Spotting: icons, labels, Smart Scaling and other ideas

[AndyHill]

That is an incredible difference. My opinion is that flying without some kind of spotting enhancements in a game is simulating aerial combat of the partially sighted. 

 

And that's not all. Resolution, framerate and viewing angle are all worse for the computer pilot, making it much harder to maintain SA. I feel that the no visual aids -mode is more hide and seek -oriented than tactical maneuvering, which can be fun - I've enjoyed "full real" gaming as well. Both options are pretty much necessary, I think, since the experience of sitting in front of a computer is just not comparable to sitting in a cockpit (which I've done extremely little). So much so that IMRO realism isn't even a factor in this discussion, because all of the options are so far from being real.

 

In a few years time things might change, though, since Oculus and its competitors will probably push the boundaries of wearable displays at a very fast pace. But until then, offering some kind of visual aids is probably going to provide an experience that is a closer match to real-world pilot capabilities.

[ParaB]

It's not that difficult, actually: just provide some options so that everyone is happy.

 

I personally don't like icons in flightsims but I also am aware that it's MUCH harder to spot objects on our screens than it is in real life.

 

When I use icons it's usually just something very basic like a dot with no "side colours" or any other info.

 

And yes, the smart scaling option in Falcon was a pretty good compromise between realism and playability.

[wastel]

The old WW2Online, or now called "Battelground Europe" has an very good Icon system.  

If you looked fast (a short time, like snap view) in a direction there was no icon at the enemy/friendly. But if you look longer, an icon faded in.

The fading effeckt depends on the distance too of course.

 

iIt is possible to lose an enemy out of sight when he moves out of the field of view, and so lost the icon . It took time for your eyes to catch him up again, means

an icon faded in again. Its hard to describe...but it works well.

 

Wastel

[=IRFC=Jorri]

Smartscaling? Please no.

 

Icons, sure, but I'll avoid any server using them that's for sure.

 

Anyway, we already have an excellent zoom function that will allow you to spot targets at a distance, and that negates any disadvantage our monitors might give us compared to real pilots. 

 

And smart scaling should not be an option, either. One part of SA is seeing how far away other airplanes are. I don't want to have to check a server's difficulty settings before being able to tell this, and one server being different from another. 

[Tomsk]

I would identify that plane in the first picture as a Spitfire. :D

 

Really looks like one doesn't it, but as it turns out it's just the pixelation playing tricks. Both planes are actually the same, its a 109 I was BnZing (badly).

 

The old WW2Online, or now called "Battelground Europe" has an very good Icon system.  

If you looked fast (a short time, like snap view) in a direction there was no icon at the enemy/friendly. But if you look longer, an icon faded in.

The fading effeckt depends on the distance too of course.

 

I've not tried WW2Online, but this sounds like an interesting system. A bit of an immersion breaker, but should give the right effect.

 

Anyway, we already have an excellent zoom function that will allow you to spot targets at a distance, and that negates any disadvantage our monitors might give us compared to real pilots. 

 

And smart scaling should not be an option, either. One part of SA is seeing how far away other airplanes are. I don't want to have to check a server's difficulty settings before being able to tell this, and one server being different from another. 

 

Zoom certainly helps identify targets, and it can help a bit with locating them, but finding targets at 4x magnifcation requires a *lot* of sky scanning. 

 

I'm not proposing that you would ever be forced to use SmartScaling or any other vision aid if you didn't want to. Even if the server permitted it. Rather some servers might allow you to turn it on, if you wanted to do that. Also IIRC SmartScaling in Falcon 4 takes starts to take effect beyond the distance you can reasonably judge distance ...

Edited November 26, 2013 by Tomsk

[=IRFC=Jorri]

 

 but finding targets at 4x magnifcation requires a *lot* of sky scanning. 

 

Exactly, and that's the point! :D 

 

In reality you wouldn't see planes at a long distance just by glancing around. It takes effort and discipline, to scan the sky, bit by bit, to see planes at great distances.

[Tomsk]

Exactly, and that's the point! :D 

 

In reality you wouldn't see planes at a long distance just by glancing around. It takes effort and discipline, to scan the sky, bit by bit, to see planes at great distances.

 

Yes of course, but to scan with the same resolution as a pilot in real life (i.e. at approx 4x zoom) will take much longer than it would take to scan the same sky in real life. Using the zoom is a compromise, it lets you scan at a more realistic resolution, but that scanning takes much longer. If you don't zoom in you can scan the sky at a realistic rate, but at a greatly reduced resolution. If you do zoom in, you can scan at a realistic resolution but at a much slower rate. That penalty in resolution has to be paid somehow, either in scanning resolution, or in scanning time.

 

And in my opinion this discussion isn't theoretical. It's well known that in Warthunder FRB mode the dominant tactic is low altitude turn fighting. Very rarely do people climb to high altitude and use BnZ attacks. Is that realistic? No not in the slightest, so why do people do it? Well partly because you can't see well enough to be very successful with BnZ.

[6S.Manu]

The old WW2Online, or now called "Battelground Europe" has an very good Icon system.  

If you looked fast (a short time, like snap view) in a direction there was no icon at the enemy/friendly. But if you look longer, an icon faded in.

The fading effeckt depends on the distance too of course.

 

iIt is possible to lose an enemy out of sight when he moves out of the field of view, and so lost the icon . It took time for your eyes to catch him up again, means

an icon faded in again. Its hard to describe...but it works well.

 

Wastel

 

That's a nice solution. Not a complete one, but it's a nice first step.

Edited November 26, 2013 by 6S.Manu

[AndyHill]

Anyway, we already have an excellent zoom function that will allow you to spot targets at a distance, and that negates any disadvantage our monitors might give us compared to real pilots. 

 

Except for the viewing angle, which is made much worse by zooming.

[6S.Manu]

Exactly, and that's the point! :D 

 

In reality you wouldn't see planes at a long distance just by glancing around. It takes effort and discipline, to scan the sky, bit by bit, to see planes at great distances.

 

In game zooming acts like looking through a telescope, but in real life you could still spot  near contacts even if you're fixating on a far point.

 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/83007395/Visual-Search-in-Air-Combat

Edited November 26, 2013 by 6S.Manu

[DD_Crash]

I would like to hear 777/1Cs view on this topic.

[JG26Hans_J_Marseille]

Hello!

 

 

I've not seen this discussed yet, and couldn't find anything with the search, so apologies if this has been discussed before.

 

One of the more controversial questions that comes up in almost every flight sim is what to do about spotting? The problem is that having icons telling you where people are, what team they are on, how far away they are ... is extremely unrealistic. In real life it just wasn't that easy to see other planes, or know that kind of information. However, on the flip side .. most people agree that spotting without any assistance whatsoever, is unrealistically difficult. The resolution of a monitor is just not as good as the human eye, as a result things that are clearly visible at a certain distance IRL, are often not at all visible in the game. This question often causes a lot of discussion, and people argue about which is better, but my personal opinion is that both extremes are flawed. What I would like to do is to propose a middle way!

 

Now from what I understand Battle-of-Stalingrad will have various realism options, including options on icons/labels. And I'm guessing each individual BoS server will have different realism settings. So ... I would like to make the pitch for including a middle option. Something that does aid spotting, but only to the point of making it realistically difficult. I've seen a couple of different ways of doing this.

 

My personal favorite approach to this problem was the solution used by Falcon 4: something called 'Smart Scaling'. For those that aren't familiar with Falcon 4, if you turned on Smart Scaling then the game would enlarge distant vehicles somewhat so that they can be spotted in the game at a similar distance to what can be seen in real life. The effect was gradual: when objects were close there was no scaling, as objects got further away progressively more scaling would be applied up to some maximum. Personally I felt this worked very well in Falcon 4, you'd think it might some how ruin your sense of distance or closure, but in practice I never found it a problem. The effect only really started to do much beyond a certain distance, and you quickly got used to the new sense of distance that Smart Scaling implied. The other thing I liked about smart scaling is that it also helped with identifying aircraft and ground vehicles a bit, again something that is unrealistically hard in a game without icons.

 

Other ideas I've seen floated are limited icons or halos. With limited icons rather than make the enemy plane entirely obvious with a brightly coloured label, you simply put a dot above the enemy if the enemy can be realistically spotted at that range. The dot is subtle, so you have to be looking for it. And it is the same colour whether friendly or enemy, so it doesn't automatically tell you whether it is a friendly or enemy contact.

 

Another idea is 'halos', here contacts that should be within realistic visible range get a slight halo effect around them. This makes them stand out against the background a little bit better. That said the effect would need to be relatively subtle, so that you could easily miss a contact, but you still stood a realistic chance of seeing them. It also doesn't help with identifying the contact, but at least you'd know they were there.

 

As I say, personally I like Smart Scaling the best, but I would be more than happy if BoS implemented any kind of reasonable solution for a realistic visibility aid. So yes, do other people think there should be some middle ground option between icons and no-icons? What do people think about Smart Scaling, and other suggestions. Does anyone have any more ideas for middle ground spotting aids?

 

This reminds me strongly at a discussion we had amongst the Simmers who flew Warthunder 14 - 15 months ago, when Full Real Battles (FRBs) got announced, how those FRBs should look like:

 

We also had this 2 factions, for and against icons, and a 3rd one suggesting a middle ground with same ideas like yours

 

When i was initially strictly against no-icons and was promoting either icons or some of your ideas, after flying more than a year in WTs FRB, me and many others got used to use no icons at all...but this came with a price !!! And this price is called:

 

"Spot the Dot"

 

We evolved our graphic settings to a point, with which we can clearly spot the remaining last pixel of a plane often up to 30 kms, which is in the same way an unrealistic solution and giving you artificial help like icons !! In fact we exchanged "icons" with "dots" but got the same unrealistic arena, but only opposite:

 

- with icons, spotting at close distance is easy and at long range, where no icon gets shown, difficult

- with those dots, spotting at far distances is easy, but at mid to close distance, hard

 

Weird, isnt it ?! :wacko:

 

I am wondering how BoS will solve this old-as-Simming conflict because the system in RoF allows to my knowledge only Icons on or completly off, but no middle ground

Edited November 26, 2013 by JG26Hans_J_Marseille

[Tomsk]

I also play WT FRB, although I wasn't around when it started 15 months ago. But yes, of all the systems I have seen for solving this problem the one chosen in WT is the most insane. And it pleased no one. The no-icons crowd weren't pleased because at long ranges the dots were as good as icons. And it didn't please the icon lovers either, because at medium ranges planes would just vanish. Then you'd find that you had to completely mangle your graphics settings to make the dots extra visible. In the end I found it so ridiculous I ended up mostly playing historical battles (with jostick, cockpit and full flight model) because it seemed less insane than spotting in FRB.

 

I only have a 'silver' IL2BoS membership, so I haven't yet had the chance to try the BoS planes. But from what other people have said, I suspect once I get my hands on IL2BoS I won't be playing much WT anymore ...

Edited November 26, 2013 by Tomsk

[DD_Crash]

We also have squads in Il-2 1946 who fly "full real" no icons BUT then lower the resolution of the game so they can spot ground and air targets a LOT easier than someone using  a more normal screen size look at this post from the 1C forum

 

A lot of the online wars and campaigns are fought with some of the best hardware set to the lowest settings to gain increased range on "dots" and lowered game settings removes buildings exposing only ground objects to be destroyed in online competitions.

Test it your self

640x480
Set all graphics to lowest settings in IL2 1946 main gui

Perfect mode & 1680x1050


Lowest settings & 640x480




Flying around looking for ground targets on these settings makes them easier to spot and kill, the same goes for aircraft they are like huge bricks rather than tiny dots.











.

 

[-MG-Cacti4-6]

My issue with various spotting settings revolves around multiplayer games. if its a MP game imo it should be a server setting so that everybody is running under those specific settings. otherwise it can give an unfair advantage to someone running super realistic versus someone using spotting assistance.

[6S.Manu]

My issue with various spotting settings revolves around multiplayer games. if its a MP game imo it should be a server setting so that everybody is running under those specific settings. otherwise it can give an unfair advantage to someone running super realistic versus someone using spotting assistance.

 

I already asked to the devs to include in the server's settings also the minimum graphic settings of the client.

[=LD=Hethwill]

Remember that there will be servers to fit all tastes with what the mechanics allow for now. BoS is definitely about server host options instead of a unified system. 

[AndyHill]

Yeah to me the two main things are 

1) There should be a highly modifiable assist system (as in 1946) so that people can experiment and find a setting they like

2) Server needs to be able to set any vision assists on or off AND the exact settings used by the server are also replicated for the clients (unless they choose to not use any assist, which should be allowed)

[=LD=Hethwill]

I think it will be like RoF for a start. No issues with its assists.

[FuriousMeow]

I've not had any issues with RoF and no icons when identifying planes, or even losing them below against the terrain. I suspect it'll be even easier with BoS since it's pretty much flat white below.

 

However, as Hethwill stated  it'll be like RoF at least - and there are quite a few options present in RoF that are server side controlled so there will be a little bit for everyone.

[[JG2]R7_Blackadder]

I don't like the idea of icons but at the same time I fear that no icons at all would advantage only those with excellent hardware.

 

An intelligent system as Wastel suggested would be much more acceptable by both parties.

[JG26Hans_J_Marseille]

In RoF one see a contact miles away and adapt flight pattern and eventually ID them by shape once you get closer.

 

I agree, Heth ! The only thing we have to remember is, the merging speed in BoS will be 3 times higher as in RoF, so it goes for your reaction time !!! The same goes for needed or possible altitude differences when you think about BnZ, which are also bigger... so i hope the RoF-LoD will fit into a much faster WWII-world

 

I am also for no icons, IF the LoD works for those faster speeds well enough, but this @Smart-Scaling thing sounds interesting

[All_Apologies]

I really liked the smart scaling also in Falcon 4.0 and hope the devs go that route because its a good alternative from Icons and less of an immersion killer for me personally. I have a nice computer and it would be a shame to play this game at 640x480 resolution to be able to see anything a kilometer away.

[=IRFC=Jorri]

In Rise of Flight I can spot fighters, without any zooming (at the maximum field of view).

 

I'm not sure what it is when I'm fully zoomed in. Perhaps 15km....haven't really testde it (might be difficult).

[Fifi]

I'm not sure what it is when I'm fully zoomed in. Perhaps 15km....haven't really testde it (might be difficult).

 

Easy with ME...start by putting a plane same level as you (or not) upon a kwown/visible land mark at 15 Km, and see if you can spot it ingame (using zoom or not)

[=LD=Hethwill]

I agree, Heth ! The only thing we have to remember is, the merging speed in BoS will be 3 times higher as in RoF, so it goes for your reaction time !!! The same goes for needed or possible altitude differences when you think about BnZ, which are also bigger... so i hope the RoF-LoD will fit into a much faster WWII-world

 

I am also for no icons, IF the LoD works for those faster speeds well enough, but this @Smart-Scaling thing sounds interesting

 

Agreed. But I reckon the high speed of ww2 moving "pixels" breaks the patterns good enough to attract attention, especially under the 3 miles distance.

Edited November 26, 2013 by =LD=Hethwill_Khan

[JG26Hans_J_Marseille]

Agreed. But I reckon the high speed of ww2 moving "pixels" breaks the patterns good enough to attract attention, especially under the 3 miles distance.

 

Could made an unexpected spotting test when taking today my "Friedrich" out for some rides, when another pair of Friedrich, the Finch 7 and 8, were eager to land and had to wait for their landing permission until i took off..

 

Even when i knew exactly that they were around and where probably they had to be, i couldnt spot them until they glided in for the landing...and even this only with maximum zoomed in.

 

As long as they were flying anywhere around the airfield, i was unable to spot them...and the distance between me and them couldnt be so far, because i was lurking around the field trying to "bounce" them for a simulated BnZ...so you see, i tried to simulate our old well known issue from WT with spotting from above against the ground, Heth.

 

Another flight, i was lucky to spot them and did some simulated attacks, but as soon as i tried an "out-of-plane-maneuver", i lost immediately sight on them and couldnt find them anymore...this i found even more strange because i knew exactly that they has to be around anywhere, not far away, maybe 4 or 5 km at maximum or even much nearer, but i was unable to find them again until they came in for the landing...

 

And when they landed, i could spot them ONLY when zooming in...as soon as i zoomed out, the planes vanished completly...zooming in again, ah, here they are again, zooming out, gone again

 

 

So the results from this VERY early and short testing looks to be not so promising, because if those had been enemies and they would had the same trouble as me, we could fly around each other for minutes after minutes without seeing each other !!!

 

 

For the other guys here:

Many of us writing here, including Heth, were very involved in WTs FRB since the very beginning, flying regularly there under well known very harsh spotting conditions, so we are rather good trained for spotting moving, hard to detect small planes which vanish into background... so this is not something completly new for us

 

 

I would like to ask, that other people could repeat this:

- search ACTIVELY for AIs around...not crossing accidently their way

- demand from yourself that you HAS to spot them as soon as possible because your life depends on it

- do it in a simulated combat environment with constantly turning around, checking your six, changing course and altitude and NOT flying straight and searching the whole sky millimeter for millimeter because you dont ahve time for this in combat

- and tell me whether you were able to spot those pair more than accidently !!!

 

 

So far Heth, and i hate it to say, the spotting in this very early version looks to be even more difficult as in WT !!! And i know many of you will hate me for stating this...

 

Note: ofc i flew in "Expert realism" - setting

Edited November 26, 2013 by JG26Hans_J_Marseille

[Panzerlang]

At first I thought the planes were actually disappearing after I'd flown close by them (a bug) and I could not find them again until they were some distance from me. But maybe there is a LOD bug going on?

[JG26Hans_J_Marseille]

At first I thought the planes were actually disappearing after I'd flown close by them (a bug) and I could not find them again until they were some distance from me. But maybe there is a LOD bug going on?

 

So you made somewhat the same experiences than described by me ?!

 

I found it difficult to find the planes because

- zoomed out, you have a good angle of view but you cannot see them until you stumble upon them more or less accidently a few hundreds meters from you

- zoomed in, you can see and track them VERY good, can identify all very clearly...but i found it near to impossible to scan my surrounding looking through this very narrow window !!! If i know where to look exactly, okay, but otherwise ???

 

Because of this, i find that up to now from this very limited short experience, spotting in WT looks to be easier because there you can take a good look around fully zoomed out, noticing in which direction something may be, and THEN zoom in at exactly this spot for a closer look !! Here it looks to be opposite and i dont know whether this will work with merging speeds of up to 1.400 km/h and more ???

 

But lets wait and see how things will develop, but a word from a Dev about the overall design philosophie of iconless spotting would be welcome

Edited November 27, 2013 by JG26Hans_J_Marseille

[=LD=Hethwill]

Will do a test run again tonight. Didn't have much time the last two days, but reckon the similarities between Week 1 and Week 2 cannot be that non similar. Only big difference I noticed was the buggy textures. When over distance or changing views planes change the skins, revert to basic, etc

[siipperi]

It is same to all so i dont see point to have bigger lods for far objects. Sure it helps out but never had problems spotting planes. Anyway we have great zoom function which is cheaty enough and compensate this. Buy 4k monitor and support manufacturers to move 4k standards

[Creepermoss]

I don't know, I've never had any spotting issues in RoF (I've actually used how great it is as an example over on the WT boards) , and not in BoS yet, either. I've tested it, rolling away and out of plane, and the distant 109s circling where right where I thought they'd be, and my eyes locked onto them very quickly. Kudos to the folks that developed this, I really hope we do end up with some no icon servers so those of us that enjoy it can enjoy it how we enjoy it.

 

Bringing WT into this doesn't really make much sense, to me, as that entire graphics engine/LOD system was designed with icons as a given. The frb side of the game was kind of an afterthought, really, and IMO a quick-cash-grab aimed at the sim pilots, in a time when there were few alternatives. On a free to play business model, would you spend money developing better LODs for less than 1% of your customer base? Neither would I, and while it makes the game unpleasant for me, I get why they don't much care.

Edited November 27, 2013 by [JG2]Creepermoss

[JG26Hans_J_Marseille]

Will do a test run again tonight. Didn't have much time the last two days, but reckon the similarities between Week 1 and Week 2 cannot be that non similar. Only big difference I noticed was the buggy textures. When over distance or changing views planes change the skins, revert to basic, etc

 

Okay, looking forward hearing your results, Heth^^

 

But pls watch out that you dont take accidently spotted planes at which you stumbled upon, for actively spotted ones...because the former one worked fine, the latter one not so good for me at least

[JG26Hans_J_Marseille]

I don't know, I've never had any spotting issues in RoF (I've actually used how great it is as an example over on the WT boards) , and not in BoS yet, either. I've tested it, rolling away and out of plane, and the distant 109s circling where right where I thought they'd be, and my eyes locked onto them very quickly. Kudos to the folks that developed this, I really hope we do end up with some no icon servers so those of us that enjoy it can enjoy it how we enjoy it.

 

Bringing WT into this doesn't really make much sense, to me, as that entire graphics engine/LOD system was designed with icons as a given. The frb side of the game was kind of an afterthought, really, and IMO a quick-cash-grab aimed at the sim pilots, in a time when there were few alternatives. On a free to play business model, would you spend money developing better LODs for less than 1% of your customer base? Neither would I, and while it makes the game unpleasant for me, I get why they don't much care.

 

So @Creeper, you say, you hadnt any issues with ACTIVELY searching for and finding those pair of AI 109s ?

 

How did you do this, zoomed out or in ??? Because even when observing their landing from 1.000m above with landing lights turned on by them, they disappeared as soon as i zoomed out !!! Ofc when i zoomed in, here they were again, but in this case, i knew exactly where to look, which isnt the case if you have to scan the whole sky...

 

Pls tell me, so i will try it again with your method !!!

Edited November 27, 2013 by JG26Hans_J_Marseille

[SYN_Skydance]

Ok so it is clear that it is much harder to spot aircraft in a flight sim compared to RL but don't forget when you flying on a sim you are constantly scanning the skies because you know that there some enemy AC not too far away. RL pilots would fly for much longer periods without even flying anywhere near to an enemy plane. Also many pilots got shot down during ww2 without even seeing their attacker.