

If you build some 1944 themed dirt near Normandy, even though the textures and details aren't portable, the actual terrain mesh and elevation data is.

 

So, if you stitched stuff together on a bigger map, we'd at least have some areas where the actual terrain is high detail that mission makers can take advantage of.

 

That said, DCS needs bigger and generally just more maps first, and maybe stitching together of the geographically close maps, but I don't think it needs the whole world just yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People who keep moaning about 8 hr flights aernt thinking about this in the right context. Think something like Xplane which has global scenery with orthoxp photo terrain and buildings overtop would be great. Each mission builder now has the flexibility to create missions now ANYWHERE globally. Your squadron server could build training missions at a home station, as an example Elmendorf afb in Alaska. Squad nites on your server blasting around Mt Mckinely. Then you jump on say a 104th server who has built thier mission covering the Taiwan strait. The possibilities are endless. The only thing that would need to be tweaked would be time period appropriate terrain. Not a dealbreaker for me, but for some yes. For those who really want to, you could concievably create a ramp spawn at say Mcguire afb New Jersey and have a KC135 drag you to the combat zone to your hearts content. The argument of 30 players spread globally really would only apply to terrible mission builders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This ties into "Community crowd building" vs "Privately licensed and committed business 3rd party development". The two can work together and still keep the paid content model working.

 

Steps I'd like to see:

- DCS 4 implements a different map tech that enables community driven content.

- Toolsets that work at two different levels;

1. Making the area, the elevations, rivers, trees, roads and rail outside the mission with a licensed tool.

 

2. Being able to add more inside the Mission editor. Drag and drop airfields from templates. Drag and drop town templates etc. Forest paint brushes, renaming places on the F10 map and a 3D editor.

 

You can give 5 people tools and we get maps every few years, or it can start to move now to global canvas and let the community get involved and give people the world. This doesn't mean the marketing model will change, in fact, it broadens the appeal as companies can still make "South East England", "Downtown Hanoi" or "Wartime Berlin" and sell it with permission should it meet requirements.

 

Right now the current engine is a victim of stifled growth in it's design. It's effectively closed unless one is serious enough to want to make it a business (and frankly I'll not be giving up my day job, like many others)

 

But all this is not something that could be very easily migrated to and I guess I'll pass my 50th birthday before it could be there.

___________________________________________________________________________

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- DCS 4 implements a different map tech that enables community driven content.

- Toolsets that work at two different levels;

1. Making the area, the elevations, rivers, trees, roads and rail outside the mission with a licensed tool.

2. Being able to add more inside the Mission editor. Drag and drop airfields from templates. Drag and drop town templates etc. Forest paint brushes, renaming places on the F10 map and a 3D editor.

 

These are really good ideas.

 

The ability to better utilise existing maps would be pretty neat. For example, we are considering using part of the Caucasus map to represent the Gothic Line (ref). Being able to add WW2-style airfields and the occasional village would make it pretty convincing, even without wholesale reworking. And the ability to rename towns on the map would really help with the immersion.

 

The same thing goes for empty corners of other maps. For example, I could imagine forming WW2 North Africa scenarios using empty stretches Persian map, if we could place simple airfields templates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They key with player modded terrain will be accessibility to the greater dcs community. Whether this would be a third party building a ww2 globe or enthusiasts building them as a labor of love, they must be made available to the broader dcs userbase. The last thing this very small community needs is map makers witholding them and fracturing an almost dead ww2 dcs community. Things to also factor in, would they be considered mods? and if so marketing it as such, getting the playerbase on the same playbook so you dont get an error when joining saying your not compatible. Communication is paramount if its not official map content.Another thing to ponder, is the juice worth the squeeze for dcs ww2?


Edited by SnappShot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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