Custom Icons...?

[FS_Fenice_1965]

The reality is that nobody uses icons online in any of the flight sims today so I'm not sure what having options for them would add.

 

 

 

All the populated servers in these games are running icons off.

 

This is not true. In 1946 is exactly the opposite. The only servers that are decently resisting have intermediate icons.

On the full real side, instead, almost nothing has remained: "spits vs 109", for example, has sadly closed the last month. 

 

 

CLOD multi is losing players constantly and sure the CLOD situation is another example of absence of scalability in the multiplayer servers.

Obviously icons are not the solution of everything (in my opinion CLOD with faster updates would have a different story...but... this is off topic....), but are a step forward where with little effort much can be achieved. 

Edited July 17, 2016 by FS_Fenice_1965

[wtornado]

With server populations that low, across all three sims, your point is meaningless.

 

The only people playing are the hard core survivors of a dying genre.

 

And it's dying because the hard core "my way or the highway" types drove everyone else off.

All of this is irrelevant 1c/777 Studios has a money stash somewhere and are making their sim they want.

 

Drove a lot off not many playing.

 

 

 

 

Nobody's driven off. It's possible to create a server with any settings desired. If somebody wants to create a server running icons they can do that.

But the type of player who prefers to play with a big red "shoot me" tag on their plane is over on War Thunder.

I think they are all in Warthunder.

 

So just because War Thunder has 100 times more players than BOS/BOM mean nothing.

 

BOS/BOM had 66 players 37 minutes ago from this time with 112 for 24 hours peak.

 

http://steamcharts.com/app/307960#1m

 

 

War thunder had just 10 008 40 mins ago with a peak of 12 919 players.

 

http://steamcharts.com/app/236390

 

Oh 43 908 in ARMA3  their 24h peak

Edited July 17, 2016 by WTornado

[SharpeXB]

There's nothing wrong with War Thunder bringing in more players to this genre. Of all those WT players, some will want to also get BoS/BoM

Perhaps though that's why you see less of the casual style game modes in BoS being used because the WT already caters to that style.

[JG5_Schuck]

At the moment there is no server side option to turn off the HUD/User interface (Techno chat), which is a shame.

It would appear they are more interested in catering for the DF server type than the hardcore full real type,  Maybe as to offer a direct alternative to WT.

I know people who have gone back to playing CLoD as its less 'gamey' than BoS/BoM.

But, its a business at the end of the day, and if this is the route they have to take to make money and for the game to progress, then so be it.

But i love that CLoD interface, no HUD or User interface options.....

[BlitzPig_EL]

Schuck,  In theory I agree with you as far as full difficulty goes, but to do that, we would have to have instrument panels that are as detailed, and as readable, as those in CLoD.

 

Currently we are not there yet.

[LLv34_Temuri]

Finnish VirtualPilots' old '46 server has had friendly-only icons in use. With that setting, you can do IFF and also sneak up to an enemy. I like that setting a lot, and I would like it to be possible in BoS.

 

In addition, I found this an interesting read http://coshacks.blogspot.fi/2016/03/why-icons-are-needed-in-combat-flight.html

[1Sascha]

Finnish VirtualPilots' old '46 server has had friendly-only icons in use. With that setting, you can do IFF and also sneak up to an enemy. I like that setting a lot, and I would like it to be possible in BoS.

 

In addition, I found this an interesting read http://coshacks.blogspot.fi/2016/03/why-icons-are-needed-in-combat-flight.html

Great article with some very valid points. Damn.. that thing sounds exactly like what I've been saying for years... :D

 

 

 

 

For an example of well working icons, take a look at World War 2 Online. See videos of the simulator to see how the icons work.

 

LOL.. yup. Can't get much better than WW2ONL's icons.

 

No "numbers", no lines of text. Just a circle to denote range, detection at around 2 - 3 km (grey icon), color/ID at much closer range (800m IIRC). And you need to keep them in your view to maintain the icon .. so despite having icons, this game does put quite a lot of emphasis on maintaining SA.

 

 

Your article? If so: What's your in-game name in WW2ONL .. and do you still play?

 

 

S.

Edited July 26, 2016 by 1Sascha

[KoN_]

War-thunder is FREE . 

 

BOS/M ....... has a big price Tag . Only the hardcore would pay that much at the start .

 

Most of my squad bought BOS in the sales . 

 

There is no shortage of players that want too play online games . 

 

Its not a dying genre .  

 

But hey its their train set . 

[1Sascha]

War-thunder is FREE . 

 

Well.. having played a "F2P"-game before (MW:O), I have a problem with calling those games "free". Yes, they are (on paper), but F2P is just another business-model. None of the developers of F2P-games are working out of the goodness of their hearts ..

 

I would hazard a guess that I've spent way more money in the 12 months or so of playing MW:O than I've spent on DCS and BoS combined - even if I go ahead as I plan and buy BoM and a couple more DCS modules.

 

 

There is no shortage of players that want too play online games . 

 

Its not a dying genre .  

 

My thoughts exactly. Flight sims and sims in general have been called "dying" since the 1990s now ... but they're still around for some reason. Just like there are still companies like Saitek (maybe?), CH Products, Thrustmaster, Naturalpoint or VKB who are making specialized flight-sim equipment.

 

It might be a niche market - especially once you move past the Warthunder/WoT-crowd - but it seems to be a pretty healthy niche.

 

And not to be diminishing the effect that games like WoT or WT have had on the market. If anything, they clearly demonstrate that people are still fascinated with the subjects of flight, (air-)combat and WW2. And the more recent success of BoS/BoM and the continued success of DCS seems to indicate that quite a few are looking for more than just WW2-themed first-person shooters set in the skies ..

 

 

 

S.

Edited July 26, 2016 by 1Sascha

[[CPT]milopugdog]

War-thunder is FREE .

 

BOS/M ....... has a big price Tag . Only the hardcore would pay that much at the start .

 

Most of my squad bought BOS in the sales .

 

There is no shortage of players that want too play online games .

 

Its not a dying genre .

 

But hey its their train set .

I played WT yesterday, flew an SBD. One match I went into a dive to bomb a heavy cruiser. I had a Ki-61 and a Ki-45 follow me into it. The 61 hit me and both our wings fell off, and the 45 couldn't pull out of the dive and went straight into the pacific.

10/10

[SharpeXB]

Finnish VirtualPilots' old '46 server has had friendly-only icons in use. With that setting, you can do IFF and also sneak up to an enemy. I like that setting a lot, and I would like it to be possible in BoS.

 

In addition, I found this an interesting read http://coshacks.blogspot.fi/2016/03/why-icons-are-needed-in-combat-flight.html

The author doesn't mention that there's a zoom view feature in every flight sim to address this very issue. And there just isn't a way to create a "realistic" icon. They're a fine game aid but once again they're just a legacy feature from the days of tiny low res screens. They just aren't needed as much today.

[LLv34_Temuri]

 

 

Your article? If so: What's your in-game name in WW2ONL .. and do you still play?

 

Not my article, was written by Cosmo of VLeLv Icebreakers.

[LLv34_Temuri]

The author doesn't mention that there's a zoom view feature in every flight sim to address this very issue. And there just isn't a way to create a "realistic" icon. They're a fine game aid but once again they're just a legacy feature from the days of tiny low res screens. They just aren't needed as much today.

Then again, how "realistic" is it that the pilot zooms around with "binoculars" to maintain SA?

[Dakpilot]

Then again, how "realistic" is it that the pilot zooms around with "binoculars" to maintain SA?

 

 

Not very at all, but one must remember that full zoomed in view is relevant/equivalent to normal vision, and zoomed out is what we have to use to get a decent field of view due to monitor and tech limitations

 

"binocular" is view is not cheating  just 'focussing' of course having to 'focus' one's eyes with a slider/buttons is very unrealistic

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[1Sascha]

Not my article, was written by Cosmo of VLeLv Icebreakers.

Hmm.. doesn't ring a bell. I do remember the Icebreakers from way back when in Warbirds, though. People like kossu, grendel or pjk come to mind. I've met a few of them at my own squad's Euro-Cons in Holland, but I never made it to the Mosquito Meeting, sadly..

 

 

 

 

"binocular" is view is not cheating

 

Well.. if your name is Geordi LaForge or Steve Austin ...

 

 

S.

Edited July 27, 2016 by 1Sascha

[LLv34_Temuri]

Hmm.. doesn't ring a bell. I do remember the Icebreakers from way back when in Warbirds, though. People like kossu, grendel or pjk come to mind. I've met a few of them at my own squad's Euro-Cons in Holland, but I never made it to the Mosquito Meeting, sadly..

This year's Mosquito Meeting will be in about two weeks in Hattuvaara, Ilomantsi, 11.-14.8. http://www.virtualpilots.fi/fi/feature/cons/mm2016/

 

There's still room

[SharpeXB]

Then again, how "realistic" is it that the pilot zooms around with "binoculars" to maintain SA?

Different sim. Same explaination. Since your monitor is at a fixed resolution, zoom view is the only way to simulate 20/20 vision.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2561114&postcount=221

[LLv34_Temuri]

Different sim. Same explaination. Since your monitor is at a fixed resolution, zoom view is the only way to simulate 20/20 vision.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2561114&postcount=221

The other way to simulate 20/20 vision is to use icons, if you can bear having them. That's why it would be good to have flexible options for icon use.

[SharpeXB]

The other way to simulate 20/20 vision is to use icons, if you can bear having them. That's why it would be good to have flexible options for icon use.

Icons make objects way too visible compared to reality. They're a fine game aid but if you want anything like realism they need to be off.

Just read any account of real air combat and that fact will be immediately apparent.

[1Sascha]

This year's Mosquito Meeting will be in about two weeks in Hattuvaara, Ilomantsi, 11.-14.8. http://www.virtualpilots.fi/fi/feature/cons/mm2016/

 

There's still room

Yeah, yeah.. just so you evil Finns can pump me full of FPO again... :D

 

 

 

 

 

Icons make objects way too visible compared to reality. They're a fine game aid but if you want anything like realism they need to be off.

 

Look at it this way: Icons simulate  a (RL) pilot's ability to spot, track and ID other planes in the sky. It's both part of simulating RL-events that can't be truly recreated in the comforts of your own home *and* a "crutch" to overcome technical limitations which still exist even today - as pointed out in that article linked further up.

 

We're sitting at our desks, staring at flat computer screens, not staring at a real sky. That's why you don't have to take out a loan every time you start up your virtual plane because it only burns "virtual" fuel ... not the real stuff. Or why you're not thrown out of your (RL) chair every time you fly your virtual plane inverted.

 

 

S.

[SharpeXB]

Look at it this way: Icons simulate a (RL) pilot's ability to spot, track and ID other planes in the sky.

A real pilot can't see and track other aircraft with as much certainty as icons provide. Unless maybe they're flying an F-35 with that $400k helmet.

For example in the real world two pilots could successfully attack a formation of 50 enemy planes. Sending the enemy into panic and chaos because they can't easily tell that they are being attacked by only two adversaries. With icons on such a situation would never work out like it does in reality. Where being outnumbered can actually be an advantage.

Edited July 27, 2016 by SharpeXB

[[CPT]milopugdog]

The only plane I've ever seen at the distance we do in IL-2 was a B-17. Other than that, my 20/20 vision hasn't done much. I once lost a plane right in front of me in the pattern. Sure it's a two seater private aircraft, but the dude was a white plane flying over trees in the summer.

[1Sascha]

That's a very good point. I've recently read of Battle of Britain pilots doing just that.

 

I'm not an icon person, but in fairness to the idea of customisable icons, I read it that some just want visibility assistance not friend or foe.

 

Again though, I like the no icons ability to hide against dark ground features, such as trees when you're trying to stay alive in an IL-2.

All of which would still be do-able with the right icon-settings.

 

If you lose color/ID on the icon at anything over, say 500 - 800m, you'll still have to maintain SA yourself.

 

If you lose the icon of a contact that you lost from your view/center of your view, you'll also have to maintain SA yourself.

 

Same goes for removal of the silly "pointers" and the ability to track planes that are "blocked" from your line of sight.

 

 

And I'll repeat myself again: This is not about removing any options that are currently in the game, it's about *adding* new options and more flexibility. And giving players more options to tailor the game and their experience to their own preference can only be a good thing. Forcing people to play either in arcade-mode or "full real" when it comes to icons is not a good thing.

 

Just like, say, adding the option to choose your own weapons-/fuel-loadout or convergence. How "realistic" is it to be able to fly with anything other than a full tank of gas or with convergence settings that are way shorter/longer than the standard harmonization-settings used on the real planes?

 

 

S.

[No601_Swallow]

 

And I'll repeat myself again: This is not about removing any options that are currently in the game, it's about *adding* new options and more flexibility. And giving players more options to tailor the game and their experience to their own preference can only be a good thing. Forcing people to play either in arcade-mode or "full real" when it comes to icons is not a good thing.

 

Very well put.

[ShamrockOneFive]

The reality is that nobody uses icons online in any of the flight sims today so I'm not sure what having options for them would add. Multiplayer and the Campaign are the only game modes where difficulty is enforced, otherwise in SP you can just switch them on and off at will by pressing "H"

All the populated servers in these games are running icons off. If there were all these icon choices, players wouldn't be able to agree on which to use so they'd all do what they do now which is the easiest thing to all agree on. Off

 

Icon options were a boon for IL-2. For years I played on UK-1 server where there was a custom icon set. Visibility was there for friendlies mostly so that newbie players wouldn't blow away their teammates and for coordination but visibility was very low for enemies. It was a balance of seeing the enemy for newer players and some rip roaring fun.

 

I haven't found that for IL-2: BoS/BoM.

 

I'm totally absolutely cool with the hardcore set. But it gets annoying having to explain that not everyone wants to play that way all the time.

[SharpeXB]

not everyone wants to play that way all the time.

Well looking at the servers which are most populated it appears that in fact everyone does want to play that way.

Icons were more important in the older games because of the insuficient monitor sizes and resolution back then. They are less important today.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

I went round and round with Sharpe last year on this. He believes that only the hardcore should play this game while the reality is for most do this is for fun. There are lots of dedicated hobbyists but there is a broader market and making entry to the sim FUN would broaden the base while bringing more people over to his style of play and increase the Expert numbers as well. His analysis boils down to what he sees currently - better numbers on Expert servers. What he fails to account for are the far larger numbers sitting on the sidelines. His opinion, however, will not be changed by anything said here and he has a right to his opinion.

 

Not everyone, in fact most people I suspect, want to fly for fifty minutes to either have no contacts or get smoked by the unseen bandit. Is that realistic? Of course it is. Is it fun? Not for most and I suspect it keeps many flyers on the SP side or shelving it altogether as opposed to joining a community on TS and playing together. No options is a sure fire way to keep the expert severs down to three serviceable ones with 20-70 pilots instead of a mixed bag of dozens of servers catering to a multitude of needs and being a feeder service to Expert play.

 

This makes the Expert servers a bit clique'ish and offputting to many for that reason in particular. In '46 there were hundreds of servers and probably too many options. On the other hand, one only need to look at WT to see icons on currently has THOUSANDS of players duking it out weekly. There are more reasons than icons for that but the overall ACCESSIBILITY is what fills the ranks. We should be seeking ways to make this game accessible because it is a far better experience than that thing over there. Let's face it. Doing well in this game is difficult. Even with icons on this game is really difficult for a newbie. I have increased my enjoyment exponentially by teaming up with three other decent fellows over comms. I might have drifted away if I was just lone wolfing it and getting my @$$ handed to me on a nightly basis.

 

Nonetheless, there should be more options on the server side. I don't want the individual pilot to necessarilly have the ability to change icons but the server options should be more customizable. Let's say an OFF, 4k, or 9k server side option. Keep everyone on a particular server on the same page. I'm sure there are pilots who enjoy or need the 9k for a variety of reasons.

 

I think the 72AG training site has it just about right. Icons but no HUD. If the distances were cut in half it would be perfect for the official Normal server on full size maps. It would make spotting more important and allow bounces to be set up successfully but also give the players the ability to track close targets.

 

In short, MY STYLE would be icons at 4-5 km and no HUD. There were lots of servers in the '46 set which operated within those parameters and I sought them out as a good balance between fun and tactics. But that's just me.

Edited July 30, 2016 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[SharpeXB]

It's not my opinion or choice. It's just a fact.

Right now there's about 70 people online playing without icons and 10 people with them.

If there were more icon choices then those 10 people would get split up onto more servers, each with their own options and about 5 players on each.

Meanwhile since having icons off doesn't involve any options for players to agree on, those servers would be full.

Flight sims are poorly attended online to begin with. Having more options just splits up an already small number of players.

 

For single player, the campaign doesn't allow custom settings since that difficulty level is tied to achievements, unlocks etc. There's only Normal and Expert. So custom icons wouldn't be usable in the campaign anyways.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Meanwhile since having icons off doesn't involve any options for players to agree on, those servers would be full.

 

And yet they are not either!?!

 

There is a gap in your logic.

 

And it (reduced icons) wouldn't change the numbers on the Normal servers at all as it would be the standard.

Edited July 31, 2016 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[SharpeXB]

I don't think everyone will ever be able to agree what icons should look like.

They all look the same when they're off though. So that's easy to agree on.

 

I'm surprised there aren't more "Normal" style servers. The reason why is probably just as you stated above. All the players who want that style of gameplay are on War Thunder.

[ShamrockOneFive]

Well looking at the servers which are most populated it appears that in fact everyone does want to play that way.

Icons were more important in the older games because of the insuficient monitor sizes and resolution back then. They are less important today.

 

Maybe there are other reasons.

 

But really... this is an easy one. Options are good.

Edited July 31, 2016 by ShamrockOneFive

[Rolling_Thunder]

As an HTC vive user I would like to see reduced icons. The current limitations of VR make the use of icons a necessity. As sharp said earlier in this thread icons are a legacy from older smaller resolution monitors. Well that's what we have with the current state of VR. I'm all for just a grey dot up to a certain distance for both friend and foe. I don't want to see names or distance, just a grey dot. There is no zoom/binocular use in VR you can't do it. It would help but, as it's not possible, it puts the VR users at a disadvantage in the world of just on or off. If the devs are serious about VR there needs to be options for icons, not just on or off.

[312_Tygr]

Finnish VirtualPilots' old '46 server has had friendly-only icons in use. With that setting, you can do IFF and also sneak up to an enemy. I like that setting a lot, and I would like it to be possible in BoS.

 

In addition, I found this an interesting read http://coshacks.blogspot.fi/2016/03/why-icons-are-needed-in-combat-flight.html

There's no reason for icons, ever. IFF becomes second nature in a short while. We've had one squadron member who transitioned from Warbirds to old Il-2 and always refused to fly without icons. He never learned IFF. Everybody else in the squadron has. In BoS it's very easy, based on a/c shapes. IFF was an issue in real war as well, having to guess and being uncertain sometimes makes for higher immersion, in my view.

[LLv34_Temuri]

There's no reason for icons, ever. IFF becomes second nature in a short while. We've had one squadron member who transitioned from Warbirds to old Il-2 and always refused to fly without icons. He never learned IFF. Everybody else in the squadron has. In BoS it's very easy, based on a/c shapes. IFF was an issue in real war as well, having to guess and being uncertain sometimes makes for higher immersion, in my view.

Did you read the article in the link?

[Muddy]

No he did not, or chose to ignore the info.

As I stated in another thread, those that do not want them seem to think that if they are changed they will be forced to use them.

Like the option will go away..

As a primarily single player guy, I play with and without icons as it's my game and I'll play how I want.

That said the current labels are too much!!

The discussion on whether or not I can use them in my own game is nobody's business,

When on line I have to play to the server rules and that's the way it is..

 

I really don't get why the so called Purests are so frightened of any change in Icons unless they too know a quality set of icons will bring more players online to those servers other than there hardcore ones.

Edited October 28, 2016 by Muddy

[Rolling_Thunder]

No he did not, or chose to ignore the info.

As I stated in another thread, those that do not want them seem to think that if they are changed they will be forced to use them.

Like the option will go away..

As a primarily single player guy, I play with and without icons as it's my game and I'll play how I want.

That said the current labels are too much!!

The discussion on whether or not I can use them in my own game is nobody's business,

When on line I have to play to the server rules and that's the way it is..

 

I really don't get why the so called Purests are so frightened of any change in Icons unless they too know a quality set of icons will bring more players online to those servers other than there hardcore ones.

 

Absolutely. Choice is a good thing, an important thing. Some folk are adamant that the no icon servers will stay the most populated so where is the problem if there is a choice of icon styles? That argument invalidates itself. Its an argument for the sake of arguing.  

[Sokol1]

The curious about this is:

 

Servers with icons/labels exist. But statistically most people don't want play in this servers - perhaps because consider the gameplay there too "dumb", how much icons/labels contribute to this? 

 

Anyway there's two things related to "icons": a dot, a * or something similar over planes - what can help Mr. Magoos seem then at distance.

 

And are this dumb labels - in some games telling plane model, their distance, and even their squadron, what really ruins the gameplay and visual experience.

 

In the above linked article the expert suggest even plane loadout in the label!!! 

 

                                            *

F-16XL - Lt. Maverick - 8th FS - 4xAIM-9X - 29NM    

 

Next steep is people begin for highlight silhouette of planes behind the clouds, terrain... after all this is common in Bf's and other "AAA" games. 

[Muddy]

I agree with what you say about (*) for me that would be fine under 5k with no side colour or range or anything at all really, but that is me,

The current full screen neon billboard with a big bright arrow from 10k is too much and drove me off line,

A small marker un coloured can easily be missed but will be visible under all resolutions where a single pixel plane could be invisible at 5k for some folks setups,

This is why the need for choice and configuration.

 

On a side note, the ugly icons we have now have made me play without, only real time I really miss them is after TO while forming up with AI so I can keep track of who really is following me to target, as they tend to wander off doing whatever they like lol.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

I really dont understand how some people are so ignorant to the request for custom icons!

 

I have been asking for ages for such a feature. It has nothing to do with realism so people on both camps should forget that notion!

 

The point for me at least is that I would like some flexibility in how I play this game. If I have time I will go on full real, if I want a quick blast I will go on normal. But the problem is there is nothing in the middle and the icons in normal i find to be a little too easy. I would like a more serious custom icon mode that maybe all icons are just a dot regardless of team or aircraft type or distance because that would be fun for me and suit my play.

 

ps type, colur, size, text, no text, visibility through cockpit..... would only add to things in a good way like in 1946

 

pps all u people that say it is about realism ...... well that is for u and good for you but there are others that want a slightly different experience so just give it a break !!!!!! Play ur server and be happy!!!!! Some of us would like a little more variation!!!! 

Edited October 28, 2016 by AeroAce

[Rolling_Thunder]

I dont understand the "I don't want options so there shouldn't be any" mindset. It certainly is a head scratcher to be sure.