CloD hud graphic would be nice.

[Sokol1]

I too really like the "analogue" sliders in CloD - an elegant solution to the problem that it's sometimes quite hard to guage the true positions of the quadrant levers by looking at them from the 1st person perspective in the cockpit, particularly the radiator (water and oil) controls. It was lovely to get away from barking percentages of throttle and pitch at squadmates and instead get used to reading boost, rpm, ata, etc levels. Lovely, and I'd welcome the inclusion of a similar system in BoS.

 

+1 (as option).

 

Why we need "digits" ?

 

http://i39.tinypic.com/dn29s9.jpg

(Well aid read "ambient temp").

 

Sokol1

Edited December 2, 2013 by Sokol1

[ACG_Kraut]

No huds for me anyway.

 

HUDs are for players of that other flying game  

[FuriousMeow]

First of all, alpha - this isn't anywhere close to the final product. So we could have what is currently there, gauges, sliders, or komodo dragons that spit flames.

 

Obviously not the last, but it's just to get everyone oriented and is a placeholder. RoF has gauges in place, so clearly this isn't the final HUD graphic.

Edited December 2, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[BigC208]

Only thing I realy miss in a hud is a turn and bank indicator. In a real aircraft you feel, by the seat of your pants, that you're skidding or slipping.

In a sim you have to look down at the gauge to see f you're flying coordinated. As the aerodynamics get better simulated with each sim so are the penalties for

not flying coordinated. I would like to see a small T&B indicator somewhere in my normall line of sight.

[FuriousMeow]

With open cockpits, you get audio feedback!

 

But I understand what you're saying, and it makes sense to add that to the HUD line up and being able to enable/disable it separately from the rest of the HUD icons.

[-MG-Cacti4-6]

With open cockpits, you get audio feedback!

 

But I understand what you're saying, and it makes sense to add that to the HUD line up and being able to enable/disable it separately from the rest of the HUD icons.

on this note: can i just say how ecstatic i am that when i lean outside the pit with my track ir, i cant hear a dang thing. 

 

you may now return to your regularly scheduled thread

[LukeFF]

Ability to change HUD info between KM/meters and Miles/Foot is another need, for "non-metric" people (not my case).

 

You can already do that.

[thx1138]

No huds for me anyway.

 

HUDs are for players of that other flying game  

 

 

Your my hero

[Marrond]

To be honest I prefer this HUD over CloD's or RoF's. It's simple, clean and very readable without covering precious screen space. I wouldn't mind if they changed it for RoF style, or CloD style as long as this one would be still present. There's no immersion breaking for me with it since I accept this as compromise to compensate current display technology limitations. When I switch to Oculus Rift HD I MAYBE won't need to use HUD since I will be able to naturaly look arround the cockpit that now is somewhat limited even with TrackIR.

 

If anything I would add more details (preferably toggleable) to current HUD since some informations are missing and you still have to look arround the cockpit to make sure in what position certain lever actualy is.

 

If I will be able to run BoS in UltraHD then I propably wouldn't mind getting rid of HUD entirely. As it is 1920x1080 doesn't provide view crisp enough to check readings in a blink of an eye without zooming in.

[-MG-Cacti4-6]

? I'm wearing glasses/contact lenses and have no problems whatsoever reading essential data from my dials in "no" time. Apart from figuring out the brain-teasing cyrillic typos, 1920x1080 is fine enough for me on a 24" ASUS VH-242. I wonder what real life veteran fighter pilots of back then would say about crisp graphics, considering a real life, trembling, vibrating, cramped fighter plane cockpit of back in the days... ;-)

 

same. maybe its his graphics card er somthin. I CANT WAIT to see this game with my new 7870 and 27" monitor...hoooo man.....

 

i just wish new egg would hurry up and send the stoopid monitor out...rush processing my butt

 

[dburne]

 

same. maybe its his graphics card er somthin. I CANT WAIT to see this game with my new 7870 and 27" monitor...hoooo man.....

 

i just wish new egg would hurry up and send the stoopid monitor out...rush processing my butt

 

 

Which 27" monitor did you go with?

[-MG-Cacti4-6]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824160168

 

got it for 180 yesterday

[dburne]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824160168

 

got it for 180 yesterday

 

Thanks, I will be curious to know how you like it when you get it going.

 

I will be doing a new build the week of the 16th, and am contemplating getting a new monitor as the one I use as secondary is on the fritz...

 

Now back to regularly scheduled programming... 

[6S.Manu]

I too really like the "analogue" sliders in CloD - an elegant solution to the problem that it's sometimes quite hard to guage the true positions of the quadrant levers by looking at them from the 1st person perspective in the cockpit, particularly the radiator (water and oil) controls. It was lovely to get away from barking percentages of throttle and pitch at squadmates and instead get used to reading boost, rpm, ata, etc levels. Lovely, and I'd welcome the inclusion of a similar system in BoS.

 

People often claim icons are an immersion breaker. Personally, I always felt those numbers were more so (and that goes for the "HUD" now).. The little lever graphic is far less intrusive somehow!

[Flyingpencil]

One thing I do like about CLoD is the hud graphic in the lower left corner.  If ya gotta have one that is a nice one.  I like the look of a slider than just numbers.

 

Huds for NOOBS.

[Bearcat]

 

How about no Hud at all and we use the in game devices and gauges?  Its 2013, everyone should know what their controls are doing by now.

 

Why eliminate the option to set it server side?

 

better idea, allow an option for users to have it enabled or not. that way if you dont want to use it, you dont have to. but if there are folks out there that want to use it, they have the option to

 

At least..

 

 

For me the perfect solution would be to allow the gauges to be exported to a third party program that could be displayed on a second monitor. I guess I must be getting a bit decrepit, but the guages are hard to read.

 

In the original IL-2 we had device link, and other sims have similar functionality. Exporting of the values can be restricted to what was historical displayed in each aircrafts cockpit so there can be no whining about cheating and it would give all the people who invested in SimPits a chance to play.

 

That is another solution... having the option to do HUD or no HUD and a devicelink equivalent as well is IMO the best solution.

[Dutch]

There is no such thing as 'a nice HuD', when we are discussing a game set in the 1940s.

 

In 1942, there were no 'HuDs'

 

If you are looking for 'HuDs' and 'target locks', you are looking for a game, not a simulator.

 

Cliffs of Dover made a great mistake in this respect. Anyone could customise their own info windows to show whatever they liked. Mistake.

 

Maybe someday the blokes who develop this stuff will realise the distinction. I hope so.

[FuriousMeow]

I hope that they continue to provide aids and assistance to those who need it or want it, and to bring in new individuals from the easier flying combat games to keep this genre alive.

 

I'm fully capable of playing the game with everything switched off and just the cockpit in front of me, and a kneeboard map. Many aren't, even if they have years of experience their eyesight might be failing them now so they need icons or assistance there.

 

For the sake of this genre, the sake of retaining true simulators, I hope that the aids never go away. I never want to end up doing what some do with EAW, still holding onto old technology with awful FM/DM/graphics because that's all that is left.

[Flyingpencil]

I hope that they continue to provide aids and assistance to those who need it or want it, and to bring in new individuals from the easier flying combat games to keep this genre alive.

 

I'm fully capable of playing the game with everything switched off and just the cockpit in front of me, and a kneeboard map. Many aren't, even if they have years of experience their eyesight might be failing them now so they need icons or assistance there.

 

For the sake of this genre, the sake of retaining true simulators, I hope that the aids never go away. I never want to end up doing what some do with EAW, still holding onto old technology with awful FM/DM/graphics because that's all that is left.

 

I agree, thus I said HUD fo Noobs!

I am all for new players haveing all the aids until they get experinace, but then at a point it should be limited (could be for FRB, or pay $$ for, or some other method).

[FuriousMeow]

Those items can be locked server side. I don't understand why there is an even an issue on that point. Servers dictate difficulty settings, and not surprisingly the hud is one of them. So are icons, and a whole host of items.

 

Honestly, this "noobs" thing because some like HUDs or icons is ridiculous. Paying money for HUD? That's a new one, and scary. I don't suppose your first flying game was War Thunder?

[Dutch]

I hope that they continue to provide aids and assistance to keep this genre alive.

 

For the sake of retaining true simulators, I hope that the aids never go away.

For...the...sake...of.....'True Simulators'...... you hope that the..... 'aids never go away'

 

I have never before witnessed such unadulterated self contradictory sycophantic clap-trap in all my forum years.

[FuriousMeow]

For...the...sake...of.....'True Simulators'...... you hope that the..... 'aids never go away'

 

I have never before witnessed such unadulterated self contradictory sycophantic clap-trap in all my forum years.

 

Wow. You truly captured the true nature of yourself there.True simulators will die without the sales to those who would like to eventually get that far to enjoy the ful totality of it. But you are too self absorbed to realise that. I salute you for being so far up your tailside you're enjoying breakfast twice.

Edited December 4, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[Dutch]

Wow. You truly captured the true nature of yourself there.True simulators will die without the sales to those who would like to eventually get that far to enjoy the ful totality of it. But you are too self absorbed to realise that. I salute you for being so far up your tailside you're enjoying breakfast twice.

 

Hmmm... must've touched a nerve there. Wonder why?

[Flyingpencil]

For...the...sake...of.....'True Simulators'...... you hope that the..... 'aids never go away'

 

I have never before witnessed such unadulterated self contradictory sycophantic clap-trap in all my forum years.

 

Wow. You truly captured the true nature of yourself there.True simulators will die without the sales to those who would like to eventually get that far to enjoy the ful totality of it. But you are too self absorbed to realise that. I salute you for being so far up your tailside you're enjoying breakfast twice.

 

No, he is right.  The most hard core players will stick with a sim/game for years.  BoS must offer that ability especially since we pay good money on a high realism product.

 

OTOH, we do need to cater to the up and comming players too.  Yes, server side controls are great, but the big problem with WT is everyone keeps playing Arcade and RB, their is no push off easymode.

 

I know friends who still play WW2Online becuase, despite its age, it has minimal HUD, and there was a huge bitch fest when the Rats added ammo counters becuase it broke with reality.  Personally I hated the IL-2 and CloD markers, but I tolderated them.

Edited December 4, 2013 by Flyingpencil

[LukeFF]

There is no such thing as 'a nice HuD', when we are discussing a game set in the 1940s.

 

In 1942, there were no 'HuDs'

 

There was also no "refly" button in 1940's airplanes, but we seem to accept that just fine.

 

Pilots couldn't pause their mission so they could go answer the phone or use the toilet back in the 1940s, but I've never seen that be an issue with virtual pilots these days.

 

Pilots couldn't choose where, when, and what aircraft they could fly in the 1940s, but that doesn't seem to be a bother these days.

 

Pilots couldn't fly their missions from the comfort of their home back in the 1940,s but I've not heard any complaints about that from sim pilots.

[FuriousMeow]

No, he is right.  The most hard core players will stick with a sim/game for years.  BoS must offer that ability especially since we pay good money on a high realism product.

 

OTOH, we do need to cater to the up and comming players too.  Yes, server side controls are great, but the big problem with WT is everyone keeps playing Arcade and RB, their is no push off easymode.

 

I know friends who still play WW2Online becuase, despite its age, it has minimal HUD, and there was a huge bitch fest when the Rats added ammo counters becuase it broke with reality.  Personally I hated the IL-2 and CloD markers, but I tolderated them.

 

I don't even know what you are talking about. Forcing people to play with settings is not what the game is there for, the game is there for those to enjoy. And if you want certain settings, then play the server with those settings. Play those wars with those settings. There is no point to forcing people, because they will do one of two things - not buy the game, or leave the game.

 

I've been around since Confirmed Kill v.93, I know that the elitests who run around and say that full real/full hardcore/full whatever think it's the only way to play the game are few and far between. I'll see you on those servers that restrict everything down to the cockpit and the map, but I won't tell anyone else that is the only way to play and restricting it to only that or forcing people to play on that way will see this game, and any game, fail. No one will buy a game without scalable options, and it's no coincidence that only a handful of people will say that - because they are the few and they aren't enough to make this game profitable so that the developers would even consider making a title like this.

 

Even DCS has scalable options for difficulty, so apparently I'm right.

Edited December 4, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[Flyingpencil]

 There is no point to forcing people, because they will do one of two things - not buy the game, or leave the game.

 

Ah, but you missed what I said.

Players stayed becuase they did not all the HUD candy.

 

I also said what you said, scalable, but with strong incentive to go lean as they learn the game.  We could have more then one environment like WT.

[Dutch]

Even DCS has scalable options for difficulty, so apparently I'm right.

 

Eh? Since when were DCS the oracle of all knowledge? But apparently, you are correct. DCS said so. Eh?

[siipperi]

No one will buy a game without scalable options, and it's no coincidence that only a handful of people will say that

 

 

From my experience almost 100% realism servers have been always the most popular, atleast for past few years. Normally those servers only accept 3rd person which is nice eye candy for pics.

 

 

 

About the topic. Why not just use the excellent HUD we have in the plane?   You learn pretty quickly to read it (by sound, feel and just looking) and it's FAR more enjoyable and immersive than looking at artificial UI/HUD.

[Bearcat]

There is no such thing as 'a nice HuD', when we are discussing a game set in the 1940s. In 1942, there were no 'HuDs'

If you are looking for 'HuDs' and 'target locks', you are looking for a game, not a simulator.

Cliffs of Dover made a great mistake in this respect. Anyone could customise their own info windows to show whatever they liked. Mistake.

Maybe someday the blokes who develop this stuff will realise the distinction. I hope so.

 

Yes but is that set server side online? If not that is indeed a bad move.. sort of like CFS was.. but if it can be set server side then what is the problem? I ask because I have never flown CoD online.

 

Those items can be locked server side. I don't understand why there is an even an issue on that point. Servers dictate difficulty settings, and not surprisingly the hud is one of them. So are icons, and a whole host of items.

Honestly, this "noobs" thing because some like HUDs or icons is ridiculous. Paying money for HUD? That's a new one, and scary. I don't suppose your first flying game was War Thunder?

 

Exactly.. I could never understand why some people are so dead set against having options. Believe me.. if ever there is a hardcore sim released that does not have scalable options as far as aids go.. it will be short lived. The sims that last are the ones than can appeal to a wide variety of simmers who can grow with the sim and increase the challenges they face all within the same sim over a period of time.

 

For...the...sake...of.....'True Simulators'...... you hope that the..... 'aids never go away'

I have never before witnessed such unadulterated self contradictory sycophantic clap-trap in all my forum years.

 

... well then you obviously don't read your own posts... 

 

True simulators will die without the sales to those who would like to eventually get that far to enjoy the ful totality of it.

 

I agree 100%.

 

I don't even know what you are talking about. Forcing people to play with settings is not what the game is there for, the game is there for those to enjoy. And if you want certain settings, then play the server with those settings. Play those wars with those settings. There is no point to forcing people, because they will do one of two things - not buy the game, or leave the game.

 

I've been around since Confirmed Kill v.93, I know that the elitests who run around and say that full real/full hardcore/full whatever think it's the only way to play the game are few and far between. I'll see you on those servers that restrict everything down to the cockpit and the map, but I won't tell anyone else that is the only way to play and restricting it to only that or forcing people to play on that way will see this game, and any game, fail. No one will buy a game without scalable options, and it's no coincidence that only a handful of people will say that - because they are the few and they aren't enough to make this game profitable so that the developers would even consider making a title like this.

Even DCS has scalable options for difficulty, so apparently I'm right.

 

+1 ...

 

From my experience almost 100% realism servers have been always the most popular, atleast for past few years. Normally those servers only accept 3rd person which is nice eye candy for pics.

About the topic. Why not just use the excellent HUD we have in the plane?   You learn pretty quickly to read it (by sound, feel and just looking) and it's FAR more enjoyable and immersive than looking at artificial UI/HUD.

 

Almost 100% realism servers are not 100% like Dutch is saying ...

 

Uh-huh. And do you fly with icons on, with an invisible cockpit, with 'target lock' enabled, and then come here telling us what 'True Flight Simulators' are for??

Just interested. But only slightly.

 

.... ... do you work at this.. or does it just come natural?

[6S.Manu]

I'm starting to hate this community.

 

Why is some people do not understand that being in a virtual cockpit is totally different from being in a real one? When do they understand that a PC screen gives far less infos that the human eyes?

They want a True Simulator where to touch your balls you have to look at them.
Sliders are needed since there are things that you can check by hands, as the many levels on a Lagg: just think to youself driving your car... do you need to look at the shifter to understand which gear is engaged?

No cockpit, auto CEM, assisted Aim and easy FM are aid for newbies (I hate the word "noob", it has a offensive meaning), but minimal onscreen gauges, sliders and "some kind" of icons are needed to have your True Simulator.

Simply those IL2's "100% realism servers" are instead "100% difficulty servers": the degree of realism is not directly proportional to the difficulty. You see this also in racing sims like iRacing and Assetto Corsa. The latter seems easier because it's more realistic.

Edited December 4, 2013 by 6S.Manu

[Bearcat]

I'm starting to hate this community.

 

Why is some people do not understand that being in a virtual cockpit is totally different from being in a real one? When do they understand that a PC screen gives far less infos that the human eyes?

 

They want a True Simulator where to touch your balls you have to look at them.

Sliders are needed since there are things that you can check by hands, as the many levels on a Lagg: just think to youself driving your car... do you need to look at the shifter to understand which gear is engaged?

 

No cockpit, auto CEM, assisted Aim and easy FM are aid for newbies (I hate the word "noob", it has a offensive meaning), but minimal onscreen gauges, sliders and "some kind" of icons are needed to have your True Simulator.

 

Simply those IL2's "100% realism servers" are instead "100% difficulty servers": the degree of realism is not directly proportional to the difficulty. You see this also in racing sims like iRacing and Assetto Corsa. The latter seems easier because it's more realistic.

 

Well heck don't do that .. it's like hating a girl because of her @hole.. .. What about the hands and feet and other parts ...

 

I agree with that last statement 100%.

[BraveSirRobin]

Banning HUD from the most realistic servers is just silly.  Most of the players using HUD probably have poor eyesight and should be easier to bounce.  

[Volkoff]

Banning HUD from the most realistic servers is just silly.  Most of the players using HUD probably have poor eyesight and should be easier to bounce.  

 

+1 I think it is best to allow persons to enjoy their multiplayer experience with the help of a HUD, if they want or need the HUD. I can always turn off the HUD and I will turn off the HUD, but that doesn't mean that other players should not be able to enjoy playing on the same server that I am playing on, if they have trouble reading the in plane 3D instruments.   MJ

[Sparrer]

S!

I too really like the "analogue" sliders in CloD - an elegant solution to the problem that it's sometimes quite hard to guage the true positions of the quadrant levers by looking at them from the 1st person perspective in the cockpit, particularly the radiator (water and oil) controls. It was lovely to get away from barking percentages of throttle and pitch at squadmates and instead get used to reading boost, rpm, ata, etc levels. Lovely, and I'd welcome the inclusion of a similar system in BoS.

 

People often claim icons are an immersion breaker. Personally, I always felt those numbers were more so (and that goes for the "HUD" now).. The little lever graphic is far less intrusive somehow!

 

 

I'm starting to hate this community.

 

Why is some people do not understand that being in a virtual cockpit is totally different from being in a real one? When do they understand that a PC screen gives far less infos that the human eyes?

They want a True Simulator where to touch your balls you have to look at them.
Sliders are needed since there are things that you can check by hands, as the many levels on a Lagg: just think to youself driving your car... do you need to look at the shifter to understand which gear is engaged?

No cockpit, auto CEM, assisted Aim and easy FM are aid for newbies (I hate the word "noob", it has a offensive meaning), but minimal onscreen gauges, sliders and "some kind" of icons are needed to have your True Simulator.

Simply those IL2's "100% realism servers" are instead "100% difficulty servers": the degree of realism is not directly proportional to the difficulty. You see this also in racing sims like iRacing and Assetto Corsa. The latter seems easier because it's more realistic.

 

 

Totally agree with both.

The "HUD" it's necessary because you can't see like in a real cockpit (peripheral view) and you can't feel it too.

So we need to replace some lost senses (touching and viewing) by the direct view.

Adding the % of  throttle, mixture and prop pitch isn't a replacement but an ease.

They should be represented, only this.

Even most of modern jets with their HUD don't have the throttle % . Why in an old crap plane sim it's necessary ?

Every non instrumental data showed in HUD is an ease....so they could be limited.

[Sokol1]

 

 

In 1942, there were no 'HuDs'

 

Mmm, no. "proof" - old picture of LaGG-33 prototype, with HUD in properly place.

 

 

Is toggleable.

 

 

 

Even most of modern jets with their HUD don't have the throttle % .

 

BTW - LaGG (analog) PP indicator is not in %?

 

Calling difficult settings of "realism" is the most idiot thing even done in flight "simulators". OM "invention"...

 

Sokol1

 

Edited December 4, 2013 by Sokol1

[-MG-Cacti4-6]

 

 

Mmm, no. "proof" - old picture of LaGG-33 prototype, with HUD in properly place.

 

 

Sokol1

 

 

how can you tell when you haz a missle lock?!  

[Fifi]

As far as we always can turn it off, HUD is a good thing for those who get troubles with incockpit gauges and levers.

 

But i'd rather re-name the topic "CloD cockpit graphics would be nice"  IMHO 

[DocSnyder]

How about no Hud at all and we use the in game devices and gauges?  Its 2013, everyone should know what their controls are doing by now.

 

How about adding real life intuition, realistic sensation of flying an actual aircraft, blind control of levers, buttons, wheels while simulating not only the reaction of the device itself but the plane and it's virtual enviroment?

 

Please think before demanding ridiculous "features", believing it would be "realistic" or just simply some sort of pro gaming.

 

As long as a simulation can't simulate the feeling and intuition of flying a "real" plane there's plenty of room for virtual indicators. If you don't want them -> disable it. Quite easy ... isn't it?

 

No - it's not. Cause what you propably want is dominating people on "equal" terms in multiplayer battles. But some people (me for example) need / want indicators, at least minimalistic indicators. So ... why exactly should we not have a HUD - whatever kind of - just because some multiplayer jokeys think it's "noobish"? Cause obviously you would be able to disable it for yourself - if that makes this simulation more "simulation like" for you. Do you fear a disadvantage? And than again - how could anyone possibly write people who use virtual indicators in a simulation want to play a arcade game, while at the same moment they are craving for multiplayer FFA arenas, jumping on the 109F train and bullying anyone who disagrees with a - let's face it - dumb statement?

Edited December 4, 2013 by DocSnyder

[Sokol1]

But i'd rather re-name the topic "CloD cockpit graphics would be nice"  IMHO 

 

In fact if topic name are something like "What about a analog HUD, with sliders for throttle, pp, mix..."

would be better received and discussed, but as mention the "unmentionable" game = "ego war".

 

BTW - Since this actual HUD is placehold, hope that final one have transparent (at least adjustable) background, showing only digits, like War Thunder, il-2:'46...

This "MP3" style is ugly.

 

Sokol1

Edited December 5, 2013 by Sokol1