Jump to content

YIPPEE

Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

    491
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

380 Excellent

1 Follower

About YIPPEE

  • Rank
    Founder

Recent Profile Visitors

1075 profile views
  1. No. Games that attempt to be simulations are trying to model discrete elements of the real world. How players use those tools is by definition, not part of simulation. It is the opposite of simulation to alter parts of the game that are attempting to model the real world because players do not behave like the real world. It is also not simulation to alter accurate models because not everything is modeled. If you want a player to have to deal with a part of reality, it has to be modeled. If you cannot model that aspect reality practically, that is not an legitimate rational for modeling other aspects of the simulation poorly on purpose in an attempt to skew the model. No what I advocate for is not modeling a hammer as a wrench just because we cant model the sandbox perfectly too. On the other hand, what you are advocating for is a not at all subtle totally partisan agenda to alter the game in a total nonsensical way just to suit bomber pilots. And this is the bit of the post where you list a bunch of irrelevant items as a form of ad hominem because you know your rational is invalid.
  2. Hint: Harder for some and easier for others is a completely irrelevant metric in this conversation. No one on the alt is better side of this is arguing that it does not have issues. Rather than the improvements it brings to spotting in general are more realistic than the almost totally meaningless ability to see things at absurd ranges. Also, who gives a hootin hell if the developers agree with you lol. In the game you do not have realistic vision in zoom. In real life, you eyeballs do this for you, and it makes more sense to have scaling maxed out either at highest FOV or constant at all FOVs. The fact that you find "smaller when i zoom" counter intuitive is not at rational argument for realis There is no solution that is totally realistic. Sometimes you can implement mechanics to add to the game, but its never reasonable in a simulation to alter the specific realism of the game due to the way players play the game. You give a player realistic tools, and see what they make of them. Btw, seeing what they make of them, is what we call "playing" a game.
  3. I wait, probably forever, to hear a rational explanation of how this is relevant. Completely immaterial. If you want a solution so this, you should advocate for things that dont make every other aspect of the game take a huge step backwards. Other games for example, had solutions like giving large bombers two AI wing men that bombed and fired in sync with the human leader. It is not reasonable to intentionally alter the spotting to be less realistic to intentionally benefit some aspect of the game. The best any simulation can do model everything as close to reality as possible and then let the cookie crumble as it will. Short of a total simulation of reality, the game will always exist in a game environment and this will always alter the relationships between various parts.
  4. Well I give you this, at least your transparent. But this the most absurd case anyone has made for non-alt so far. "help me I need people to not see me so i can unrealistically fly my airliner sized plane to an objective all alone." It appears we have run into the bomber lobbyists. You guys should start a super PAC
  5. YIPPEE

    Spotting.

    1440p alternative vs non-alt max FOV ALT non alt alt non-alt 1080p "expert" spotting
  6. YIPPEE

    Spotting.

    The Doctor of Philosophy, (PhD, Ph.D., DPhil or D.Phil.) is a degree a person gets from a university by finishing a doctorate program. In many areas of study, the PhD/DPhil is the highest degree that a person can earn (this is called the "terminal degree"). Dr. Gary Serfoss is an adjunct faculty member of the School of International Graduate Studies at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School. He served as a U.S. Air Force officer for 20 years and spent most of those 20 years involved in some aspect of defense acquisition work. Gary worked research & development as well as training at the Air Force Research Laboratory. He served as the lead test and evaluation analyst for the $5 Billion Air Force/Navy Joint Primary Aircraft Training System (JPATS) program, which included the Raytheon T-6 aircraft and supporting systems. Gary also worked as a project manager and systems engineer to develop and deploy the Defense Biometric Identification System, the world’s largest identity management and access control system, around the world in support of the U.S. military. Finally, he served as an instructor at the Air Force Academy, teaching courses related to systems engineering, human factors engineering, the acquisition life-cycle and other topics. He is a graduate of the Air Force Academy and completed his Master’s and Ph.D. work at Arizona State University in Industrial Engineering-Human Systems. "He is a graduate of the Air Force Academy and completed his Master’s and Ph.D. work at Arizona State University in Industrial Engineering-Human Systems." I have no words.
  7. YIPPEE

    Spotting.

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irony
  8. YIPPEE

    Spotting.

    Almost missed this https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Philosophy
  9. YIPPEE

    Spotting.

    Ad hominem. Argument from authority. Misunderstanding of the actual content of the paper. No specific argument as to how any of the it is wrong. Sharpe you have been going at this one for years and I haven't seen a single piece of evidence posted yet. I am still waiting for you to provide some specific reason as to how any of the calculations or rationals in that paper are wrong. "gamer" Dr. Gary Serfoss is an adjunct faculty member of the School of International Graduate Studies at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School. He served as a U.S. Air Force officer for 20 years and spent most of those 20 years involved in some aspect of defense acquisition work. Gary worked research & development as well as training at the Air Force Research Laboratory. He served as the lead test and evaluation analyst for the $5 Billion Air Force/Navy Joint Primary Aircraft Training System (JPATS) program, which included the Raytheon T-6 aircraft and supporting systems. Gary also worked as a project manager and systems engineer to develop and deploy the Defense Biometric Identification System, the world’s largest identity management and access control system, around the world in support of the U.S. military. Finally, he served as an instructor at the Air Force Academy, teaching courses related to systems engineering, human factors engineering, the acquisition life-cycle and other topics. He is a graduate of the Air Force Academy and completed his Master’s and Ph.D. work at Arizona State University in Industrial Engineering-Human Systems. Thats "dr. gamer" to you
  10. YIPPEE

    Spotting.

    Please, where is the specific explanation of how spotting a contact at 40km is worse than missing it at 10 or 6. Still waiting. It is, because this is in the peripheral zone of vision. I would love to hear the rational on how non-scaling rendering of ANY object in a video game could possibly be even close to reality considering the huge differences in effect resolution, contrast, lighting etc. It isnt just a given that this is the case, your point of view is materially impossible.
  11. YIPPEE

    Spotting.

    Yes it does. Close being everything from 5-15km. Then there is a shift at close range where the affect is less noticeable or not there. So no criticism of the actual content then. Gotcha. more baseless ad hominem Clearly you didnt read it very carefully.
  12. YIPPEE

    Spotting.

    And the basis for this statement is?
  13. YIPPEE

    Spotting.

    It really is pretty flabbergasting the degree to which you can shift goalposts and ignore the present arguments as they are given. You ability to pretend like you dont understand what Im saying is astounding. And you wonder how I find you disingenuous.
  14. YIPPEE

    Spotting.

    Never argued it was. And you know this. Yes, completely ignore the points I made about which one is worse since since both are wrong. I will wait until you actually try to explain to me how it is better to sacrifice better spotting in close because I can see something at ranges that are so far away they do not matter.
  15. YIPPEE

    Spotting.

    There is a paper on this that explains why this is correct. This is because you dont have any data to back your position up. Your argument all these years has been "HDR solves all problems that dont exist"
×
×
  • Create New...