I'm thrilled they are making an Afghanistan map. Making this map is not easy. I have a pilot friend who served in Afghanistan, and he is eager to create missions bases on his real-world experiences. This is exactly what DCS needs. NO ONE is doing anything even close to this at all.
Regardless how others may feel, I believe developing this map was the right decision. Twenty years of warfare took place here. This map holds sentimental significance and value to me. I spent more than a few years of my life fighting on the ground in many areas of that country. I was on a small outpost in the Arghandab river valley; the birthplace of the Taliban, outside Kandahar proper durning the timeframe this map is based on. I lost a few good friends in that area. So for me, being able to own something such as this is very personal on so many levels. I still have pictures, videos, maps, and grid locations of some of the most significant or impactful events that went down there. It would be wild to show my two younger children, in VR, where exactly I was when my son was a one year old and my wife pregnant with my daughter. Even more so, to pinpoint the very area I was standing, talking on a satellite phone when my daughter entered this world. As I stated earlier, this map was needed. Well done ED! I hope you do your due diligence and really bring it for this one. Excited to see it, and more than ready to give you my money to own it. @pricklyhedgehog and all the other content creators, thanks for everything you do for this community, it doesn’t go unnoticed. Looking forward to what’s beyond the horizon. Thanks again, -Mack
We needed this map since DCS: A-10C Warthog Open Beta, back in 2009/10. This is a fantastic addition to cater most more modern modules we have in DCS World, plus some in the pipeline. A-10C, F-16C, F/A-18C, F-14B, F-15E, AV-8B N/A, AH-64D, SA-343 Gazelle, L-39C, Mi-8MTV, Mi-24P, MiG-19P, Su-25 and with a bit of leeway the M2000C. Upcoming OH-58D, CH-47 and C-130J fit perfectly, as well. It is a region that saw a lot of conflicts in the last decades, if not centuries including on of the longest conflicts in history. With detailed information from written accounts, through pictures and videos... And I personally are bored to death, after 50 years of regurgitating the same old Vietnam war, scenarios in movies, books and computer games, but maybe that's just me. I won't object a Vietnam map for DCS, as I think any map is a great addition that ultimately benefits us, but I prefer Afghanistan over Vietnam, or a "fictional" middle Europe "never happened" Cold War. 😉 When finished, as a complete map it will provide a mix of terrain features from rocky foothills, medium mountain ranges to 7,000 m peaks near the pakistani border, lush green hills in Faryab province, to dense forests and pine woods in the Nuristan mountain valleys, agricultural plains and steppe in the north and the Kandahar region, rich agriculture along the Helmand valley and yes actually there's the Dasht-e-margo and the Afghanistan part of the Registan desert crossing the border to Iran.🥰
I disagree. We needed the Northern Germany/Netherlands/Belgium map ever since the A-10C back in 2009/10. However, any map will hopefully be well received and of course is always most welcome.
@@Ecthaelyon To do what? A realistic Cold War training campaign? Or flying circles over germany? Or escorting russian aircraft at the border of NATO airspace after visual identification? That's why I am so interested in Afghanistan and Iraq actual places where recent conflict happened IRL, so not much need to create fictional scenarios in a simulation dedicated to realism. Yes, of course there will be artistic liberties, but nothing around "alternative history" or "red vs blue because what else to do"... there's plenty of maps to create fictional air wars already. I am happy to get another map that has opportunities for real life scenarios. 🥰
@@ivaniuk123 No, we already have Syria/Sinai where near peer-to-peer conflicts have been raging for decades. People tend to forget just how much war has been directed at Israel, and how many times they've whipped every ass that came for them.
I have pre-purchased the full map, call me what you want, but I enjoy DCS so I purchase whenever I can, to me this is my Patreon way of supporting those who produce something I truly love. Some may say I am mad. Well, Rabid. Perhaps I am. But where would we be without DCS? (Neither am I an online player, I don't feel comfortable enough or skilled enough and would not want to irritate or upset the ardent online community.) In fact, I now have all the Maps and all modules bar three and they are the F4-E and MB 339 and the Mirage F1. (One day.) Plus, I also have the extras the Supercarrier, NS 430 GPS navigation system etc. Many modules I have never even flown. I have purchased a whole host of campaigns I think about 53 and not played one. So what do I do you ask? I create my own in the mission editor. It keeps me happy. So Helmond and the Brits Pricklyhedgehog. Absolutely. 2009 would be Britain's bloodiest year in Afghanistan, with 109 deaths. 2010. Surge. The British participated in the largest joint offensive at that time in Helmand. So this area saw a lot of action, so bring it on. If you have a problem with it don't buy it. If you throw Patreon money at TH-camrs, Twitch streamers, etc carry on. Just remember without DCS there will be no DCS streaming from them. (I don't mean don't support them.) But remember if you can give a little (sales and stuff) it all helps the creators to keep creating. Yeh. Thats right I'm Rabid.😁
The first time I flew over it in War Thunder I had some conflicting feelings. Almost 20 years is long enough to deal with demons though. I'm now looking forward to recreating missions I was involved in as a 13Fox/JTAC. I had always dreamed of being the guy/gal in the A-10 coming to save our asses while watching them work. Of course I'm one of those "I could have been a Pilot but.." guys lol
I can understand that, I guess. I bought the Harrier because it came with Tarawa. Was aboard her for 6 months 4 days during the Gulf War. Kinda like seeing home again i guess.
Hi Prickly, Music was Dystopian Strings, of which there are 2 parts, in the link you sent. Not the title suggested, but I’m sure after x hours getting the video out, remembering the music name is the last priority, cheers
Good take, and on the question about why the backlash, simple, a lot of people thrive on drama, and need it to feel good. and you will see that with anything, be it the kind of cola offered at a party to the choice of what kind of buffalo you pick for the steak.
Would be interesting if they could pull an 'IL-2' on maps, if you purchase it you can play it on SP/Career/Host it on your server. If you do not own it, you can still fly it on multiplayer servers who host it.
I´m not very excited about the Afghanistan map. Even though i´ve been to Kabul and Mazar-i-Sharif, it is one of the maps in the pipeline i´m less interested in. In fact, only North Australia is less interesting to me than Afghanistan. And i´m definately not going to buy North Aus., so i´m still struggeling with Afg. I admit to your conclusion that it is not "just another desert map", but not beeing just another desert map is not enough imo. I´m looking more forward to the Iraq map and this will definately be another desert map. The history of Afghanistan is interesting, very complex and contains a long period of military conflicts suiting a lot of modules we have in DCS, no doubt about it. Also Afghanistan has some breathtaking countryside, i´ve been there on the ground for a couple of times and have seen it with my own eyes. I totally respect that and i absolutely adore maps with a rich history of modern military conflicts. But the history about conflicts prior to the soviet invasion in ´79 is completely unimportant to me for this DCS map and within the modern conflicts, it is pretty much pure anti-guerilla warfare wich can be recflected historically correct. So fighting mostly infantry, technicals, suicide bombers and maybe a few BTRs / BMPs. That´s great for ArmA 3 or any other Infantry Simulator, but not realy what i prefer in DCS. Every other scenario (i.e. runway attack, CAP, SEAD etc...) is just fictional as usual. And for fictional scenarios, i´d rather take a Balkans, Korea, Taiwan or a North Cape map over Afghanistan any day. I´m realy looking forward to the Iraq map and i still have high hopes in the Kola map though. Good sitrep as always and thank you very much for giving credit to the discussion about this map.
On that basis an ahistorical conflict scenario might be more your thing. Imagine say a coalition force to the north taking on assets in the south. Etc, etc.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 For Afghanistan? Absolutely. But that´s what i have on Buddyspike modern and 80´s with PG and Caucasus almost every day. That´s ok for PvP multiplayer and in some way for PvE. But for Singleplayer /2P Coop/ Multicrew i would rather see something historical accurate. Or at least close to. Afghanistan delivers that for sure, just not the type of conflict i would like to "replay". I highly prefer the modern, western multirole fixed wing material, no pure ground-pounder, no pure A/A fighter. And i want to do multirole. I do fly the Apache and the Hind, but by far not as much as the fixed wings and the Hind only as multicrew co-pilot. For me, Iraq or Balkans would provide that much better and would, in the historical context, cover as much of our existing modules as Afghanistan. But "facing" a regular military, demanding the whole range of air missions thinkable in a military conflict. For both, blue and red forces. I miss the times of Jane´s F-15 or Longbow, were we could replay desert storm or just cause. Sure not historically accurate missions, but the immersion was there... I have no doubt that, technically, Afghanistan will be the most advanced and best looking map in DCS and i´m sure ED will deliver a superb product. But if i pull the trigger on Afghanistan, is highly dependant of who and how much of the people i´m regulary flying with will get the map as well.
@@ImpendingJoker True, but the rest of the map is... serviceable. Not realy an option imo, i´ll touch Sinai again once it´s finished. Same for South Atlantic, both rotten on my SSD...
When they first announced the Afghanistan map before showing any screenshots I wasn't really interested. But after I saw snippets of game play and screenshots I was blown away, thought it looked incredible. I didn't know they were raising the bar with map fidelity which is awesome. I'm excited for it as of now, but would still like to see more game play.
I just bought the map, if for no other reason than to support ED. I REALLY hope I'm impressed. I really do. But my expectations are.........brown........if you follow me
After buying the Siani map (buyers remorse) and not doing much with it I won’t buy any maps going forward until there is a decent campaign using the map.
@@luke-zm9cg They have been promising a huge update since last fall if you follow the map on the forums. There is an area of the map for me where my frames drop in half causing major stutter. It’s over a desert area near the canal. Not an urban area so it makes no sense.
I was so, so, excited to buy the Sinai map... I downloaded it (a full 9 hour download thanks to the BS UK internet), I took one flight on the map... Never used it since... I am so, well, I don't know... Just... Meh about it. I hear you loud and clear on this one.
@@johnwicks4936 Even with an update, it's still just a map. I think map development should include some kind of campaign. I mean they have gone this far to create a great map and I don't mind giving these guys my hard-earned money if they can provide something really fun. How cool would it be to have a Raven One type of campaign on these maps. Now that is something I am willing to pay for. A nice, packaged bundle. I would happily open my wallet for that. Otherwise, if it's just a map, I don't need another MSFS in my library. :)
It’s not my first choice of map but it’s an interesting map due to the history of conflicts and the Aircraft’s in DCS. The map I’m most exited for is a Vietnam war era map but as a A/G and Helo player I’m excited about the Afghanistan map. From the preview vids and pic it looks really good.👍
So much hate in the comments. I'm excited for this map. DCS is better than MSFS in many ways (especially if you fly in VR) and I'm excited to see this detailed map.
Agreed. I finally tried MSFS in DCS. Flew the Rio area in VR max settings in a Reverb G2 and a 4090. It really let me down as far as the graphics were concerned. Always believed it was better than DCS graphics wise and it's not.
@@l8knight845 MSFS has great graphics thats not the problem (unless your complaint is bout the GPS terrain in untouched areas that's fair). The actual problem MSFS VR players complain about is performance. Unlike DCS, it lacks support for quadview rendering. MSFS VR users have resorted to external apps like AutoFPS to get them into 45fps and settle for that. Meanwhile, a high end setup in DCS can get much higher if their headset supports eye tracking. See "Vr Flight Sim Guy" one of his latest videos touched on this subject. Basically he explains he feels like VR is being neglected over there. In the end, I agree with you we have it so good in DCS. But for me its perf; not visuals. Cause the visuals in those official air bases, etc are very nice when maxed out.
I’m super excited for both Afghanistan and Iraq, Ofc. I hope they’re working on Vietnam and Korea too. They did say both Korea and Vietnam was too varied in height to work with the current map tech, which I assume is the main reason we don’t have those yet.
Good for you, I am happy to know that you will enjoy it so heartily. Whilst I do not consider myself a "hater", whatever that term entails, I am not so excited for the map and I think ED made a questionable decision here. As such I humbly disagree with your sentiment. People should have a voice and be respected for that voice even if they do not have the means to be so eloquent as yourself by way of expression.
@@Ecthaelyon You didn't need to reply to him. Could have just ignored it and moved on. Instead you didn't like what he said, couldn't get over it, and had to in your own way try and start an argument.
with the upcoming F4, vietnam makes more sense, it's starting development was known by ED ages ago, so they would have had time to get vietnam on the works
@@chulian1819 One map centered around 2-3 aircraft does not make sense in the least, whereas a map that supports almost the entire stable makes much more sense, add to that Syria and Sinai, and those support the entire stable plus the F-4, so no, a Vietnam map does not make sense at this time. Why? The C-130 and CH-47 is not out yet, there is no Mi-24A, no OH-6A Cayuse or OH-58A/C Kiowas, the A-1 is not out yet nor is the F-100, there is no official A-4, the A-7 is not out yet, there are no F-105s in the pipeline, and most damning, no AH-1 Cobras in the works at all. So, no, a Vietnam map does not make sense even in the slightest when you think about it logically.
Personally, I am in the same camp as some of the others... Did we really need another "Desert Map", what with more important maps coming down the pipe such as Iraq (a stronger case for the A-10 statement). Whilst I understand the sales aspect for ED, this will definitely be a money earner as the Afghan map is definitely a more recent and pertinent subject matter to most of the current DCS simmers, GW1/2 (Iraq) has taken a back seat history wise. In a purely a selfish statement I would say that a Western Europe map or indeed the fabled "Vietnam" map may have been a better route to go down in order to break up the MMFD (Miles n Miles of F'ing Deserrt ) monotony. Just my humble opinion. With this said a Western Europe map would be a massive undertaking for ED or any other terrain developer, I think this goes without saying, considering the amount of detail that would have to be included (high density of cities, towns, villages and not to mention the accurate inclusion of simple ground objects such as bridges, etc.). Prickly, with all respect (I mean this most sincerely as I love your YT content and hold you in high esteem) one could argue, if you were of that particular mindset which I am not but I make mention of it anyway, that the SA map is more of a troubled water map (I do have the SA map, I enjoy it and appreciate the work that went into it, pls don't get me wrong here). In reality the aggrieved's argument maybe more valid despite our dislike for the core sentiment and its obvious negative connotations towards ED than we care to appreciate. Personaly I am happy to see ANY content come out for DCS World, lord knows we do not see enough of it compared to other simulations (Don't get me started, one eye levelled at ED for this one, I am definitely in the Sergio Costa camp) so this addition is welcome in my DCS World, but a neccesasry one at this time? Most definitely not, again in my own humble opinion, but then who am I? What do I know, eh? :D
I'm honestly excited about Afghanistan. It would be awesome to have a chill map that's more air to ground and close air support oriented. Hopefully we can have some kind of insurgency missions where they randomly pop up wherever. I could see this being a JTAC heavy map as well.
DCS needs more free maps with lower fidelity, like the Caucasus, so that everyone can fly together and get immersed. A Vietnam map does not need extreme detail to create the required immersion.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 That is definitely true, but there are levels of destructibility and special effects. The same goes with the aircraft. If we could combine some kind of mid-fidelity Vietnam map with mid-fidelity 100 series jets, it could be an amazing experience.
I just hope the vaunted latest tech being used will do something about the terrible lack of resolution in the terrain mesh in maps to date. So long we have had to put up with mountains looking like a pile of cushions with a tablecloth draped over them. It looks good so far. I really hope they cater for people who have the disc space and processing power to render them properly.
Dcs has a very immature community imo, every little thing they announce has drama but ED also doesn’t really honor their word and promises with alot of things so I can kinda see most peoples frustration.
Personally, I do not understand this "hate" word being banded about in such an out of context manner. Try, with respect and an open mind, to appreciate both sides of the debate concerning this Map and ED's decision to go with it, you may understand and appreciate the "hate".
Everyone whining about this crap obviously had nothing to do with Afghanistan. Probably basement shut-ins. Those of us that were there are very excited for it.
I really do want a Vietnam map but getting there will require the very latest map building tech; Afghanistan is a valuable opportunity for Devs to lay the groundwork for Vietnam. imo.
I think at this point anything that happens in DCS seems to cause complaints. I don't know why they do it, but I'm glad they do. Map looks great, and I will buy the whole thing and enjoy all the parts as and when they come out. People just need to get out more i think.
@@Ecthaelyon Not really. Back then it was so niche we were happy you got anything. It was the same with FSX and Orbx's PNW scenery. I didn't care about the PNW RL, but it was such fantastic scenery I flew there anyway. The Afghanistan map will be no different. I prefer Sinai because I was based there and would love to see a Ft. Irwin or Ft. Hood map made one day.
From a Single Player perspective: If you want a map to play historically (say after 1960) authentic-ish missions (likely many do) then this map (and Iraq, and Vietnam, Kosovo, etc) should have been in the map rota a LONG time ago. It's my guess that the amount of angst stems from ED's...curious history with regards to maps. The type of vegetation in place is irrelevant to me. I pre-purchased this map as most (again post 1960) modules you can buy are dedicated air-to-ground (surface attack, CAS, interdiction, etc: AH-64, AV8B, A-10, etc) or capable of such (by design multi-role: F-18/16/15E/4...the list goes on). And most conflicts in the last 60+ years either started out air-to-ground or ended up there pretty quickly ('Nam being an anomaly due to, well, you know...). We need a world map to authentically have a virtual WW3 with peer adversaries. Multiplayer perspective - I don't do MP (not my Jam) so I'm speculating here: How about a 'BVR' map? 1000x1000 nautical miles with two small islands at opposite ends - covered in dense, green, vegetation I suppose - for land-locked fighters and lots of ocean for your carriers; you can takeoff and get your BVR fix anytime you want. Shouldn't be much of a data footprint as it's 99% empty ocean....hmm, sounds a lot like the Instant Action button... Or: add another fictional island to the Marianna map - Ice Age Marianna?. Would bore the snot out of me but should make the missileers happy.
"Where little action took place". Those 'critics'/whiners definitely don't know what they're talking about. RC-West and RC-South are where, by far, the most "action" took place regarding OEF for the U.S., UK, Italy, and Canada (Kandahar, Helmand, Farah, Harat). The "action" that did take place in RC-North and RC-East was highly concentrated to very specific mountain valleys like Gardez, and the J-bad area. Not only are Afghanistan and Iraq ideal* maps for the assets we have but there's also a significant number of DCS players from ISAF countries who deployed to one or both IRL. Including pilots but especially soldiers. I get the point of wanting more variety but these two maps are no brainers.
Afghanistan is around 6000ft, at that low density of air the Apache won’t be able to hover with a COIN loadout like it obviously can in real life. Not so much a map issue as it is a DCS flight model issue. If they solve that, I’ll definitely get the map.
Give me more locations that are as amazing looking as this map. Vietnam is of course extremely desirable, however it will present some serious challenges to look as good as the recent maps have. It takes time to develop the software to pull off what they are doing. Until then we have a map where two decades of conflict occurred and we can now simulate much of it.
Not buying another desert map, but it looks great. Looking forward to a Kola update. As a wish list… Balkans and Turkey would be fun. Also, I wish they updated the Nevada map to include 29Palms, Star Wars canyon, Edwards, San Diego and St.Nicolas island.
This will easily be the best map in the game. As someone who loves CAS / air to ground ops, this is a dream. Especially being able to recreate awesome A-10, AH-64, and OH-58 missions as well as fun with the CH-47. Most of these haters will come to enjoy it for sure. And Iraq will be fun too, but I’m glad they are doing Afghanistan first.
as a developer can say polygon count does not lie, the amount of effort they have to put in to be able to run vietnam with good fps while recreating the dense vegetation and cities will require more effort than afghanistan, the final say will be the amount of man hours used in vietnam vs afghanistan (to normalize the data would need to be done by man hour per km2 maybe) , hope those numbers get released to know for sure some of the reasons (like effort) why one map was first over the other. The comparison of the SA devs, you will need to ask the hypothetical question: if SA had the same vegetation density as vietnam, would be the same effort or more?
@chulian1819 - As a hobbyist scenery developer for X-Plane 11 and later MSFS I totally agree with you. Deserts and barren rocky mountainous terrains are a piece of cake compared to lush tropical areas with dense vegetation. Yep, polygons, and the laborious effort to create them, definitely don't lie! I'm sure that's exactly why 98% of DCS scenery is predominately deserts and barren mountainous areas. I've been waiting and waiting for E.D. to offer southern China, Southeast Asia, and the South China Sea since that area is libel to blow its top at any time. Oh well, and now we have DCS Afghanistan. Go figure.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72Creation of basic scenery, whether mountainous, hilly, or desert, requires only satellite/aerial maps accurately projected onto 3D mesh/polygons from digital topography maps. These maps provide latitude and longitude for each point as well as elevation. The scenery software will create the 3D mesh/polygons The higher the resolution topography data, and satellite/aerial maps, the more accurate and detailed the scenery will be, but at a performance cost and increased scenery file sizes. Compromises must be made to ensure minimum FPS. From there, vegetation, waterways, roads, buildings, cities, infrastructure, etc. are then added. All things considered, barren areas require the least resources and man-hours to create. Cheers from Thailand buddy!
It seems ED mentioned enabling technology that will allow them to develop maps more quickly. Assuming this will also accelerate green maps as well. I will note I do see the improvements in the SA map with successive updates.
Will I buy the map? Yes, just to support ED and for completeness. Am I excited about it? Hardly. I really REALLY wish I was, but I’m not. It wasn’t worth one drop of US or Allied blood, and a steady diet of COIN and CAS missions doesn’t excite me at all.
It feels out of place for the Viggen and F-14A/B, which I currently fly and I’m not really into rotary’s but I am looking forward to see what they do with the COIN AI and assets. Wags recently mentioned ‘two green’ maps that are incoming. Vietnam or Korea hopefully. But that’s likely to be in 2025. I own all the maps except South Atlantic Falklands. I don’t see a reason to get it apart from the Falklands War. I might get Afghanistan for the Instant Action missions and if Grayflag choose it for one of their PVE server.
For me this and iraq are maps that i can relate to, since i have operated in both countries. Afghanistan is one of the most beautiful and scenic countries I've ever been to.
I think the time required for such a big map, also tends to dictate the map being cut up, or it would take much longer to put it out which hurts everyone customers and company alike. I think in Casmo's interview with Wags, Wags might be bringing a monthly sitrep of goings on with ED and DCS.
Not really, as you can simply buy the complete map for $48 at 30% off, and get all three parts whenever they are finished. The reason to split was only to have a chunk of the map at a reduced price. I hope people bought the "chunk" deliberately and did see the option to also buy the complete map at a further discount, so we don't get the next sh.tstorm, at the release of the next chunk... 🤔
@@shagrat47 Okay, you and common sense wins - again, lol! Actually, I bought the whole thing. However, I do keep my comment about cutting it up so they can release it sooner than later. I did see somewhere that ED is looking at a workaround to reduce the price difference if you do buy it in chunks and want to eventually get the whole thing. It will allow customers to buy a larger SSD to hold all the upcoming maps, which will definitely be very large😇
Excellent video and explanation, I ‘ve already purchased, to me the who-ha, is cobblers. We’ve all bought in pieces before. For the carrier people, we just need the fuel available overhead the border, where the normal ingress points were and have tankers available at the borders edge. CASMO also stated that Hornets were on TDY in country. That does it for me. Looking forward to it. Prickly, what’s the name of the music track? 😊or a link if it’s an internet thing ,please.
Its easy to sit on the bench and critize laziness, when you have absolutely no clue the effort it takes even to make mountain and desert terrain. I for one cant wait for a Vietnam map either 🤑 but I still think its great that ED invests in a theater which fits well with the Apache, Blackhawk, Chinook and of course the BRRRRRRRT A-10 ✌️😎 I recently finished the Homeland series, so the theater lies close to mind atm as well.
To those saying "there was less action" simply consider the fact, that the Taliban movement originated in Kandahar province! One of the biggest campaigns against the Taliban was Operation Medusa, to clear the south of Kandahar around the "Taliban Capital" Spin Boldak. A combined Task Force of Canadian, British and US assets. Helmand valley, the Kajaki dam and the mountains north of Kandahar so a long and grinding conflict between british and USMC hearts and minds and Taleban insurgency over more than a decade. The US forces that fought in Herat province and near the Turkmenistan and Usbekistan border region may also disagree with the assessment of "less action"... 😇
Not to disrespect the achievements of our canadian, british and american comrades. They fought a hell of a fight out there, no doubt. But very most of the action in Afg. hit us infantry guys and not the jet and helicopter guys and is therefore not very interesting for a DCS map. Killing infantry, technicals and a few BTRs maybe fun for the rotary and the A-10 Drivers in DCS, but is definately getting pretty fast, pretty boring for the rest of the fixed wing community. So we will end up with fictional scenarios as with most other maps. And for that, i´d rather take a Taiwan or Korea map than Afghanistan...
@@r4dio4ctiv3man9I personally am more interested in exactly those COIN scenarios, where the challenge isn't to kill as many enemies as possible in the least amount of time, but to take out the right enemy, at the right time, without endangering own troops and innocents while achieving mission goals. In general air support, from CAS, to insertion, MEDEVAC or gathering intelligence was daily business and often, there weren't even enough air assets available to accommodate every need... over a period of at least 10-15 years! So, yeah, not much dogfighting and BVR, or "Cold War gone hot", if you want to keep it realistic, but a lot to do for helicopters and aircraft alike, though COIN may have different challenges than SEAD, SAM evasion and enemy CAP.
@@r4dio4ctiv3man9 Hate to break it to you but after air superiority is achieved that is 99% of air combat. Happened in Desert Storm. After the skies belonged to the Coalition, it was nothing but ground pounding. Even the opening strikes were from the air on ground targets by F-117s.
@@ImpendingJoker True. Ground pounding. This is absolutely ok, but Desert storm was ground pounding against a regular military. And runway attack, precision strikes against comm centers, anti ship etc is all great fun. The war in Afghanistan since the soviet invasion on the other side was pure anti-guerilla / counter-insurgency warfare, wich is something totally different and that is what i´m talking about. You don´t do anti-ship or runway strikes against the Taliban, you do CAS, CAS, CAS and again CAS. Or carpet bombing. The opening strikes with the F-117s where precision strikes against command and control centers in Baghdad, not CAS sorties against Talibs driving a Nissan Pickup over the Hindukush...
@@shagrat47 Absolutely ok, but with "the very most of the action", i didn´t mean the air support itself, but more where the action took part. And that was on the ground. Generally spoken from the soviet invasion in ´79, Afghanistan was infantry war. With armored forces and air assets playing only a secondary support/transport role. And infantry warfare is pretty much unimportant for DCS. At least with the infantry models we have right now
I love that ED is addressing pricing issues associated with its modules by splitting modules into bite sized bits. Those with more disposable income can opt for the full module purchases. What the complaint?
I agree and think it's a welcome addition, however I am extremely disappointed that we didn't get any of Iran or Pakistan and access to the Gulf. This will make Naval ops impossible as well as long range missions that newly released aircraft like the F-15E could take advantage of. This map will feel very similar to the Nevada map, which appears to be one of the least popular.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 question for Wags, if you get the chance. What IS the theoretical map size limit? Would be interested to know. Kinda curious as the Strike Eagle seems to have a larger fuel capacity than some of the maps. While you CAN midair refuel at F15E, do you really REALLY HAVE to? Or WANT to?😉😊
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 well what I’m asking is, perhaps, could a Strike Eagle make it from one corner of a “theoretical” largest map able to be made, to the other, without refueling? Not really asking about loiter time…..
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 im not actually that enthused for this one i dont know why. I think i just want more aircraft and missions to do with my friends on servers. We all have different maps now and its mostly Caucusus that we fly on for that reaon. Kola has been really good on the fallen angels 1987 server. Very good with a small group. I will probably pick up this one but i need a bigger hard drive 😄 cheers dude!
Dear Prickly, I totally respect Your opinion ( 1 minute 43 seconds into this video ), and at 69, My brain isn't as sharp as it used to be, but last night I watched Matts interview and He mentioned a plane like the F4U Corsair takes 5 years to have it meet EA standards, but that a map, especially a desert map was EASY to make and takes little time. Let Me know if I am wrong, please. Mike
Not quite. He said that advances in their new terrain making kit has made making maps a lot easier. The primary issue I was tackling, was people saying ED was lazy in making desert maps per se. That's not how I see it, and that's what I was primarily taking umbrage with, along with the southwestern portion being devoid of any action so why release that part. And so on...
There is nothing wrong with the map, in fact it could be the best one so far. The problem is buying map after map won't fill the gap of interesting campaigns. They talked about a campaign engine for years and it's really time we would be able do something that does not involve hours in the mission editor.
Looks beautiful. But is not going to look like that on my rig. Plus I need to draw a line on the modules I want to buy this year. If any. Is costing too much.
Could DCS make a Multiplayer mission package for the servers? Now there are just few playable servers and always the same mission profile with dummy AI movements.
Well when 5090 will be release new PC is next.. with 16 MB ram😁... 64 or 128 time will tell extra mem is good for rendering. What is green square in lower right hiding form 15:00 to 17.00 min?
Strong rumors is the RTX 5090 is going to be 50 plus percent faster than the 4090, with 28 gigs of GDDR7 memory, 512-bit memory bus speed and a $2000 or better price tag, the card is going to be a beast. Start banking away some coin now, I am filling my piggy bank starting yesterday, lol😅
I get that a lot of detail nerds really want to try out their A10 in Afghanistan, but really ANOTHER desertmap? Couldnt that wait in line. There is no Koreamap, no Vietnam Map, and no modern Euromap. Wouldnt that be nice fly round the Adriatic Sea or Skandinavia...
We really dont need a world map. I rather take a better performing more detailed map like we have now. I dont know what benefit a world map would have to what we have now. Unless you can put 1000s of players on one server.
Yeah but the SA map was absolute Garbage and resulted in me stopping buying maps for a while. Even an Orbx map seems very DCS and nowhere near photorealistic like MSFS! This map does look promising though!
Absolute garbage? I’d HARDLY say THAT. Not by a long shot. True, the only real world conflict down there was the Falklands war, but there is a HUGE number of theoretical conflicts scenarios available that tie in to the current real world situation
I recently installed Gunship 2000 and you get SIX WHOLE MAPS included with the game and it has like 8 helicopters plus I downloaded it for free off something called an "abandonware site" idk what that is but it seems cool, you don't need this DLC you can play in antartica if you download it it's really cooool Eagle Dynamics are taking use for ABSOLUTE FOOLS thank you for reading my comment
Unfortunately Gunship 2000 has a horrible controls implementation... a "very simplified" helicopter flight model and systems. It was a great game(!) at its time, but to compare it to a modern, detailed simulation, is... let's say, apples and oranges. 😉
lmao so you downloaded abandonware (labor has long since been paid off) to somehow prove that people working today can't make a buck like the ones did back in the day.
It’s time to move to a full world map. These expensive local maps taking up massive space on our SSD’s is archaic now after MSFS. I have a harder and harder time flying in DCS compared to MSFS now that better military aircraft are coming out in MSFS. I really enjoy being able to fly what I want WHERE I want in the real world. I find local maps too restricting now and ED needs to find a better way to pull me back. If MSFS brings back a military version of the sim, that will be the nail in the coffin for me.
This is a very, very valid argument and one that ED should really be keeping an eye on. The current spate of high quality Military aircraft now appearing in MSFS (despite itrs military use drawbacks) should be bringing more than a few alarm bells for ED. Good post.
To me this sounds a awfull lot like a moneygrab. They need money now, but dont have a full Product to sell. I am not saying, that ED will abandon the Mapproject, but Maps getting now "early access" too, where will this go to? How many ED Modules are actually released and not in Early Access? On top of all that, they even presell a unfinished product. I can not imagine what the next step is and to be honest, I don't want to know. I Really like DCS, but its developing in a direction I don't like and I will not support such behaviour. If the Map gets fully released, and only THEN I will consider buying it.
Cool... so then don't take the discount they offer to counter that as it being a work in progress. They literally said in an interview this was dual option was for people tighter on funds so they could get a region in higher detail most important to them with still access to the full map. Doesn't quite sound like a money grab.
I'm thrilled they are making an Afghanistan map. Making this map is not easy. I have a pilot friend who served in Afghanistan, and he is eager to create missions bases on his real-world experiences. This is exactly what DCS needs. NO ONE is doing anything even close to this at all.
That's exactly why I'm excited for it. I want to re-create missions I personally witnessed as a 13Fox/JTAC
Regardless how others may feel, I believe developing this map was the right decision. Twenty years of warfare took place here. This map holds sentimental significance and value to me. I spent more than a few years of my life fighting on the ground in many areas of that country. I was on a small outpost in the Arghandab river valley; the birthplace of the Taliban, outside Kandahar proper durning the timeframe this map is based on. I lost a few good friends in that area. So for me, being able to own something such as this is very personal on so many levels. I still have pictures, videos, maps, and grid locations of some of the most significant or impactful events that went down there. It would be wild to show my two younger children, in VR, where exactly I was when my son was a one year old and my wife pregnant with my daughter. Even more so, to pinpoint the very area I was standing, talking on a satellite phone when my daughter entered this world.
As I stated earlier, this map was needed. Well done ED! I hope you do your due diligence and really bring it for this one. Excited to see it, and more than ready to give you my money to own it.
@pricklyhedgehog and all the other content creators, thanks for everything you do for this community, it doesn’t go unnoticed. Looking forward to what’s beyond the horizon. Thanks again,
-Mack
41R QQ. Never knew it from the ground but knew it decently from the air in 2011. Thanks for your service brother.
We need decent infatry in DCS for this kind of map.
Agreed. Wags has said they were redoing the animations for infantry.
We needed this map since DCS: A-10C Warthog Open Beta, back in 2009/10. This is a fantastic addition to cater most more modern modules we have in DCS World, plus some in the pipeline. A-10C, F-16C, F/A-18C, F-14B, F-15E, AV-8B N/A, AH-64D, SA-343 Gazelle, L-39C, Mi-8MTV, Mi-24P, MiG-19P, Su-25 and with a bit of leeway the M2000C. Upcoming OH-58D, CH-47 and C-130J fit perfectly, as well.
It is a region that saw a lot of conflicts in the last decades, if not centuries including on of the longest conflicts in history. With detailed information from written accounts, through pictures and videos...
And I personally are bored to death, after 50 years of regurgitating the same old Vietnam war, scenarios in movies, books and computer games, but maybe that's just me. I won't object a Vietnam map for DCS, as I think any map is a great addition that ultimately benefits us, but I prefer Afghanistan over Vietnam, or a "fictional" middle Europe "never happened" Cold War. 😉
When finished, as a complete map it will provide a mix of terrain features from rocky foothills, medium mountain ranges to 7,000 m peaks near the pakistani border, lush green hills in Faryab province, to dense forests and pine woods in the Nuristan mountain valleys, agricultural plains and steppe in the north and the Kandahar region, rich agriculture along the Helmand valley and yes actually there's the Dasht-e-margo and the Afghanistan part of the Registan desert crossing the border to Iran.🥰
Dont forget the tornado!
If anyone really wants a map where a near peer war is going on they would be begging for a Ukraine map.
I disagree. We needed the Northern Germany/Netherlands/Belgium map ever since the A-10C back in 2009/10. However, any map will hopefully be well received and of course is always most welcome.
@@Ecthaelyon To do what? A realistic Cold War training campaign? Or flying circles over germany? Or escorting russian aircraft at the border of NATO airspace after visual identification?
That's why I am so interested in Afghanistan and Iraq actual places where recent conflict happened IRL, so not much need to create fictional scenarios in a simulation dedicated to realism.
Yes, of course there will be artistic liberties, but nothing around "alternative history" or "red vs blue because what else to do"... there's plenty of maps to create fictional air wars already. I am happy to get another map that has opportunities for real life scenarios. 🥰
@@ivaniuk123 No, we already have Syria/Sinai where near peer-to-peer conflicts have been raging for decades. People tend to forget just how much war has been directed at Israel, and how many times they've whipped every ass that came for them.
I have pre-purchased the full map, call me what you want, but I enjoy DCS so I purchase whenever I can, to me this is my Patreon way of supporting those who produce something I truly love.
Some may say I am mad. Well, Rabid. Perhaps I am. But where would we be without DCS? (Neither am I an online player, I don't feel comfortable enough or skilled enough and would not want to irritate or upset the ardent online community.) In fact, I now have all the Maps and all modules bar three and they are the F4-E and MB 339 and the Mirage F1. (One day.) Plus, I also have the extras the Supercarrier, NS 430 GPS navigation system etc.
Many modules I have never even flown. I have purchased a whole host of campaigns I think about 53 and not played one. So what do I do you ask? I create my own in the mission editor. It keeps me happy.
So Helmond and the Brits Pricklyhedgehog. Absolutely. 2009 would be Britain's bloodiest year in Afghanistan, with 109 deaths. 2010. Surge. The British participated in the largest joint offensive at that time in Helmand. So this area saw a lot of action, so bring it on. If you have a problem with it don't buy it. If you throw Patreon money at TH-camrs, Twitch streamers, etc carry on. Just remember without DCS there will be no DCS streaming from them. (I don't mean don't support them.) But remember if you can give a little (sales and stuff) it all helps the creators to keep creating.
Yeh. Thats right I'm Rabid.😁
I was stationed at bagram for 15 months. Strangely curious to see it again in DCS.
The first time I flew over it in War Thunder I had some conflicting feelings. Almost 20 years is long enough to deal with demons though. I'm now looking forward to recreating missions I was involved in as a 13Fox/JTAC. I had always dreamed of being the guy/gal in the A-10 coming to save our asses while watching them work. Of course I'm one of those "I could have been a Pilot but.." guys lol
I can understand that, I guess. I bought the Harrier because it came with Tarawa. Was aboard her for 6 months 4 days during the Gulf War. Kinda like seeing home again i guess.
eject then go for a familiar walk XD
@@SA80TAGE Actually tried that, but never could quite land on deck
@@RedTail1-1 yo I was a JFO in Afghanistan with the 101st in 2010. I was in the river valley
They had better model the Tim Hortons and the hockey rink at KAF!
Lol I was about to say that, I wonder if poo pond will be there 🤣
Hi Prickly, Music was Dystopian Strings, of which there are 2 parts, in the link you sent. Not the title suggested, but I’m sure after x hours getting the video out, remembering the music name is the last priority, cheers
Good take, and on the question about why the backlash, simple, a lot of people thrive on drama, and need it to feel good. and you will see that with anything, be it the kind of cola offered at a party to the choice of what kind of buffalo you pick for the steak.
Would be interesting if they could pull an 'IL-2' on maps, if you purchase it you can play it on SP/Career/Host it on your server. If you do not own it, you can still fly it on multiplayer servers who host it.
I like this model, as it forces people online to play with others. Once they get hooked with online play, we got em!
Brings back Memories ... we have six Tours in Kabul, Masar-e Scharif and Kundus between 2003 an 2011.
I´m not very excited about the Afghanistan map. Even though i´ve been to Kabul and Mazar-i-Sharif, it is one of the maps in the pipeline i´m less interested in. In fact, only North Australia is less interesting to me than Afghanistan. And i´m definately not going to buy North Aus., so i´m still struggeling with Afg. I admit to your conclusion that it is not "just another desert map", but not beeing just another desert map is not enough imo. I´m looking more forward to the Iraq map and this will definately be another desert map.
The history of Afghanistan is interesting, very complex and contains a long period of military conflicts suiting a lot of modules we have in DCS, no doubt about it. Also Afghanistan has some breathtaking countryside, i´ve been there on the ground for a couple of times and have seen it with my own eyes. I totally respect that and i absolutely adore maps with a rich history of modern military conflicts. But the history about conflicts prior to the soviet invasion in ´79 is completely unimportant to me for this DCS map and within the modern conflicts, it is pretty much pure anti-guerilla warfare wich can be recflected historically correct.
So fighting mostly infantry, technicals, suicide bombers and maybe a few BTRs / BMPs. That´s great for ArmA 3 or any other Infantry Simulator, but not realy what i prefer in DCS. Every other scenario (i.e. runway attack, CAP, SEAD etc...) is just fictional as usual. And for fictional scenarios, i´d rather take a Balkans, Korea, Taiwan or a North Cape map over Afghanistan any day. I´m realy looking forward to the Iraq map and i still have high hopes in the Kola map though.
Good sitrep as always and thank you very much for giving credit to the discussion about this map.
On that basis an ahistorical conflict scenario might be more your thing. Imagine say a coalition force to the north taking on assets in the south. Etc, etc.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 For Afghanistan? Absolutely. But that´s what i have on Buddyspike modern and 80´s with PG and Caucasus almost every day. That´s ok for PvP multiplayer and in some way for PvE. But for Singleplayer /2P Coop/ Multicrew i would rather see something historical accurate. Or at least close to. Afghanistan delivers that for sure, just not the type of conflict i would like to "replay".
I highly prefer the modern, western multirole fixed wing material, no pure ground-pounder, no pure A/A fighter. And i want to do multirole. I do fly the Apache and the Hind, but by far not as much as the fixed wings and the Hind only as multicrew co-pilot. For me, Iraq or Balkans would provide that much better and would, in the historical context, cover as much of our existing modules as Afghanistan. But "facing" a regular military, demanding the whole range of air missions thinkable in a military conflict. For both, blue and red forces. I miss the times of Jane´s F-15 or Longbow, were we could replay desert storm or just cause. Sure not historically accurate missions, but the immersion was there...
I have no doubt that, technically, Afghanistan will be the most advanced and best looking map in DCS and i´m sure ED will deliver a superb product. But if i pull the trigger on Afghanistan, is highly dependant of who and how much of the people i´m regulary flying with will get the map as well.
@@r4dio4ctiv3man9 Then you should be all over Sinai as that area has some very intense historical combat scenarios.
@@ImpendingJoker True, but the rest of the map is... serviceable. Not realy an option imo, i´ll touch Sinai again once it´s finished. Same for South Atlantic, both rotten on my SSD...
The squeaky wheel is always the loudest!! It looks incredible, cant wait to pick it up
When they first announced the Afghanistan map before showing any screenshots I wasn't really interested. But after I saw snippets of game play and screenshots I was blown away, thought it looked incredible. I didn't know they were raising the bar with map fidelity which is awesome. I'm excited for it as of now, but would still like to see more game play.
I just bought the map, if for no other reason than to support ED. I REALLY hope I'm impressed. I really do. But my expectations are.........brown........if you follow me
Great vid. A really balanced overview of the map. It looks amazing.
Map is going to take me back in time. Yes, we would like a Vietnam/Eastern Europe maps but also maybe some Japanese Zero's and Order of Battle.
After buying the Siani map (buyers remorse) and not doing much with it I won’t buy any maps going forward until there is a decent campaign using the map.
I can’t believe how long it’s taking to do any meaningful updates to Sinai!
I love the Siani map.. just nobody seems to play on it.. especially multiplayer. It’s never populated
@@luke-zm9cg They have been promising a huge update since last fall if you follow the map on the forums. There is an area of the map for me where my frames drop in half causing major stutter. It’s over a desert area near the canal. Not an urban area so it makes no sense.
I was so, so, excited to buy the Sinai map... I downloaded it (a full 9 hour download thanks to the BS UK internet), I took one flight on the map... Never used it since... I am so, well, I don't know... Just... Meh about it. I hear you loud and clear on this one.
@@johnwicks4936 Even with an update, it's still just a map. I think map development should include some kind of campaign. I mean they have gone this far to create a great map and I don't mind giving these guys my hard-earned money if they can provide something really fun. How cool would it be to have a Raven One type of campaign on these maps. Now that is something I am willing to pay for. A nice, packaged bundle. I would happily open my wallet for that. Otherwise, if it's just a map, I don't need another MSFS in my library. :)
It’s not my first choice of map but it’s an interesting map due to the history of conflicts and the Aircraft’s in DCS. The map I’m most exited for is a Vietnam war era map but as a A/G and Helo player I’m excited about the Afghanistan map. From the preview vids and pic it looks really good.👍
So much hate in the comments. I'm excited for this map. DCS is better than MSFS in many ways (especially if you fly in VR) and I'm excited to see this detailed map.
Agreed. I finally tried MSFS in DCS. Flew the Rio area in VR max settings in a Reverb G2 and a 4090. It really let me down as far as the graphics were concerned. Always believed it was better than DCS graphics wise and it's not.
@l8knight845 it's surprising isn't it, and makes you appreciate the work ED does.
@@l8knight845 MSFS has great graphics thats not the problem (unless your complaint is bout the GPS terrain in untouched areas that's fair). The actual problem MSFS VR players complain about is performance. Unlike DCS, it lacks support for quadview rendering. MSFS VR users have resorted to external apps like AutoFPS to get them into 45fps and settle for that. Meanwhile, a high end setup in DCS can get much higher if their headset supports eye tracking. See "Vr Flight Sim Guy" one of his latest videos touched on this subject. Basically he explains he feels like VR is being neglected over there. In the end, I agree with you we have it so good in DCS. But for me its perf; not visuals. Cause the visuals in those official air bases, etc are very nice when maxed out.
If I can’t walk from my B-Hut to the flight line in Bagram, I’m gonna be pissed!!! 😂😂😂
Great video. Very excited for this map. We can recreate lots of ground pounding here
I’m super excited for both Afghanistan and Iraq, Ofc. I hope they’re working on Vietnam and Korea too. They did say both Korea and Vietnam was too varied in height to work with the current map tech, which I assume is the main reason we don’t have those yet.
DCS Afghanistan map will immediately become my favorite terrain. The haters in our community need to calm down. ED made a good decision here.
Good for you, I am happy to know that you will enjoy it so heartily. Whilst I do not consider myself a "hater", whatever that term entails, I am not so excited for the map and I think ED made a questionable decision here. As such I humbly disagree with your sentiment. People should have a voice and be respected for that voice even if they do not have the means to be so eloquent as yourself by way of expression.
@@Ecthaelyon You didn't need to reply to him. Could have just ignored it and moved on. Instead you didn't like what he said, couldn't get over it, and had to in your own way try and start an argument.
@@RedTail1-1lmfao. You literally did the same thing.
with the upcoming F4, vietnam makes more sense, it's starting development was known by ED ages ago, so they would have had time to get vietnam on the works
@@chulian1819 One map centered around 2-3 aircraft does not make sense in the least, whereas a map that supports almost the entire stable makes much more sense, add to that Syria and Sinai, and those support the entire stable plus the F-4, so no, a Vietnam map does not make sense at this time. Why? The C-130 and CH-47 is not out yet, there is no Mi-24A, no OH-6A Cayuse or OH-58A/C Kiowas, the A-1 is not out yet nor is the F-100, there is no official A-4, the A-7 is not out yet, there are no F-105s in the pipeline, and most damning, no AH-1 Cobras in the works at all. So, no, a Vietnam map does not make sense even in the slightest when you think about it logically.
Personally, I am in the same camp as some of the others... Did we really need another "Desert Map", what with more important maps coming down the pipe such as Iraq (a stronger case for the A-10 statement). Whilst I understand the sales aspect for ED, this will definitely be a money earner as the Afghan map is definitely a more recent and pertinent subject matter to most of the current DCS simmers, GW1/2 (Iraq) has taken a back seat history wise.
In a purely a selfish statement I would say that a Western Europe map or indeed the fabled "Vietnam" map may have been a better route to go down in order to break up the MMFD (Miles n Miles of F'ing Deserrt ) monotony. Just my humble opinion. With this said a Western Europe map would be a massive undertaking for ED or any other terrain developer, I think this goes without saying, considering the amount of detail that would have to be included (high density of cities, towns, villages and not to mention the accurate inclusion of simple ground objects such as bridges, etc.).
Prickly, with all respect (I mean this most sincerely as I love your YT content and hold you in high esteem) one could argue, if you were of that particular mindset which I am not but I make mention of it anyway, that the SA map is more of a troubled water map (I do have the SA map, I enjoy it and appreciate the work that went into it, pls don't get me wrong here). In reality the aggrieved's argument maybe more valid despite our dislike for the core sentiment and its obvious negative connotations towards ED than we care to appreciate.
Personaly I am happy to see ANY content come out for DCS World, lord knows we do not see enough of it compared to other simulations (Don't get me started, one eye levelled at ED for this one, I am definitely in the Sergio Costa camp) so this addition is welcome in my DCS World, but a neccesasry one at this time? Most definitely not, again in my own humble opinion, but then who am I? What do I know, eh? :D
Agreed. "the fabled "Vietnam" map may have been a better route to go down", this.
Great video as always, thanks for sharing!
No worries. I'm really excited to see the map and new textures which no doubt, will flow into other map products in the future!
Cant wait for the map! (If Afghanistan came up earlier than phantom i will die 😂)
I'm honestly excited about Afghanistan. It would be awesome to have a chill map that's more air to ground and close air support oriented. Hopefully we can have some kind of insurgency missions where they randomly pop up wherever. I could see this being a JTAC heavy map as well.
DCS needs more free maps with lower fidelity, like the Caucasus, so that everyone can fly together and get immersed. A Vietnam map does not need extreme detail to create the required immersion.
Potentially, but I can see the vitriol if we don't have destructible trees and napalm.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 That is definitely true, but there are levels of destructibility and special effects. The same goes with the aircraft. If we could combine some kind of mid-fidelity Vietnam map with mid-fidelity 100 series jets, it could be an amazing experience.
I just hope the vaunted latest tech being used will do something about the terrible lack of resolution in the terrain mesh in maps to date. So long we have had to put up with mountains looking like a pile of cushions with a tablecloth draped over them. It looks good so far. I really hope they cater for people who have the disc space and processing power to render them properly.
I agree.. the drama wasn't warranted at all. I don't get all the hate directed at ED over this.
Looking forward to the map, for sure.
Dcs has a very immature community imo, every little thing they announce has drama but ED also doesn’t really honor their word and promises with alot of things so I can kinda see most peoples frustration.
Just people letting the company know where their priorities should be, “drama” is just customer feedback and good companies take note obviously.
@@Wheelman_PCAS not this drama though, them complaining because they’re giving. Othered the option to buy a map for cheaper? Come on now.
@@RW-zn8vy ah gotcha
Personally, I do not understand this "hate" word being banded about in such an out of context manner. Try, with respect and an open mind, to appreciate both sides of the debate concerning this Map and ED's decision to go with it, you may understand and appreciate the "hate".
I'd love to see a Baltics map ... I'm sure I'll buy the Afghanistan map, but I would like to see us spend some more time in other parts of the world.
Everyone whining about this crap obviously had nothing to do with Afghanistan. Probably basement shut-ins. Those of us that were there are very excited for it.
I really do want a Vietnam map but getting there will require the very latest map building tech; Afghanistan is a valuable opportunity for Devs to lay the groundwork for Vietnam. imo.
Well said, a solid statement.
Now THAT is a good reason to buy the Afghanistan map. Thank you because I was drawing blanks other than to support ED
Caucasus has tons of trees and other objects but runs great (for me at least), I don't see why Vietnam would be that much different?
I think at this point anything that happens in DCS seems to cause complaints. I don't know why they do it, but I'm glad they do. Map looks great, and I will buy the whole thing and enjoy all the parts as and when they come out. People just need to get out more i think.
Welcome to the base nature of Flight Simmulation ;) It has been this way since the heady days to MS FS95 and before... :D
@@Ecthaelyon Not really. Back then it was so niche we were happy you got anything. It was the same with FSX and Orbx's PNW scenery. I didn't care about the PNW RL, but it was such fantastic scenery I flew there anyway. The Afghanistan map will be no different. I prefer Sinai because I was based there and would love to see a Ft. Irwin or Ft. Hood map made one day.
From a Single Player perspective:
If you want a map to play historically (say after 1960) authentic-ish missions (likely many do) then this map (and Iraq, and Vietnam, Kosovo, etc) should have been in the map rota a LONG time ago. It's my guess that the amount of angst stems from ED's...curious history with regards to maps. The type of vegetation in place is irrelevant to me.
I pre-purchased this map as most (again post 1960) modules you can buy are dedicated air-to-ground (surface attack, CAS, interdiction, etc: AH-64, AV8B, A-10, etc) or capable of such (by design multi-role: F-18/16/15E/4...the list goes on). And most conflicts in the last 60+ years either started out air-to-ground or ended up there pretty quickly ('Nam being an anomaly due to, well, you know...).
We need a world map to authentically have a virtual WW3 with peer adversaries.
Multiplayer perspective - I don't do MP (not my Jam) so I'm speculating here:
How about a 'BVR' map? 1000x1000 nautical miles with two small islands at opposite ends - covered in dense, green, vegetation I suppose - for land-locked fighters and lots of ocean for your carriers; you can takeoff and get your BVR fix anytime you want. Shouldn't be much of a data footprint as it's 99% empty ocean....hmm, sounds a lot like the Instant Action button...
Or: add another fictional island to the Marianna map - Ice Age Marianna?. Would bore the snot out of me but should make the missileers happy.
Another well grounded argument (is there a pun here?), well said.
"Where little action took place". Those 'critics'/whiners definitely don't know what they're talking about. RC-West and RC-South are where, by far, the most "action" took place regarding OEF for the U.S., UK, Italy, and Canada (Kandahar, Helmand, Farah, Harat). The "action" that did take place in RC-North and RC-East was highly concentrated to very specific mountain valleys like Gardez, and the J-bad area.
Not only are Afghanistan and Iraq ideal* maps for the assets we have but there's also a significant number of DCS players from ISAF countries who deployed to one or both IRL. Including pilots but especially soldiers. I get the point of wanting more variety but these two maps are no brainers.
Afghanistan is around 6000ft, at that low density of air the Apache won’t be able to hover with a COIN loadout like it obviously can in real life. Not so much a map issue as it is a DCS flight model issue. If they solve that, I’ll definitely get the map.
Give me more locations that are as amazing looking as this map. Vietnam is of course extremely desirable, however it will present some serious challenges to look as good as the recent maps have. It takes time to develop the software to pull off what they are doing. Until then we have a map where two decades of conflict occurred and we can now simulate much of it.
Not buying another desert map, but it looks great. Looking forward to a Kola update. As a wish list… Balkans and Turkey would be fun. Also, I wish they updated the Nevada map to include 29Palms, Star Wars canyon, Edwards, San Diego and St.Nicolas island.
This will easily be the best map in the game. As someone who loves CAS / air to ground ops, this is a dream. Especially being able to recreate awesome A-10, AH-64, and OH-58 missions as well as fun with the CH-47. Most of these haters will come to enjoy it for sure. And Iraq will be fun too, but I’m glad they are doing Afghanistan first.
as a developer can say polygon count does not lie, the amount of effort they have to put in to be able to run vietnam with good fps while recreating the dense vegetation and cities will require more effort than afghanistan, the final say will be the amount of man hours used in vietnam vs afghanistan (to normalize the data would need to be done by man hour per km2 maybe) , hope those numbers get released to know for sure some of the reasons (like effort) why one map was first over the other.
The comparison of the SA devs, you will need to ask the hypothetical question: if SA had the same vegetation density as vietnam, would be the same effort or more?
@chulian1819 - As a hobbyist scenery developer for X-Plane 11 and later MSFS I totally agree with you. Deserts and barren rocky mountainous terrains are a piece of cake compared to lush tropical areas with dense vegetation. Yep, polygons, and the laborious effort to create them, definitely don't lie! I'm sure that's exactly why 98% of DCS scenery is predominately deserts and barren mountainous areas. I've been waiting and waiting for E.D. to offer southern China, Southeast Asia, and the South China Sea since that area is libel to blow its top at any time. Oh well, and now we have DCS Afghanistan. Go figure.
True on the polygon count. But I was thinking also in terms of objects and mountains as well. The cultural icons also needing development.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72Creation of basic scenery, whether mountainous, hilly, or desert, requires only satellite/aerial maps accurately projected onto 3D mesh/polygons from digital topography maps. These maps provide latitude and longitude for each point as well as elevation. The scenery software will create the 3D mesh/polygons The higher the resolution topography data, and satellite/aerial maps, the more accurate and detailed the scenery will be, but at a performance cost and increased scenery file sizes. Compromises must be made to ensure minimum FPS. From there, vegetation, waterways, roads, buildings, cities, infrastructure, etc. are then added. All things considered, barren areas require the least resources and man-hours to create. Cheers from Thailand buddy!
It seems ED mentioned enabling technology that will allow them to develop maps more quickly. Assuming this will also accelerate green maps as well. I will note I do see the improvements in the SA map with successive updates.
@@bbmatthews2002 hope they will expand caucasus
Will I buy the map? Yes, just to support ED and for completeness. Am I excited about it? Hardly. I really REALLY wish I was, but I’m not. It wasn’t worth one drop of US or Allied blood, and a steady diet of COIN and CAS missions doesn’t excite me at all.
I'm looking forward to it to see how well they can work out the mountain textures.
Frontline has a great 3 part series on the US war in Afghanistan.
It feels out of place for the Viggen and F-14A/B, which I currently fly and I’m not really into rotary’s but I am looking forward to see what they do with the COIN AI and assets.
Wags recently mentioned ‘two green’ maps that are incoming. Vietnam or Korea hopefully. But that’s likely to be in 2025.
I own all the maps except South Atlantic Falklands. I don’t see a reason to get it apart from the Falklands War.
I might get Afghanistan for the Instant Action missions and if Grayflag choose it for one of their PVE server.
@@British_Dragon-4K-Simulationsmuch more like Balkan and Baltics. But who knows...
For me this and iraq are maps that i can relate to, since i have operated in both countries. Afghanistan is one of the most beautiful and scenic countries I've ever been to.
I bought the entire map. I'm going to buy it eventually and why not get the discount now.
Me too. Although other than to support ED, I have no idea why I did it
Afghanistan is a No Brainer. One of the most hard-fought areas on earth. Absolut playground for Soviet and Nato assets.
I think the time required for such a big map, also tends to dictate the map being cut up, or it would take much longer to put it out which hurts everyone customers and company alike.
I think in Casmo's interview with Wags, Wags might be bringing a monthly sitrep of goings on with ED and DCS.
Not really, as you can simply buy the complete map for $48 at 30% off, and get all three parts whenever they are finished.
The reason to split was only to have a chunk of the map at a reduced price. I hope people bought the "chunk" deliberately and did see the option to also buy the complete map at a further discount, so we don't get the next sh.tstorm, at the release of the next chunk... 🤔
@@shagrat47 Okay, you and common sense wins - again, lol! Actually, I bought the whole thing. However, I do keep my comment about cutting it up so they can release it sooner than later. I did see somewhere that ED is looking at a workaround to reduce the price difference if you do buy it in chunks and want to eventually get the whole thing. It will allow customers to buy a larger SSD to hold all the upcoming maps, which will definitely be very large😇
Excellent video and explanation, I ‘ve already purchased, to me the who-ha, is cobblers. We’ve all bought in pieces before. For the carrier people, we just need the fuel available overhead the border, where the normal ingress points were and have tankers available at the borders edge. CASMO also stated that Hornets were on TDY in country. That does it for me. Looking forward to it.
Prickly, what’s the name of the music track? 😊or a link if it’s an internet thing ,please.
Check out the link in the description to musictonoise's YT channel. I think it's called distopian strings or similar.
Its easy to sit on the bench and critize laziness, when you have absolutely no clue the effort it takes even to make mountain and desert terrain.
I for one cant wait for a Vietnam map either 🤑 but I still think its great that ED invests in a theater which fits well with the Apache, Blackhawk, Chinook and of course the BRRRRRRRT A-10 ✌️😎
I recently finished the Homeland series, so the theater lies close to mind atm as well.
To those saying "there was less action" simply consider the fact, that the Taliban movement originated in Kandahar province! One of the biggest campaigns against the Taliban was Operation Medusa, to clear the south of Kandahar around the "Taliban Capital" Spin Boldak. A combined Task Force of Canadian, British and US assets.
Helmand valley, the Kajaki dam and the mountains north of Kandahar so a long and grinding conflict between british and USMC hearts and minds and Taleban insurgency over more than a decade.
The US forces that fought in Herat province and near the Turkmenistan and Usbekistan border region may also disagree with the assessment of "less action"... 😇
Not to disrespect the achievements of our canadian, british and american comrades. They fought a hell of a fight out there, no doubt. But very most of the action in Afg. hit us infantry guys and not the jet and helicopter guys and is therefore not very interesting for a DCS map. Killing infantry, technicals and a few BTRs maybe fun for the rotary and the A-10 Drivers in DCS, but is definately getting pretty fast, pretty boring for the rest of the fixed wing community. So we will end up with fictional scenarios as with most other maps. And for that, i´d rather take a Taiwan or Korea map than Afghanistan...
@@r4dio4ctiv3man9I personally am more interested in exactly those COIN scenarios, where the challenge isn't to kill as many enemies as possible in the least amount of time, but to take out the right enemy, at the right time, without endangering own troops and innocents while achieving mission goals.
In general air support, from CAS, to insertion, MEDEVAC or gathering intelligence was daily business and often, there weren't even enough air assets available to accommodate every need... over a period of at least 10-15 years!
So, yeah, not much dogfighting and BVR, or "Cold War gone hot", if you want to keep it realistic, but a lot to do for helicopters and aircraft alike, though COIN may have different challenges than SEAD, SAM evasion and enemy CAP.
@@r4dio4ctiv3man9 Hate to break it to you but after air superiority is achieved that is 99% of air combat. Happened in Desert Storm. After the skies belonged to the Coalition, it was nothing but ground pounding. Even the opening strikes were from the air on ground targets by F-117s.
@@ImpendingJoker True. Ground pounding. This is absolutely ok, but Desert storm was ground pounding against a regular military. And runway attack, precision strikes against comm centers, anti ship etc is all great fun. The war in Afghanistan since the soviet invasion on the other side was pure anti-guerilla / counter-insurgency warfare, wich is something totally different and that is what i´m talking about. You don´t do anti-ship or runway strikes against the Taliban, you do CAS, CAS, CAS and again CAS. Or carpet bombing.
The opening strikes with the F-117s where precision strikes against command and control centers in Baghdad, not CAS sorties against Talibs driving a Nissan Pickup over the Hindukush...
@@shagrat47 Absolutely ok, but with "the very most of the action", i didn´t mean the air support itself, but more where the action took part. And that was on the ground. Generally spoken from the soviet invasion in ´79, Afghanistan was infantry war. With armored forces and air assets playing only a secondary support/transport role. And infantry warfare is pretty much unimportant for DCS. At least with the infantry models we have right now
I will buy it when the mountain region comes later.
Fair enough
Thanks for your vid 👍🏿
I love that ED is addressing pricing issues associated with its modules by splitting modules into bite sized bits. Those with more disposable income can opt for the full module purchases. What the complaint?
I agree and think it's a welcome addition, however I am extremely disappointed that we didn't get any of Iran or Pakistan and access to the Gulf. This will make Naval ops impossible as well as long range missions that newly released aircraft like the F-15E could take advantage of. This map will feel very similar to the Nevada map, which appears to be one of the least popular.
Sadly Wags said the map technology prohibited them from stretching the map for sea ops. But it would have been nice.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 question for Wags, if you get the chance. What IS the theoretical map size limit? Would be interested to know. Kinda curious as the Strike Eagle seems to have a larger fuel capacity than some of the maps. While you CAN midair refuel at F15E, do you really REALLY HAVE to? Or WANT to?😉😊
@@simtaylor61Ask the Tomcat pilot who was on a 9 hour mission with multiple refuels. It happens.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 well what I’m asking is, perhaps, could a Strike Eagle make it from one corner of a “theoretical” largest map able to be made, to the other, without refueling? Not really asking about loiter time…..
Afghanistan is going to be most excellent, but what I really want more than anything is a modernized & expanded CAUCASUS.
Please, make it so.
I'd love to see like Japan east China, Taiwan, and the Korea area, for both ww2 n modern
Looks cool.
@@rybuds47 hopefully by tomorrow's end, we'll know.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 im not actually that enthused for this one i dont know why. I think i just want more aircraft and missions to do with my friends on servers.
We all have different maps now and its mostly Caucusus that we fly on for that reaon. Kola has been really good on the fallen angels 1987 server. Very good with a small group. I will probably pick up this one but i need a bigger hard drive 😄 cheers dude!
Mary airbase is an incredibly important russian base. Its in the map but wont be modeled for some dumb reason.
Dear Prickly, I totally respect Your opinion ( 1 minute 43 seconds into this video ), and at 69, My brain isn't as sharp as it used to be, but last night I watched Matts interview and
He mentioned a plane like the F4U Corsair takes 5 years to have it meet EA standards, but
that a map, especially a desert map was EASY to make and takes little time.
Let Me know if I am wrong, please.
Mike
Not quite. He said that advances in their new terrain making kit has made making maps a lot easier. The primary issue I was tackling, was people saying ED was lazy in making desert maps per se. That's not how I see it, and that's what I was primarily taking umbrage with, along with the southwestern portion being devoid of any action so why release that part. And so on...
I prefer desert maps because my system doesn't like to render all the Kola trees in VR.
Yeah that can be taxing on systems. 5090 here come...
There is nothing wrong with the map, in fact it could be the best one so far. The problem is buying map after map won't fill the gap of interesting campaigns. They talked about a campaign engine for years and it's really time we would be able do something that does not involve hours in the mission editor.
Spent seven months there and never want to go back, so I have mixed feelings about this map.
It’s Vietnam.. that’s a map that’ll map people really excited. Mig21 / 19 vs f4 and f5
Looks beautiful. But is not going to look like that on my rig. Plus I need to draw a line on the modules I want to buy this year. If any. Is costing too much.
How do they get the fa18c in the air shots look so real? I have a 4090 system and i cant get them to look like that. Then in vr no where near.😢
Good point. It could be some post capture editing, but it looks amazing.
what was the synthy music from the opening?
Check the description for the video, you'll find a link to musictonoise's YT channel. I think it's called desert strings or similar.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72thanks buddy, love the vid, very informative!
CAMPAIGN CAMPAIGN CAMPAIGN
I'm concerned this will be another map let down just as Falklands has been. We have Syria as a standard set and it launched 3 years ago!
I'll buy once it is all finished, sometime in 2030ish..
Could DCS make a Multiplayer mission package for the servers? Now there are just few playable servers and always the same mission profile with dummy AI movements.
Where did you get all of the screen shots? I would like to be able to download them.
Go to EDs main website and there's a tab for downloads and screensjots
Never mind, I found them on the DCS World "Screenshots" page.
Well when 5090 will be release new PC is next.. with 16 MB ram😁... 64 or 128 time will tell extra mem is good for rendering.
What is green square in lower right hiding form 15:00 to 17.00 min?
It's a block out of the camera which wasn't recording
If you are talking about motherboard memory I would say 64 gigs or better. The card itself is rumored for 28 gigs of GDDR7 memory.
@@JPsTechReviews Yep, motherboard memory.
Ah yes, an Afghanistan map...because I come to my flight sims for a PTSD trigger >
Only of you let it.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 Spot on, big thumbs up for this reply from a PTSD survivor.
Peoples have been asking for years for the Afghanistan map and now they get it, they complain it is another 'dessert' map.
I haven't been asking for it, and yes you could put me in the complainer's camp if you wish, but... I certainly never asked for the map.
What people?
Strong rumors is the RTX 5090 is going to be 50 plus percent faster than the 4090, with 28 gigs of GDDR7 memory, 512-bit memory bus speed and a $2000 or better price tag, the card is going to be a beast. Start banking away some coin now, I am filling my piggy bank starting yesterday, lol😅
They always say these things.
Personally, I have no interest in an Afghan map, but I can at least respect that it's needed for Hind pilots.
First for my weekly Hedgehog.
Don’t think it’s another desert map… literally shows flat desert map in every shot 😂😂😂
I get that a lot of detail nerds really want to try out their A10 in Afghanistan, but really ANOTHER desertmap? Couldnt that wait in line. There is no Koreamap, no Vietnam Map, and no modern Euromap. Wouldnt that be nice fly round the Adriatic Sea or Skandinavia...
Mate, you need to sort your sound out, constant crackling sounds.
No one else has mentioned this, and I can't hear it on my phone or other devices I've played this on.
We really dont need a world map. I rather take a better performing more detailed map like we have now. I dont know what benefit a world map would have to what we have now. Unless you can put 1000s of players on one server.
Don't forget about Russian POWs who converted to islam and stayed back
Yeah but the SA map was absolute Garbage and resulted in me stopping buying maps for a while. Even an Orbx map seems very DCS and nowhere near photorealistic like MSFS! This map does look promising though!
Absolute garbage? I’d HARDLY say THAT. Not by a long shot. True, the only real world conflict down there was the Falklands war, but there is a HUGE number of theoretical conflicts scenarios available that tie in to the current real world situation
I recently installed Gunship 2000 and you get SIX WHOLE MAPS included with the game and it has like 8 helicopters plus I downloaded it for free off something called an "abandonware site" idk what that is but it seems cool, you don't need this DLC you can play in antartica if you download it it's really cooool
Eagle Dynamics are taking use for ABSOLUTE FOOLS
thank you for reading my comment
Unfortunately Gunship 2000 has a horrible controls implementation... a "very simplified" helicopter flight model and systems. It was a great game(!) at its time, but to compare it to a modern, detailed simulation, is... let's say, apples and oranges. 😉
lmao so you downloaded abandonware (labor has long since been paid off) to somehow prove that people working today can't make a buck like the ones did back in the day.
It’s time to move to a full world map. These expensive local maps taking up massive space on our SSD’s is archaic now after MSFS. I have a harder and harder time flying in DCS compared to MSFS now that better military aircraft are coming out in MSFS. I really enjoy being able to fly what I want WHERE I want in the real world. I find local maps too restricting now and ED needs to find a better way to pull me back. If MSFS brings back a military version of the sim, that will be the nail in the coffin for me.
This is a very, very valid argument and one that ED should really be keeping an eye on. The current spate of high quality Military aircraft now appearing in MSFS (despite itrs military use drawbacks) should be bringing more than a few alarm bells for ED. Good post.
Couch potatoes who claim that Afghanistan is just a desert map and a lot of sand clearly never deployed there
I had to go on ChatGPT and ask the AI why any government would WANT to go there
To me this sounds a awfull lot like a moneygrab. They need money now, but dont have a full Product to sell. I am not saying, that ED will abandon the Mapproject, but Maps getting now "early access" too, where will this go to? How many ED Modules are actually released and not in Early Access? On top of all that, they even presell a unfinished product. I can not imagine what the next step is and to be honest, I don't want to know. I Really like DCS, but its developing in a direction I don't like and I will not support such behaviour. If the Map gets fully released, and only THEN I will consider buying it.
Cool... so then don't take the discount they offer to counter that as it being a work in progress. They literally said in an interview this was dual option was for people tighter on funds so they could get a region in higher detail most important to them with still access to the full map. Doesn't quite sound like a money grab.
@DoradoFever wags actually said they were losing money on this one.
@@Pricklyhedgehog72 not loosing money per say but expected profit…
You don't make sense
@@luke-zm9cg Losing money means no profit my guy
Waiting for F-15 Update. 😡😡😡
Why do you complain about it in a totally unrelated video talking about a complete different product, by a different vendor?! 🤦🏻♂️
@@shagrat47 Sorry! Because I'm angry! More and more but nothing really finished.
Too many entitled snowflakes in the community IMO.
Why would I buy this map? Much air war here? Taliban Air Force with what.....sopwith camels? The f86 and mig15 never got a home.