Jump to content
Lord_Flashheart

How the current contact visibility negatively impact tactics in BOX

Recommended Posts

I do think it's a shame that we need to use zoom for view. I very much doubt most pilots had a pair of binos around their neck, but I would be totally lost in BoX without the aid of zoom.

Zoom is fine, it's not so much a way to make distant objects appear closer as it is an attempt to simulate the mk1 eyeball's ability to zero in and focus on something in normal life, which is something that doesn't translate to a flat screen in the same way.

 

And, not to get too dragged off-topic but having a simulated pair of binoculars for actual distance viewing would be great and useful for close air support and ground attack pilots to allow them to observe the situation on the ground better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither of those docs make your case. What exactly is your experience? You need to support your argument better than this to convince me my direct experience is to the contrary because I'm telling you locating aircraft, particularly at co-alt or lower can be extremely difficult and similar to in-game. Above the horizon (such as the bus example in your doc - at the end of a runway looking for an aircraft on approach) or above co-alt can be easier than in game but not always.

 

With all due respect, those documents do make his case.

 

I've ALWAYS held the opinion that picking up traffic IRL was waaaay easier than BoX. Requiem has heard me complain on TS about this for years. The airplanes in BoX blend in with the background too well. I think you would agree that IRL the greater the relative movement of a target against the background the easier the target is to detect. Or against a solid background with contrast. I'm not disputing your RL experience (and it does qualify as anecdotal evidence as does my experience). IRL these days flying a slow moving airplane whilst looking for slow moving traffic against an urban background is a BIG challenge for me, less so when the target has a high line of sight change.

 

Fenris_Wolf I share the OP's opinion. Ignore him at your discretion. You have validated his opinion of the forumites. His argument strikes a chord with this former fighter pilot, current glider tow pilot.

Edited by busdriver
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all due respect, those documents do make his case.

 

I've ALWAYS held the opinion that picking up traffic IRL was waaaay easier than BoX. Requiem has heard me complain on TS about this for years. The airplanes in BoX blend in with the background too well. I think you would agree that IRL the greater the relative movement of a target against the background the easier the target is to detect. Or against a solid background with contrast. I'm not disputing your RL experience (and it does qualify as anecdotal evidence as does my experience). IRL these days flying a slow moving airplane whilst looking for slow moving traffic against an urban background is a BIG challenge for me, less so when the target has a high line of sight change.

 

Fenris_Wolf I share the OP's opinion. Ignore him at your discretion. You have validated his opinion of the forumites. His argument strikes a chord with this former fighter pilot, current glider tow pilot.

With your flying experience, no wonder you are an excellent RL spotter. Spotting on the screen is a different animal and you need to re-learn. DCS mushes up plane silhouette and the ground in a very bad way. BoX not so much. Especially when you remove AA filtering. Check your GFX settings. They very much affect spotting. Give it a try. Spotting in BoX I find still difficult and far from perfect, but you can learn it.

 

1zzhuw.jpg

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This video has a couple of good shots of distant aircraft silhouettes, and quite a few good example of airplanes against backdrop of some sort. The Camera zooms in and out in alot of shots, but there are still a good number of shot where you can see the contrast of aircraft in profile if not necessarily a zoomed out perspective etc. Aircraft here generally stand out alot better than in BOX. They sort of "pop" out against the terrain. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Busdriver,

 

Again, I'm not saying spotting shouldn't be improved in the game. It should.

 

You may naturally be gifted at spotting. One of the documents above alludes to this possiblilty. You should remember you went through extensive training, built scanning regimens and have real world experience based upon that training. This colors your opinion greatly about the relative ease of real world spotting.

 

I don't have a problem with either of those things. What I do have a problem with is the average sim jockey stating emphatically that something is one way without the expertise to make that statement. I believe you have TM'd the One G Comfy Chair moniker. Spotting in real life is hard. It is different for all of the reasons Zach, and Dak and I stated. None of this has even touched on the added difficulties of atmospheric effects on spotting - of which there are many. There are tens of thousands of dead young men and women from both the wartime and civil sectors who cannot chime in about this as they paid the ultimate price and because spotting is difficult.............

 

The game may be hard, it may be harder than real life, it should probably be improved but none of that makes spotting in the real world easy.


This video has a couple of good shots of distant aircraft silhouettes, and quite a few good example of airplanes against backdrop of some sort. The Camera zooms in and out in alot of shots, but there are still a good number of shot where you can see the contrast of aircraft in profile if not necessarily a zoomed out perspective etc. Aircraft here generally stand out alot better than in BOX. They sort of "pop" out against the terrain. 

 

All of those AC are low pro grey, two to three times bigger than anything you face online, against emerald green backgrounds and clear sky above the relative horizon, at a few hundred yards to inside of three miles. Of course they are easy to spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Busdriver,

 

Again, I'm not saying spotting shouldn't be improved in the game. It should.

 

You may naturally be gifted at spotting. One of the documents above alludes to this possiblilty. You should remember you went through extensive training, built scanning regimens and have real world experience based upon that training. This colors your opinion greatly about the relative ease of real world spotting.

 

I don't have a problem with either of those things. What I do have a problem with is the average sim jockey stating emphatically that something is one way without the expertise to make that statement. I believe you have TM'd the One G Comfy Chair moniker. Spotting in real life is hard. It is different for all of the reasons Zach, and Dak and I stated. None of this has even touched on the added difficulties of atmospheric effects on spotting - of which there are many. There are tens of thousands of dead young men and women from both the wartime and civil sectors who cannot chime in about this as they paid the ultimate price and because spotting is difficult.............

 

The game may be hard, it may be harder than real life, it should probably be improved but none of that makes spotting in the real world easy.

All of those AC are low pro grey, two to three times bigger than anything you face online, against emerald green backgrounds and clear sky above the relative horizon, at a few hundred yards to inside of three miles. Of course they are easy to spot.

Yes, they are grey. Many aircraft in BOX are too. Yes, they are bigger, but like I said I didnt post that for pure distance comparison. And my original point is focuses not on spotting at ranges beyond 3 miles but well inside of that. In fact, inside of 3 miles is where one of the documents I posted specifically shows spotting should become easier due to FOV. The whole point of this topic is that spotting at moderate to short ranges is too difficult. That video merely shows how much better aircraft contrast IRL than they do in games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm off to bed. I have to rest my eyes to get them ready to do a ton of spotting from dusk until people start their morning routines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spotting on the screen is a different animal and you need to re-learn....Especially when you remove AA filtering. Check your GFX settings. They very much affect spotting. Give it a try. Spotting in BoX I find still difficult and far from perfect, but you can learn it.

 

Zach...BoX isn't my first 1G Comfy Chair Fighter Pilot experience. I sit at arm's length in front of a 42" LED TV. Requiem is my Free Tech Support For LifeTM and he helped me optimize the graphics. It is what it is for me.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zoom is fine, it's not so much a way to make distant objects appear closer as it is an attempt to simulate the mk1 eyeball's ability to zero in and focus on something in normal life, which is something that doesn't translate to a flat screen in the same way.

 

And, not to get too dragged off-topic but having a simulated pair of binoculars for actual distance viewing would be great and useful for close air support and ground attack pilots to allow them to observe the situation on the ground better.

Zoom being "fine" or "unrealistic" depends heavily on display size.

 

People running large monitors are able to make objects appear much larger than they would be to the eye in real life. Just compare the size of the components in the cockpit when zoomed in to their actual sizes.

 

On some setups it's fine. On others, the targeting reticle is the size of a human head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God I wish I still had the video of the time I was landing at Logan airport (Boston, MA, USA, as a passenger) and videotaping a C-130 landing parallel when the pilot apparently noticed him and jerked the aircraft suddenly. Nearly [Edited] my pants, and he didn't say anything besides "apologies for the rough approach folks" but I'm convinced that big camouflaged aircraft suddenly popped out at him. It was landing on a parallel runway just a bit ahead of us and probably scared the crap out of him. No point to be made, but it was an interesting experience relevant to this conversation.

Alas I moved to a work phone years ago and ditched my personal phone within thinking about the years of pics and videos like this I didn't save!

Edited by Bearcat
Profanity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem with either of those things. What I do have a problem with is the average sim jockey stating emphatically that something is one way without the expertise to make that statement. I believe you have TM'd the One G Comfy Chair moniker. Spotting in real life is hard. It is different for all of the reasons Zach, and Dak and I stated. None of this has even touched on the added difficulties of atmospheric effects on spotting - of which there are many. There are tens of thousands of dead young men and women from both the wartime and civil sectors who cannot chime in about this as they paid the ultimate price and because spotting is difficult....

 

The game may be hard, it may be harder than real life, it should probably be improved but none of that makes spotting in the real world easy.

All of those AC are low pro grey, two to three times bigger than anything you face online, against emerald green backgrounds and clear sky above the relative horizon, at a few hundred yards to inside of three miles. Of course they are easy to spot.

 

Apparently you and I are reading two distinctly different posts by Fumes. I could have sworn he was positing that RL visual acquisition is EASIER than BoX. I did not infer nor did he imply that RL is easy. Nor did I for that matter.

 

If you prefer, assign whatever varying degree of difficulty to RL spotting you wish (sometimes easy...sometimes a bitch). Then for me (and apparently Fumes) increase that difficulty many times over in BoX. You, Dak, and the glider pilots find BoX easier than RL...okay...that's your in game advantage. That's all.

 

WRT to the video, I don't recall the details, but scientists have determined that beyond XXX distance we only see airplanes as dark dots, as the distance decreases we discern shape, followed by color.

Edited by busdriver
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God I wish I still had the video of the time I was landing at Logan airport (Boston, MA, USA, as a passenger) and videotaping a C-130 landing parallel when the pilot apparently noticed him and jerked the aircraft suddenly. Nearly shit my pants, and he didn't say anything besides "apologies for the rough approach folks" but I'm convinced that big camouflaged aircraft suddenly popped out at him. It was landing on a parallel runway just a bit ahead of us and probably scared the crap out of him. No point to be made, but it was an interesting experience relevant to this conversation.

 

Alas I moved to a work phone years ago and ditched my personal phone within thinking about the years of pics and videos like this I didn't save!

 

If you were shooting video with your phone the airplane (if an airliner) probably had TCAS which would have provided bearing and altitude difference of the 130. ATC (Approach or Tower) probably informed your pilots of the 130 if you were VMC. I've clicked off the autopilot on one or two occasions only to find the AP had not trimmed out all the yoke pressure. Or if the autopilot is flying the approach (even on a clear day) and a taxiing airplane or vehicle blocks the ILS signal the autopilot can make an ugly unexpected control input or simply drift off course or glidepath. The pilot has to grab the controls to counteract. 

Edited by busdriver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you were shooting video with your phone the airplane (if an airliner) probably had TCAS which would have provided bearing and altitude difference of the 130. ATC (Approach or Tower) probably informed your pilots of the 130 if you were VMC. I've clicked off the autopilot on one or two occasions only to find the AP had not trimmed out all the yoke pressure. Or if the autopilot is flying the approach (even on a clear day) and a taxiing airplane or vehicle blocks the ILS signal the autopilot can make an ugly unexpected control input or simply drift off course or glidepath. The pilot has to grab the controls to counteract.

I was a passenger using a cellphone yeah. You're probably right and it was just something small like that, but damn if it didn't scare me. I can't imagine the pilot wasn't made aware of the parallel approach, but on that note, I've never seen two aircraft land parallel like that before (at a major civ airport).

 

I started recorded as soon as I saw the Herc and kept getting more and more excited as it dropped flaps and gear with us and kept on approach, then the aforementioned scary twitch, followed by an awesome shot as we landed together. As an ground-borne aviation nut it was freakin cool man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was a passenger using a cellphone yeah. You're probably right and it was just something small like that, but damn if it didn't scare me. I can't imagine the pilot wasn't made aware of the parallel approach, but on that note, I've never seen two aircraft land parallel like that before (at a major civ airport).

 

I started recorded as soon as I saw the Herc and kept getting more and more excited as it dropped flaps and gear with us and kept on approach, then the aforementioned scary twitch, followed by an awesome shot as we landed together. As an ground-borne aviation nut it was freakin cool man.

Oh yeah...I know the feeling..."this is so cooool." We were landing at SEA one day. Due to the close lateral distance between runways, arrivals were staggered. When we broke out of the clouds at five miles Tower advised us of a Horizon prop (I don't recall the type) on the outboard runway, "Cleared to land 16L, you're 40 knots faster DO NOT OVERTAKE." Well we slowed to our final approach speed and still passed the guy about a mile on final (I was the FO and waved to them, their CA waved back...perhaps with just one finger). Tower got angry with us, I told him we would have stalled if we slowed any further, then added, "you could have directed us to go around if it was a conflict." Often at MSP or MEM we would try to pass guys on final to the other parallel runway (if we weren't following traffic) and sometimes delay dropping the gear. And sometimes we fly beautiful tactical formation down final.

 

So yeah...freakin cool man!

Edited by busdriver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zach...BoX isn't my first 1G Comfy Chair Fighter Pilot experience. I sit at arm's length in front of a 42" LED TV. Requiem is my Free Tech Support For LifeTM and he helped me optimize the graphics. It is what it is for me.

Of course it is just that to you. Otherwise I wouldn‘t have made a suggestion to help. But as you have Requiems tech suppoet, that may have been redundant. Sorry for that. So all we basically can do is wait for the developpers to add object glare and other effects increasing contrast of objects. And do plane spotting the way we have things until then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I think the best view in Wales is from about 3:10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it is just that to you. Otherwise I wouldn‘t have made a suggestion to help. But as you have Requiems tech suppoet, that may have been redundant. Sorry for that. So all we basically can do is wait for the developpers to add object glare and other effects increasing contrast of objects. And do plane spotting the way we have things until then.

 

My sincere apologies my friend if I came across as snarky.   :drinks: That was not my intention. I have absolutely no reservations about asking for help. The text to Requiem usually starts off, "Dear Free Tech Support For Life..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m gonna have to concentrate on sun glits off of glass for a few weeks. I don’t recall ever finding a tough spot because I saw the sun reflecting off a canopy. Airplane, yes. Windscreen, unknown. I’ll get back to you on that.

Did I mention sun glinting off canopies was difficult in spotting for the spotter or easier for spotting for the spotter as the light is easier to see over distance when reflected off the canopy of another airplane of which the sim does not model??

 

Reflective surfaces when catching light at certain angles are easier to see over distance.  I am not talking of sun blindness or internal reflections on ones own canopy making spotting a problem although, it could as does having dirty canopy to look out of.  ))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I mention sun glinting off canopies was difficult in spotting for the spotter or easier for spotting for the spotter as the light is easier to see over distance when reflected off the canopy of another airplane of which the sim does not model??

 

Reflective surfaces when catching light at certain angles are easier to see over distance.  I am not talking of sun blindness or internal reflections on ones own canopy making spotting a problem although, it could as does having dirty canopy to look out of.  ))

 

As Busdriver with Zach, I am not being snarky about this. I genuinely have never given it a moment of thought. I will actually try to see if I notice glinting over the next few weeks in general. Though, I do start in the late afternoon and there is not much sun this time of year. Would have been a better experiment had we had this conversation mid-summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My two cents on the subject

 

For one, I confirm that spotting IRL is harder than it is in BoX. Not that it is too easy in BoX, there are certain situations where even medium sized planes blend well with an appropriate camo. 

But spotting a clean white cessna sized aircraft even against a dark green forest can be challenging IRL even with two pair of eyes and ATC giving you clues about where to look. I never went into troubles like some of you did, but I had some situations that were not comfortable at all in moderate air traffic.

 

Now on the 10km visibility range, Here's my 4 reasons why I think this should be looked after during the developpment of BoB

 

1- Planes popping in and out in plain sight. Not a trouble for fighters because even in my 4k display, if not zoomed in there are not that visible, a dozen pixels at most. 

But for bombers, especially ponderous ones like the He111, even fully unzoomed, you can often see a big gray cigar magically appear in the sky, and disappear a few seconds later. Disturbing.

 

2- Contrails. These can visible from maybe a hundred kilometers away, if not more. So if you can't spot the plane, at least these are impossible to miss. Leaving a high alt dogfight with all these twirling white trails, only to look at an empty blue sky one minute later is a bit disapointing. It will be even more of a concern when we get the extended horizon.

 

3- Bombing. If we even were to try to emulate late war bombing operations with adequate aircrafts, we  would just not be able to do so. Any level bombing above 5500m will fail because you don't have a reasonable time window to make correction between the moment where the target appear, and the moment where you have to drop the ordnance. 

 

4- Ships. This is also disturbing and it will become a major problem for the pacific theater of war. Huge warships black smoking are also visible from several dozen km away in a clear day. Currently, if flying at 3k of altitude, you can literally pass 8 km away from a huge pedestal-like ship convoy and see only blue sky and sea. 

 

I'm confident these things will sooner or later be adressed, save alone for Midway, I can't imagine releasing the PTO episode with a 10km bubble for ships. there might be ways to reduce computer load like, for example, on ground targets increase rendering distance only of linked entities of the mission, so that regular blocks and trees still appear at 10km. Even if it might not be the perfect solution, as an interim one it would make things much more enjoyable. I'm sure that the devs are thinking about such things, and possibly already working on it.

 

Fun thing is that for fighter to fighter engagement, I find that this contact visibility isn't much of a problem compared to the aforementioned things.  :P

 

I really hope that the release of Kuban and the announcement of Boddenplate will bring the expected incomes to tackle this and all the other problems Jason and the devs already mentionned in the past few months.

Edited by F/JG300_Gruber
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For one, I confirm that spotting IRL is harder than it is in BoX.

It would be great if you could also state what type of display you have in BoX. The difference in opinions may be affected by people comparing the same RL experience to quite different BoX experiences (depending on display type, size, and resolution, and, in case of 2D displays, on viewing distance).

Edited by sniperton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its far too bad in the game. Sometimes it can be absurd.

Elaborate please. You are contributing nothing with a post like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If experienced RL pilots can't agree on the answer to the question "is spotting in RL harder or easier than BOX" I guess we can conclude spotting in BOX must be probably pretty close to reality.

 

The 10 km bubble is reasonable for small fighters travelling at 500 km/hr. 2 fighters with relative velocity of 1000 km/hr take 36 seconds from entering each other's bubble to collision, which is adequate.

 

Devs should however find a better solution for large ground targets and ships, and of course contrails. At last we will be able to draw a penis in the sky in MP over an enemy airfield :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the 10 km bubble is not that much uf an issue for small fighters but for larger aircraft or large structure on the ground.

 

Spotting is greatly aided by cues that exist that help one find planes. They are usually not just randomly scattered, but they are near certain objects. You find them at the tip of condensation trails, and you find them near landmarks that are commonly used as navigation markers. Scenic areas are particularly crowded on beautiful days.

 

But even in combat sims, you know the places you are most likely to find them (besides behind oneself). And most of all, you know what to look for. This frees you a great deal to „look for the unknown“.

 

Learning those cues greatly improves spotting. But now we are lacking some of the cues due to the 10 km restriction.

 

But I must admit that basically the only thing that keeps me alive in dogfights (at least for a short time) is opponents losing track of me in maneuvering. I‘d say in about half the cases when caught in a furball, especially at low level, after some violent maneuvers (no compliance with Boyds recommendations here), suddenly you end up being alone. It also happens to me chasing someone. I check my six and looking ahead again, he’s gone (even if he might just be hidden by the canopy frame). I don‘t think that is entirely unrealistic.

 

I really hope for the devs implement multithreading to give more CPU headroom to draw farther objects. So far, at least half our CPUs do nothing while we go as far as „beheading the CPU“ to get another 10% clock speed for the core that runs the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Elaborate please. You are contributing nothing with a post like that.

People flying by past each other and having no clue. This happens quite often. This is what i call absurd. The low field of view should be compensated in some way. We need thick contact dots.

 

The diffirence we have with real life is that we have only one of two things:

-resolution

-field of view

 

you can have wide field of view but bad ability to spot distant targets. Or a small fov and ability to see them. You have both of these IRL at the same time. This needs compensating in the games. If you want real angular sizes of contqacts on your screen, you need to fully zoom in and have a twice as big of a monitor compared to what you usually use. This is 1)impossible for people with small monitors. 2) very impractical because you FOV fully zoomed is tiny.

 

Sometimes it feels like you are a submarine pilot.

Edited by Max_Damage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be great if you could also state what type of display you have in BoX. The difference in opinions may be affected by people comparing the same RL experience to quite different BoX experiences (depending on display type, size, and resolution, and, in case of 2D displays, on viewing distance).

This is majorly important. Things having influence on those graphics are panel tech, size, color calibration, antialisaing settings, graphics filtering options (washed out pixels etc), ingame graphics options and general grade of the monitor..

 

Depending on these settings I get very different results, from very good spotting to really bad. So that whole BOX thing is hard to generalize. However seeing all planes approaching maikop at the deck from 7k high made me wonder if that wasnt a tad too easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use VR and quite often spot contacts before others in my flight. Many of those times are at the limit. Only the times I've gotten bounced from high 6 (my fault) have been any issue. Sometimes it is hard to see fighter against the blue above but that isn't due to any limit. I do have to be closer to Id something which I think is more the 2x zoom in VR than just the resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If experienced RL pilots can't agree on the answer to the question "is spotting in RL harder or easier than BOX" I guess we can conclude spotting in BOX must be probably pretty close to reality.

 

My friend I'll agree that your conclusion is certainly one possibility. Sadly not in my world. I'm more of a SP gamer and constantly have to cycle the icons on and off when looking for a bandit below my altitude. Just wish I could customize the icon to eliminate the aircraft type and range (leaving just a red or blue square).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Just wish I could customize the icon to eliminate the aircraft type and range (leaving just a red or blue square).

+1

That would indeed be helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in war thunder simulator battles is even more difficult to spot which i think its accurate due to camo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Camouflage works dude.

 

masada-flyover.jpg

As a still it is pretty impressive.  In real life they are moving and much easier to spot.  The movement is key.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shape, shine, shadow, speed, silhouette, plus a couple of others that I can't remember. Judging how effective camouflage is from photo's is an utter waste of time, even video is suspect if it is of low quality or contrast. Another, often forgotten consideration is that the Second World War was fought, almost exclusively, in black and white so it didn't really make any difference what colour you painted your aircraft.

 

Speed, or movement, is a biggie IRL. Targets moving obliquely attract the eye whereas targets either not moving, or only moving slowly relative to your line of sight are far less likely to attract your attention.

 

The biggest problems in sims generally are contrast and shape. The above F15's do however show to good effect, despite being grey, that shadow and shine are also important factors. You can be as camouflaged as you like but if the surface reflects light, and all surfaces do, more or less, then no amount of camouflage paint will hide it, the brighter the day, the bigger the problem. Manoevering targets tend to attract more attention than aircraft flying straight and level, like Cessnas, because they are constantly changing their attitude relative to the light.

 

If camouflage was so brilliantly effective there would be far greater agreement on design and style.

 

Incidentally, I spotted and correctly identified two Mig 21's, despite them being among the last aircraft on earth that you would expect to see here and that was from a good 5 mile away with the aircraft flying at some 4000 ft. ( I know the distance because I know the regular flight patterns for military aircraft landing at the local airbase.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depending on these settings I get very different results, from very good spotting to really bad. So that whole BOX thing is hard to generalize. However seeing all planes approaching maikop at the deck from 7k high made me wonder if that wasnt a tad too easy.

Can you please tell me your settings? I could use the help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F-16A/B known in Hebrew as the “Netz”, meaning “Hawk” flying over the ruins of Masada. Flying in the 116th out of Nevatim Airbase. (Squadron is also called 'The Defenders of the South')

 

 

 

 

Camouflage works dude.

masada-flyover.jpg

Edited by [CPT]CptJackSparrow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a still it is pretty impressive. In real life they are moving and much easier to spot. The movement is key.

The same goes for the sim. Spotting objects that are in motion against the background is really bloody easy, even near maximum render distance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not everyone agrees that it is too hard to spot either. Also, spotting individual contacts should be exponentially more difficult than spotting a formation - which is the way it is in real life too. Let's wait and see what happens with the more extended terrain draw, it may actually make it easier to spot targets at varying angles compared to now.

 

Of course this whole thing tends to circulate around how people think they should be able to simply glance in a direction and instantly spot something which just isn't accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'm saying is that a part of this may have something to do with hardware and settings.

 

So if you find spotting to be easy, post your setup/settings. Unless it's some secret.

 

That way people who are having difficulty can try adjusting their setup to see if it helps them.

 

It is obvious that there are people who are having difficulty with this; even people who have simmed for a long time. Let's try to help people out, rather than just shutting them down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...