Spotting.

[VBF-12_Stick-95]

48 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

First problem I see is the quote from AnPetrovich that "people wanted to see planes past 30 km". No we didn't, where did that information come from?! Ships yes, planes - hardly realistic.

 

Ya, where did that come from?  The way I see it, Expert is too short (~10km) and Alternative is too far (>=40km).  I think 25km would be a good distance for aircraft spotting in perfect conditions and would deteriorate from there based on haze, etc. 

 

The other problem is that when you spot something and zoom in it disappears.  Maybe it shouldn't resolve it better at far distance when zoomed but the plane should never disappear.

[nighthawk2174]

Agreed, although I haven't noticed the issue of targets disappearing when zooming in i'll take peoples word for it.  It would be nice if this could get fixed.  Although I do want to add, on that front, imo the fact that you can see targets from reasonable ranges without zooming in all the way like in expert and pre-expert modes is nice.  With this aspect being on of the alt spottings best changes.  Zooming in severally limits your SA and ability to keep visual on your flight lead.  So being able to see stuff at realistic distances without zooming I hope that stays.  As Thor said pixel hunting is not realistic.

[Dakpilot]

I don't really understand "pixel hunting" 

 

Spotting aircraft is hard IRL I have literally spent hundreds of tense hours scanning for aircraft, it IS hard and a learned skill that improved over my career. 

It should not be easy in the sim either. 

 

Cue cries of "harder isn't more real".. But easier is always more real either.. Just easy

 

25 k Spotting of fighters in any situation other than a very lucky glint of light on cockpit in very perfect conditions is totally unrealistic 

 

Seeing contacts at 40K and accepting this , seems to be an indication that many people want to play a different game than the Dev's are trying to produce. 

 

Suddenly expecting the issues of 2d monitors/screens to be resolved and expecting to be able to not use zoom seems very unreasonable, not the fact of wanting that, but just ignoring the reality of tech we have available to majority of users

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

 

 

[[DBS]TH0R]

 

26 minutes ago, Dakpilot said:

I don't really understand "pixel hunting" 

 

Spotting aircraft is hard IRL I have literally spent hundreds of tense hours scanning for aircraft, it IS hard and a learned skill that improved over my career. 

It should not be easy in the sim either. 

 

And therein lies the biggest problem, of not understanding the problem in the first place.

 

I will re-post again, here is one example of "pixel spotting" we currently have in-game:

 

This example is why some people (me included) stick to the ALT system even though we do not like its rendering range and huge blobs in the distance.

 

26 minutes ago, Dakpilot said:

Cue cries of "harder isn't more real".. But easier is always more real either.. Just easy

 

25 k Spotting of fighters in any situation other than a very lucky glint of light on cockpit in very perfect conditions is totally unrealistic 

 

Seeing contacts at 40K and accepting this , seems to be an indication that many people want to play a different game than the Dev's are trying to produce.

 

And at the same time, harder does not equal near impossible.

 

Where does this request of seeing contacts at 40K come from, who asked for that???

 

Hell, I'd be happy with 15km if only I could see things around me. And I know what I can and cannot spot with my own two eyes.

 

Before you jump on me for not being able to spot, mind you I have over 15 years of experience flying flight sims on full difficulty settings. And I am perfectly aware of the techniques of how to track and spot aircraft, and most of the time I have good SA.

 

26 minutes ago, Dakpilot said:

Suddenly expecting the issues of 2d monitors/screens to be resolved and expecting to be able to not use zoom seems very unreasonable, not the fact of wanting that, but just ignoring the reality of tech we have available to majority of users

 

Who is stopping you from using zoom? It can still be used after a certain range when the target gets closer (for ID). The ALT version where the dot stays the same size no matter the zoom level is a very nice compromise to bridge the gap of featuring peripheral vision you get in real life. As a real pilot (I am assuming here) yourself - why do you oppose the novelty feature trying to simulate more realistic in-game visibility system?

 

Why do people oppose changes for the better? The fact it didn't go as planed from the first attempt, doesn't mean devs should abort their attempts at fixing the problem.

Edited October 15, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[LLv24_Zami]

There it is, this is why I`ve been favoring alternate. Nothing more complicated idea behind it to make it super easy for me or seeing planes(bombers especially) easier and getting in the furballs as quickly as possible. But as long as there is no better solution to these two options, that`s how it is. No need to make it anything else because it is not.

 

I respect the fact that not everyone share my view. That`s fine and good. It seems to be more or less fifty-fifty situation so I`m not the only one. Let`s just hope we get more adjustment to the visibility at some point. In the mean time, let`s try to enjoy the game with the options we have and respect each other.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

35 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

why do you oppose the novelty feature trying to simulate more realistic in-game visibility system?

 

Why do people oppose changes for the better?

It's because for some players it isn't better. In fact it's a whole lot worse and herein lies the problem. Alternate visibility is terrible on my setup. If it was better I'd use it.

This is not about realism/or lack of, it seems to be about what setup/resolution and hardware is being used. This issue is causing divisions within our online community when we least need it. 

38 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

Where does this request of seeing contacts at 40K come from, who asked for that???

I don't think anyone "asked" for it but it now is possible to see targets from very unrealistic distances. I was flying on a WWI server the other day and the aircraft looked absolutely huge from a distance. This isn't making the game better, its making it worse for around 50% of the user base. 

 

47 minutes ago, LLv24_Zami said:

Nothing more complicated idea behind it to make it super easy for me or seeing planes(bombers especially) easier and getting in the furballs as quickly as possible.

Yes, it really is super easy to spot not only fighters but bombers now. They can be seen from an extreme distance. This will discourage an awful lot of casual bomber and ground attack pilots and we are ending up with mass furballs in the center of the map. I have already seen it happen, multiply times.  

 

55 minutes ago, LLv24_Zami said:

Let`s just hope we get more adjustment to the visibility at some point.

I genuinely hope so.

[Guest deleted@83466]

 

14 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

Let`s just hope we get more adjustment to the visibility at some point.

 

I genuinely hope so.

 

Amen, I think a lot of people are feeling this way.  My own preference would be some sort of middle ground between 'Expert' and 'Alternate' where it's pretty much the same as Alternate out to say 15 kilometers, but chances of spotting beyond that drops off much more significantly after that than currently. 

Edited October 15, 2019 by SeaSerpent

[[DBS]TH0R]

The first comment about changes for the better was mainly aimed at the ability to spot stuff with wide view thus increasing your peripheral vision. I am not the only one who likes that feature.

 

I think we can all agree that the stupidly long distance spotting needs to go away, especially from ALT spotting. The bombers are hurting the most from this "feature", fully agree with you on that one @6./ZG26_Custard.

 

I too genuinely hope that they offer us some compromise between the two systems we have now.

 

 

Edited October 15, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[LLv24_Zami]

23 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

Yes, it really is super easy to spot not only fighters but bombers now. They can be seen from an extreme distance. This will discourage an awful lot of casual bomber and ground attack pilots and we are ending up with mass furballs in the center of the map. I have already seen it happen, multiply times.  

That`s not what I`m after as some seem to put it. Limits of the current technology, on the other hand is blindness as seen in the pics there. Quid pro quo

10 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

 

 

Amen, I think a lot of people are feeling this way.  My own preference would be some sort of middle ground between 'Expert' and 'Alternate' where it's pretty much the same as Alternate out to say 15 kilometers, but chances of spotting beyond that drops off much more significantly after that than currently. 

There we agree. Some sort of scaling depending on the resolution is needed.

Edited October 15, 2019 by LLv24_Zami

[6./ZG26_Custard]

11 minutes ago, LLv24_Zami said:

That`s not what I`m after as some seem to put it

It maybe not what you are after, but unfortunately it is what we are getting.

The problem is user experience . It's approximately a 50% split it at the moment. Standard visibility for some is great for others it's awful and vice versa.  As you said, I hope there is some resolution to this in the near future. 

 

Edit: I don't envy server admins.

Edited October 15, 2019 by 6./ZG26_Custard

[LLv24_Zami]

2 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

It maybe not be what you are after, but unfortunately it is what we are getting.

It is too much, I know. But world is not perfect, at least before we get further tuning to the spotting. Everyone has to make a choice and mine is not to fly blind.

4 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

The problem is user experience . It's approximately a 50% split it at the moment. Standard visibility for some is great for others it's awful and vice versa.  As you said, I hope there is some resolution to this in the near future. 

Agreed 100%

[Guest deleted@83466]

16 minutes ago, LLv24_Zami said:

 

There we agree. Some sort of scaling depending on the resolution is needed.

 

Perhaps, but at distance, I think whatever scaling is being done needs to be a fraction of what it is now, and probably gone altogether inside 4 or 5km.  My problem with Alternate has always been a matter of degree, not an opposition to the particular method by which better realism is achieved.  I just want what I'm seeing to be credible and I don't care how they get there.

[CountZero]

They should leve alternate off (expert) option as it is now. As thats for pure realists and how devs think vis should be.

But alternate on option they should try to adjust for more frendly option, make it more easyer to spot at 3-10km, and get rid of to big contacts at 10+km.

From how i see both vis options are same up to around 9-10km, and then big differanc starts abow 10km.

I dont expect they gona do any changes in near future, as they will probably go on next things on shedule, and maybe try to see what can be done when they get some time.

For me its realy frustrating to not be able to spot contacts at med ranges, you have to play on zoom all time and check 6 every 5s as even on alternate on option you can see big dots from big ranges but when they get in -10km ranges you can easy lose them until they get 2-3km from you.

[[DBS]TH0R]

I have nothing against Expert option - as long as they fix the pixel hunting shown in this thread. Because like many here, I can't see stuff relatively close around me when in real life I would perfectly be able to. I can though with ALT visibility.

 

Like @SeaSerpent said, I don't care how they get there - but neither of the systems are entirely believable or work for the majority of users, thus we need a new spotting system or modifications to both. IMHO there shouldn't be two options.

 

I think we should get a fix in near future. Simply because it is splitting up the already small MP community, which is not what I'd want as a project leader.

Edited October 15, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[CountZero]

two option is neccesary, guy who wont realistic will never be for any compromises that make it more playable.

You can say for any realisam option that is spliting comunity, one can say bigger split is not having only east front in game, now MP is split as we have west front and east front, and OMG game will be ruined when PTO comes what well we do ?!.( And MP they say its only 5-10% so they can easy just get rid of it and would not hurt game and less stress for devs ). Ppl just have more option and can play on server that better sute them, and this way devs dont have to fight it out as to them only real option is alternate off, and users who dont like that option can fight it out with server hosts to have other one. If there is no 2nd option they would have to play on alternate off or dont play like before. 

Edited October 15, 2019 by 77.CountZero

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

No compromise from realisms seeking group, but unfortunately or not  this company have customers which deviate from that group. How much one group are able to take before quit  is something given by option to choose sometime is not .I tested server with  new AV and I don't like it , now I need to see how it is with off. Those are my options given by the game server operators.

[Barnacles]

54 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

two option is neccesary, guy who wont realistic will never be for any compromises that make it more playable.

You can say for any realisam option that is spliting comunity, one can say bigger split is not having only east front in game, now MP is split as we have west front and east front, and OMG game will be ruined when PTO comes what well we do ?!.( And MP they say its only 5-10% so they can easy just get rid of it and would not hurt game and less stress for devs ). Ppl just have more option and can play on server that better sute them, and this way devs dont have to fight it out as to them only real option is alternate off, and users who dont like that option can fight it out with server hosts to have other one. If there is no 2nd option they would have to play on alternate off or dont play like before. 

Basically, (apart from a handful of extremes) most people's beef with alternative is it's effect at long range, and for those who don't like expert the problem lies within 10k range. I reckon and hope this impression will make it back to the developers, and they make a combination of both.

[Sgt_Joch]

5 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

I don't think anyone "asked" for it but it now is possible to see targets from very unrealistic distances. 

 

Well, that is not true. A lot of players asked for it. You go back to the threads arguing against the 10 km limit, you can find many posts of players arguing that you should be able to spot ACs 40 km away, usually based on 1-2 cherry picked anecdotes.

 

As the old saying goes, you have to be careful what you ask for...you may get it.

[[DBS]TH0R]

29 minutes ago, Sgt_Joch said:

Well, that is not true. A lot of players asked for it. You go back to the threads arguing against the 10 km limit, you can find many posts of players arguing that you should be able to spot ACs 40 km away, usually based on 1-2 cherry picked anecdotes.

 

As the old saying goes, you have to be careful what you ask for...you may get it.

 

Truth be told, I am not reading every thread here but I do try to stay in touch with discussions - I haven't seen one request to be able to see contacts at 40km. Can you link me one such request please? Because I have missed them.

 

If that is true, than it is even more weird that devs tried to implement it, only to come back with a hotfix and "Expert" system that still inherits old visibility problems sub 10km (pixel hunting and disappearing targets), backed up by a wall of text explaining how it should be in real life. What was the purpose of beta testing then if they reverted to the old system with extended rendering in just 3 says after the release?

 

It doesn't add up... Unless they are still looking for a solution.

Edited October 15, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[Barnacles]

48 minutes ago, Sgt_Joch said:

 

Well, that is not true. A lot of players asked for it. You go back to the threads arguing against the 10 km limit, you can find many posts of players arguing that you should be able to spot ACs 40 km away, usually based on 1-2 cherry picked anecdotes.

 

As the old saying goes, you have to be careful what you ask for...you may get it.

There are people who believe the earth is flat too, please let us see contacts out to 200km from whilst we're parked on an airfield.

[Sgt_Joch]

2 hours ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

There are people who believe the earth is flat too, please let us see contacts out to 200km from whilst we're parked on an airfield.

 

Is that really what they want? sounds very gamey if you ask me. 

 

Edited October 15, 2019 by Sgt_Joch

[Barnacles]

Just now, Sgt_Joch said:

 

Is that really what you want? sounds very gamey if you ask me. 

 

Nah it's totes real, I can see the ISS at 120k so I should be able to see a 109 taking off from an airfield 70k away.

 

[Sgt_Joch]

2 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

If that is true, than it is even more weird that devs tried to implement it, 

 

 

 

Not really, again you look at those threads, the devs would sometimes pop in to argue that the 10km limit was a reasonable compromise and that the chances to spot something farther were slim and some players even posted real life studies saying the same thing.

 

Yet, you always had players arguing against the 10 km limit. If the player base really want gamey, easy spotting, then eventually the Devs will try to accomodate them.

1 hour ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

Nah it's totes real, I can see the ISS at 120k so I should be able to see a 109 taking off from an airfield 70k away.

 

Those players should play War Thunder then, or Crimson sky, sounds like the perfect game for them...

Edited October 15, 2019 by Sgt_Joch

[SCG_Wulfe]

I'm very tired of this view issue as it has just about ruined this game for me. I really enjoyed playing almost daily for a couple years now. It was involving, you had to work for it, and it always felt like you were growing. Now with alternate view, the way servers are behaving is just game-breaking. 

 

For me, there is no realistic ebb and flow to air combat anymore. There's no scanning the skies hoping to spot a distant contact to set up on before they see you.  There's no evaluating those contact(s) to decide if it's a fight you can win.  It's simply... look out yonder 50km away and see all and choose a target and have at it. Meanwhile, everyone can see you and will work their way over. This leads to never-ending continuous dogfights with no real ability to anticipate or counter the number of enemies that can see you and enter the fight. 

 

I'm pretty happy with the way non-alternate/regular view works as-is. It feels realistic to me in VR. That said....

 

Ultimately, as others have mentioned, the main concern that breaks the game for me is seeing contacts at absurd ranges. I would be willing to live with an alternate view that allows distant contacts to be dwindled in size down to tiny dots at 20km yet inflates closer contacts slightly to help with near range vis. This would address the potential for screen resolution to mess with your ability to spot close contacts vs real life. 

 

I truly hope the devs return to this issue soon and make changes as currently it is killing my passion for this sim. 

Edited October 15, 2019 by SCG_Wulfe

[Talisman]

11 minutes ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

I'm very tired of this view issue as it has just about ruined this game for me. I really enjoyed playing almost daily for a couple years now. It was involving, you had to work for it, and it always felt like you were growing. Now with alternate view, the way servers are behaving is just game-breaking. 

 

For me, there is no realistic ebb and flow to air combat anymore. There's no scanning the skies hoping to spot a distant contact to set up on before they see you.  There's no evaluating those contact(s) to decide if it's a fight you can win.  It's simply... look out yonder 50km away and see all and choose a target and have at it. Meanwhile, everyone can see you and will work their way over. This leads to never-ending continuous dogfights with no real ability to anticipate or counter the number of enemies that can see you and enter the fight. 

 

I'm pretty happy with the way non-alternate/regular view works as-is. It feels realistic to me in VR. That said....

 

Ultimately, as others have mentioned, the main concern that breaks the game for me is seeing contacts at absurd ranges. I would be willing to live with an alternate view that allows distant contacts to be dwindled in size down to tiny dots at 20km yet inflates closer contacts slightly to help with near range vis. This would address the potential for screen resolution to mess with your ability to spot close contacts vs real life. 

 

I truly hope the devs return to this issue soon and make changes as currently it is killing my passion for this sim. 

 

Very much agree.  I am not flying much any more since the last patch and am rather disappointed with how all this has made me feel.  Still, I understand it is WIP so hope things will improve soon and that we have one proper visual standard across the board for air-to-air spotting.

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

[CountZero]

6 hours ago, 56RAF_Talisman said:

 

Very much agree.  I am not flying much any more since the last patch and am rather disappointed with how all this has made me feel.  Still, I understand it is WIP so hope things will improve soon and that we have one proper visual standard across the board for air-to-air spotting.

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

Well now you have servers that have expert visability alternate off, and servers that have userfrendly visability alternate ON. Nothing stops you from playing on server that has option you like, why would devs change anything in expert option when they said thats what they consider most realistic option, and exactly what they wonted it to be.

it cant get any clear then this that alternate off is how they planed it to be from start:

 

I dont expect them to coming back to this issue any time sone. Ppl wonted vis ranges more then 9.5km, devs spend time to make it and we have it as alternate off option, and on top of that they made 2nd option as that bugged version that some ppl liked so they can enjoy it also.

 

Im just being realistic here, they have other stuff to focus on, they spend time on this, and finish it how they seam correct, and to now expect any aditional fast work on it is delusional from what i can see.

 

Play on server that have your option, or wait next few years when they get enought money from future DLCs to come back to issue.

 

I dont like either option, they dont adress what i see as problem, but have no problem playing on either, also i expect no changes to them in near future, and if any changes to be done it will probably be done to alternate ON option.

[SCG_Wulfe]

1 hour ago, 77.CountZero said:I dont like either option, they dont adress what i see as problem, but have no problem playing on either, also i expect no changes to them in near future, and if any changes to be done it will probably be done to alternate ON option.

You spent all that time typing to circle back to exactly what we both said. The normal version is very realistic and likely shouldn’t be touched. That said, the community has been split 50/50 on this and that includes players that traditionally were happy playing together. What I proposed was an adjustment to the alternate vis setting to at least allow it to work without negatively affecting gameplay. That’s a compromise I think is reasonable to at least maybe bring the community together again. I don’t love it as a solution, I personally think the normal view is great and realistic. That’s what we call a compromise though...

 

you yourself say you don’t like either setting ?‍♂️ 

[CountZero]

yes i dont like either and dont expect devs to fix anything in near future

 

what comunity ? 200ppl who bather to vote lol thats not even 5% of ppl playing in MP

 

all i se is that problem with visability is solved by adding two options, only few complain about it, compared how it was when patch was out, so devs solution is working so why would they come back to it when they have other things to do

[SharpeXB]

Many players in a sim are always going to want a fully realistic option. The purpose of simulation demands it. And as displays and headsets get better, higher resolutions, better color depth and rendering that goal may be achieved quite well. The problem is that if the game was able to do this with full realism there would still be this subset of player who just won’t like it. 

So dual setting seem inevitable. And perhaps the debate is pointless. 

 

“Normal” (full real) doesn’t have to be debated. It’s just real. No enhancements or anything. That should be easy to understand. Advancements in graphics and display technology will allow this to perform better and better. 

 

“Alternate” doesn’t need to be over analyzed either. It’s a game aid similar to icons. There’s no “realism” to this setting anymore than there can be a “realistic” icon. So it allows excessive visibility? That’s the whole point of an enhanced setting. If you don’t like the enhancement you can switch it off. 

Theres no purpose in trying to adjust Alternate to be more like Normal because that just eliminates the difference between the two. 

 

How multiplayer can handle dual settings remains to be seen. Right now nobody can even tell which settings are running on any server. That can be easily solved though. 

Edited October 16, 2019 by SharpeXB

[[DBS]TH0R]

7 hours ago, 77.CountZero said:

yes i dont like either and dont expect devs to fix anything in near future

 

what comunity ? 200ppl who bather to vote lol thats not even 5% of ppl playing in MP

 

all i se is that problem with visability is solved by adding two options, only few complain about it, compared how it was when patch was out, so devs solution is working so why would they come back to it when they have other things to do

 

Yet the FC poll with far less people voting is somehow more important...

 

Neither systems work 100%, and should thus be either further tweaked or merged into one realistic compromise.

 

4 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

“Normal” (full real) doesn’t have to be debated. It’s just real. No enhancements or anything. That should be easy to understand.

 

Does this look real / believable to you? Are you deliberately ignoring glaring issues the Expert mode has?

 

 

4 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

How multiplayer can handle dual settings remains to be seen. Right now nobody can even tell which settings are running on any server. That can be easily solved though. 

 

If no one can tell which settings are used - why are you then participating in this discussion with such strong agenda?

Edited October 16, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R
cleaned up

[Dakpilot]

5 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

 

 

If no one can tell which settings are used - why are you then participating in this discussion with such strong agenda?

 

?

 

How do you tell what settings are used before joining a server?

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

[SharpeXB]

3 minutes ago, Dakpilot said:

 

How do you tell what settings are used before joining a server?

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

It would be great if the servers were like any other game or RoF and let you know every setting that they are running, including visibility.

In the meantime they could easily add it to the mission name. 

14 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

Does this look real / believable to you? Are you deliberately ignoring glaring issues the Expert mode has?

 

Static pixelated screenshots aren’t good examples. I can see for myself what the game actually looks like as can everyone. 

IMO Expert (Normal) does not have “glaring issues”. 

[[DBS]TH0R]

38 minutes ago, Dakpilot said:

 

How do you tell what settings are used before joining a server?

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

 

I misread, and I apologize. Correct. Before you join, unless it is included in the server name - you can not.

 

33 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Static pixelated screenshots aren’t good examples. I can see for myself what the game actually looks like as can everyone. 

IMO Expert (Normal) does not have “glaring issues”. 

 

A strong statement, don't you think? Can you see what is visible on my monitor? Have you tried running the game on various monitors (different native resolutions), same for VR?

 

On 10/13/2019 at 6:47 PM, YIPPEE said:

1440p alternative vs non-alt max FOV

 

ALT

non alt

 

Are you telling us that you can spot a blue pixel moving against a blue background on your system, as shown in the YIPPE's post?

Edited October 16, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[SCG_Wulfe]

2 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

 

 

Are you telling us that you can spot a blue pixel moving against a blue background on your system, as shown in the YIPPE's post?

 

I can tell you that in real life, seeing a fighter sized aircraft at 8km is next to impossible unless the lighting is right and you know where to look.

 

In the regular spotting, I can spot contacts out to 20km if the lighting is right and I know where to look.

 

If the lighting is not right and there is no glint off the wings, the odds of spotting a contact at 8km is low. 

 

If you don't like it, that's one thing. But, it is realistic. 

 

Here is an airliner 1.75km away from the point the photo was taken coming in for landing at San Fransisco Intl.... in extremely good visibility conditions. Keep in mind that a 109 is 12% the length of a 747 for example.

 

Also bear in mind the scale of the photo is obviously not 1/1 with real life, but neither are screen shots of the game unless zoomed to 1/1 scale. For reference, people are standing 10m away. 

 

Edited October 16, 2019 by SCG_Wulfe

[molodoi]

1 hour ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

Are you telling us that you can spot a blue pixel moving against a blue background on your system, as shown in the YIPPE's post?

 

Non alt vision, as Devs have explained, is influenced by light conditions and angle of view.

Alt vision is an assisted spotting vision.

Non alt is obviously more difficult to use but it's, at the same time, more immersive to me.

[Aero*Bohemio]

I have a monitor and TrackIR and play at 1080p. The alternate vis it's an absolut inmersion killer for me, not only that, also opposite to what a realistic spotting is. I can see planes as huge white/grey pixels evolving 20 to 30km from me but when i get closer to 8km they dissapear, using zoom doesn´t help, actually the opposite. As many have said before, it's even worse on MP servers for bomber pilots, i love shooting bombers down but this is no fun, you can see them 30km away when they take off and you easily get ready to intercept them with lots of anticipation, no tactics, no hiding, no nothing for them...the fly straigth to the slaughter house.

I've always liked about il2 that the spotting was "spot on" ? It took you a while to have a trained eye in order to be able to spot contacts, but once you got that experience you could see everything around you and have good SA. That's realistic! I understand devs are trying to make the spotting even better so we don't have that 9.5km bubble and then they vanish;  also i understand they are adapting to new and more common by the day VR set ups. 

But at the moment under current patch even the normal spotting has suffered from recent changes...i used to have great SA and have no issues seeing contacts, i had good contrast at same level flying and also even below me while i was flying 2k to 3k above them, now it's almost imposible to follow a plane: you see it, you check your 6, and when you look at the exact point where you left it 3 seconds ago...it's gone. 

I hope devs find a good solution for this in the following patches; otherwise, if there is no possible solution, IMHO i'd rather have the spotting we had before current patch.

 

[SharpeXB]

2 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

A strong statement, don't you think? Can you see what is visible on my monitor? Have you tried running the game on various monitors (different native resolutions), same for VR?

 

 

Are you telling us that you can spot a blue pixel moving against a blue background on your system, as shown in the YIPPE's post?

This issue is hard to evaluate with screenshots because. 

1. They’re still images

2. They’re compressed files and you lose the detail in them. Everything is much more clear to me on my own screen than it is on my own screenshots. 

3. You can’t see resolution other than your own screen. I can’t show what a 2160p image looks like unless the viewer also has a 2160p screen. 

I’ve played this game on 1080x1920 and 2160x3840 monitors. 

 

I can see distant fighter aircraft clearly at 10k 

Don’t know what the situation with the screenshot is, what map, lighting, graphic settings etc. 

[LColony_Kong]

2 hours ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

aircraft at 8km is next to impossible unless the lighting is right and you know where to look.

This is pure bs. I've already posted several documents showing this range is about the average distance combat pilots aquire small aircraft. Furthermore Ive posted videos of me spotting small aircraft on the deck from 38000ft. 

 

Inside of 2-3 miles most contacts should be spotted because this is I side the peripheral detection zone. The fovea can pick out targets mi h further out. If cued by say a radar, people have been known to spot contacts as far away as 25nm. Uncued, contacts are generally discovered anywhere from 4-7 miles. 

 

Edited October 16, 2019 by YIPPEE

[CountZero]

4 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

Yet the FC poll with far less people voting is somehow more important...

 

Neither systems work 100%, and should thus be either further tweaked or merged into one realistic compromise.

 

 

Does this look real / believable to you? Are you deliberately ignoring glaring issues the Expert mode has?

 

 

 

If no one can tell which settings are used - why are you then participating in this discussion with such strong agenda?

on alternate off, i see no problems like on picture, i can see dot or airplane from all distances without it disapering.

I run tests with Ripgrunwald on him hosting same mission and we take same airplane and then start from same airstart and start going 60 deg from each other, at no point he disperes sudenly, he gradualy gets smaller and then at 20-30km i lose him, he observes same (using gps so we can see at what distances what happends). But no way i or he would be able to spot from that big distances if you dont know where contact is, were both full zoom on each other and only focused on that, and no way you can play like that, you have to scan the sky and then you have no way to spot things so far. Only problem i see is that contacts are to easy to lose at 3-4km +, you see them and good forbid you check your 6 and look back where they were and they are gone as again they are just to small to be spotted again if your not constantly on full zoom focused only at them. 

So if for years ppl complained (me included) that visibility in this game is terible and 9,5km is to short, and devs decided to make it even harder "realistic" ( as thats what alternate off is compared to what we had before with 9,5km ) then i have no hope they understand what was problem at first or they would fix it so i have visability like in other flying games, this is only game that wonts it to be harder for players/realistic.

Again i dont like either options, i dont exect they gona do anything to adjust it in near future ( if they do adjust something it will probably be to option 2, alternate ON) and i have no problem to play on server with it on or off, after i run tests to see what to expect.

Edited October 16, 2019 by 77.CountZero

[SCG_Wulfe]

28 minutes ago, YIPPEE said:

This is pure bs. I've already posted several documents showing this range is about the average distance combat pilots aquire small aircraft. Furthermore Ive posted videos of me spotting small aircraft on the deck from 38000ft. 

 

Inside of 2-3 miles most contacts should be spotted because this is I side the peripheral detection zone. The fovea can pick out targets mi h further out. If cued by say a radar, people have been known to spot contacts as far away as 25nm. Uncued, contacts are generally discovered anywhere from 4-7 miles. 

 

Fair enough you caught me exaggerating based on personal experience of how hard it is for me to see planes at those ranges in real life. That said, even combat pilots are only beginning to see a dot on average at 8km. That I would say lines up pretty perfectly with the experience in game where a dot is visible out to 20km yet I can only really reliably pick them up around the 10km mark.