[FA_Cheech]

Looking really nice!

Thoughts on scale for what it's worth:
1:1 = simulator
1:2 = game

Which is the preference?

no dynamic weather = game

so ....

regards
Z

After Team Pacific's experience with The Slot, I would like to weigh-in on this.

Construction of 1:1 maps, covering a large area, is a laudible goal that many new map builders (Team Pacific is no exception) strive for, but there are pitfalls to this approach that should be considered before starting any map building project:

- Large, 1:1 scale maps require a great deal of effort to complete to a high standard of excellence. As an example, The Slot took, a team of four individuals, six months to complete. By the time we reached the final stages of construction we were pretty tired of "the grind". I can't even imagine what it would be like to construct a map of this size in the ETO, where the rail, road network, buildings, and infrastructure is massive, compared to the PTO
- Realistic flight times, in excess of forty five mins. - one hour, are considered unrealistic and unplayable by the vast majority of the IL2 community
- Many of these maps are beyond the computing capability of the average IL2 player. It does no good to have a spendidly constructed map that takes 10 minutes to load and runs like a "slide show"
- Every map builder wants his/her project to be used and enjoyed. Sacrificing scale for playability goes a long way towards acheiving this goal. Why spend 6 months building a map that, no matter how accurate and beautiful it is, never gets played?

I say build what you want, but be realistic in what you can achieve.

I like the idea for this map, and think 1:2 will work very well