Spotting.

[RavN_Sone]

I was referring to Mr Sharpe above, who shared some doubts on that subject

Edited October 18, 2019 by RavN_Sone

[Guest deleted@83466]

18 minutes ago, RavN_Sone said:

I was referring to Mr Sharpe above, who shared some doubts on that subject

 

His premise is that other games with easier spotting have lulled people in to thinking that things are easier to spot in real life than they really are.  That is probably true.  Next time you see a contrail pass overhead and see the very small object at the front of it, realize that this is likely at least a 737 sized aircraft at a distance of about 7 miles.  Now remove the telltail contrail, make it's size about 5 times smaller, give it a drab camoflauge scheme, and put it against a cluttered background.  Easy?

[[DBS]TH0R]

4 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Sorry but what else is there to say? If you can’t play the game don’t play it. There are plenty of things I can’t do so I don’t do them. 

This is a pretty useless topic. The “experienced” players are just experienced at some other game and they expect every game to be the same. They don’t want IL-2 to emulate reality, they want it to emulate another game. 

 

All of your arguments in this thread can be summed up to this: "The game simulates visibility as realistically possible, however some users simply cannot use that real feature because they don't have latest HRD monitor tech and a resolution of 4K or higher." In other words: "I realize some people might have a problem, however... F*** everyone else who can't afford an expensive new monitor".

 

From a business perspective, if devs were thinking along those lines - they wouldn't still be in the business after 10 years.

 

All you have succeeded to accomplish here is to sound like nothing more than a spoiled brat, i.e. being selfish and arrogant while completely disregarding other people problems. Problems being reported by flight simmers seeking nothing more than realism with over a decade of experience in flight sims.

 

 

4 hours ago, III./JG52_Maple said:

I found disabling "sharpen" filter box helped a lot. With that checked it makes planes practically invisible, particularly around the wings. At high aspect, nose to nose the plane was invisible due to the filter. With it off I was able to make out the air-frame and at distance the black dot became visible and more prominent. Test ON and OFF for your own results. Note: I still use sharpen landscape filter, which doesn't seem to have an effect. 

 

Maple 

 

Now this is interesting... Thank you for your input.

 

I'll try turning this off and see whether there is a difference or not.

Edited October 18, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[Guest deleted@83466]

50 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

All of your arguments in this thread can be summed up to this: "The game simulates visibility as realistically possible, however some users simply cannot use that real feature because they don't have latest HRD monitor tech and a resolution of 4K or higher." In other words: "I realize some people might have a problem, however... F*** everyone else who can't afford an expensive new monitor".

 

 

 

 

I honestly don't think he is "saying that" in so many words.  Nor do I think the issue is so simply summarized.  I fly with a number of people who are flying with 1080/60hz run-of-the-mill monitors, and they are spotting things a lot better than I am when we are all using Normal Viz.  Meanwhile, I have a very nice 34" 3440x1440, good refresh rate, calibrated to the best of my ability.  For all I know, if I had 4k, it could be worse, or it could be better, not sure.  I think summarizing the arguments put forth as a matter of the have's vs the have-nots, or a screw-you because I've got mine stance is a misrepresentation of what is trying to be conveyed.

Edited October 18, 2019 by SeaSerpent

[ZachariasX]

6 hours ago, Mac_Messer said:

So you missed mine, it seems...? In order to even begin to talk about active ability in spotting, we`d all must have exact same picture in front of us. But it`s not like that, so how can anyone even say that one is better at spotting in IL2 than the other? Not a matter of skill, at all. I can only see that which my 24inch monitor shows on a 2D screen. How do some of you here even try to make comparisons of that with real life is beyond me.

Maybe I did then. You are saying that you don‘t expect to see the the same picture / the same aircraft drawn when you connect different screens on your computer, is it that you don‘t expect my computer not to display the same number of ac as your computer?

 

What do you consider „the same picture“, given the different monitors out there and the different display settings applied.

[[DBS]TH0R]

On 10/18/2019 at 9:38 AM, SeaSerpent said:

 

I honestly don't think he is "saying that" in so many words.  Nor do I think the issue is so simply summarized.  I fly with a number of people who are flying with 1080/60hz run-of-the-mill monitors, and they are spotting things a lot better than I am when we are all using Normal Viz.  Meanwhile, I have a very nice 34" 3440x1440, good refresh rate, calibrated to the best of my ability.  For all I know, if I had 4k, it could be worse, or it could be better, not sure.  I think summarizing the arguments put forth as a matter of the have's vs the have-nots, or a screw-you because I've got mine stance is a misrepresentation of what is trying to be conveyed.

 

Let my try again... His logic, the way I understood it is: Rendering visibility in Expert/Normal as realistically possible as it is, I don't have a problem with it, yet we need bigger, better and HDR certified monitors to help to simulate this even better without making any changes to the current system. In other words, if you read between the lines, he is recognizing the problem others here have - and doesn't want anything changed as it would brake the perfect rendering as is now (on his system).

 

I have a 2560x1440 @ 27" monitor, which translates to 108.79 PPI, 0.2335mm dot pitch

Compared to your 3440x1440 @ 34" screen, you have 109.68 PPI, 0.2316mm dot pitch

 

Now lets compare this with "run of the mill" monitor with 1920x1080 @ 24" ... 91.79 PPI, 0.2767mm dot pitch

 

One can slowly start to understand why a larger pixel gives the advantage in pixel spotting.

 

Lets continue with a 4K gaming TV, one of which SharpeXB recommended earlier on:

 

I'll take this one (LG B8 OLED) : https://www.techradar.com/reviews/lg-b8-oled-oled55b8-oled65b8

 

The smallest 55" model running 4096x2160 DCI 4K resolution translates to 84.19 PPI, 0.3017mm dot pitch

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

TL;DR - this gaming TV gives the biggest pixel to chase on our virtual flight sim battlegrounds, no wonder SharpeXB is recommending one. ?

 

Not only that, but the TV can do 120Hz with 21ms input lag if you drop it down to 1080p resolution. Lets see how big of a dot that gives:

 

40.05 PPI, 0.6342mm dot pitch ... almost 3 times as big than what @SeaSerpent, @YIPPEE and myself can see on our puney 1440p screens.

 

If this really is how it should be, then I do believe there should be a requirement on the game box or a disclaimer that you need a +55" gaming TV in order to render realistic visibility and spotting in-game.

Edited October 19, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R
spelling

[unreasonable]

30 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

 

If this really is how it should be, then I do believe there should be a requirement on the game box or a disclaimer that you need a +55" gaming TV in order to render realistic visibility and spotting in-game.

 

This misses an important variable: namely how far away from your screen you sit. Sit at the same distance from a large TV that you use for your normal desktop workstation and you will soon burn out your eyeballs and not be able to spot anything. 

 

I have found that, whatever the size of my screen, I tend to place it a distance that roughly equalizes it's visible aspect. High definition screens then look radically better, but only because each pixel looks much smaller. In my experience, using a large, high definition TV makes initial spotting much harder. Where it helps is in enabling you to make out detail on a plane that you can already see.   

[[DBS]TH0R]

If you keep it at factory default brightness then yes. Monitor/TV brightness depends on the amount of light in the room. In an average lit room monitors and TVs are most often calibrated to 120cd/m2 value. In a dim room this can go down to 80cd/m2, while in a well lit room/office you'd want values up to 160cd/m2.

 

Meaning you can sit much closer, or closer to what you would when in front of a PC monitor. As default cd/m2 value is much higher than recommended average of 120cd/m2.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candela_per_square_metre

 

But, point taken - as my post was more of a sarcastic nature.

 

Edited October 18, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[unreasonable]

5 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

But, point taken - as my post was more of a sarcastic nature.

 

 

I did spot that     Sitting closer to a large screen starts to pose other problems though, it is not just about brightness. You start to notice the fisheye effect close to a large screen. A curved screen helps a bit, but then there is also the need to keep your TiR within it's own limited  camera arc, so you still have some limitations.

 

As someone who has a 70inch 4K TV, I can attest that it has a number of great features, but assisting in spotting distant contacts, or, (my particular problem) tracking close contacts against forest, are not among them.

 

 

[[DBS]TH0R]

6 minutes ago, unreasonable said:

As someone who has a 70inch 4K TV, I can attest that it has a number of great features, but assisting in spotting distant contacts, or, (my particular problem) tracking close contacts against forest, are not among them.

 

Very interesting. What do you then think of the recommendation SharpeXB is so adamant about?

[unreasonable]

I pretty much ignore all his posts: in my experience they amount to "everyone who does not agree with my conception of what constitutes "reality" is an ignorant gamer" which I do not find either constructive or accurate. Mind you, he is not the only one who takes this line.

 

There is an irreconcilable tension between the needs of people of different ages, eyesight, training, PCs, GPUs etc - let alone VR - for options that allow them to enjoy what is after all just a game, and the need expressed by some MP folk for a "level playing field".  I do not think this will ever be solved, so I am happy for there to be options. I expect some process of natural selection will determine what wins out in the MP field, while for SP it is essential just to have options. That does not mean that all options are equally good in my view: the alternative setting, with it's luminous blobs at 30km and inverted zoom is an abomination IMHO, which just allows people who would be better off with with icons to pretend that they are not using a helper. I wish the developers could have done something a little more subtle.      

 

edit: I would add that I like to use a clean screen (no icons, technochat etc) not because I labour under the delusion that this is more "real", but because it is more "immersive", which is a very different matter.  

Edited October 18, 2019 by unreasonable

[Mac_Messer]

4 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

What do you consider „the same picture“, given the different monitors out there and the different display settings applied.

There is none. For those exact reasons stated, each and everyone of us has a different picture displayed by his monitor. And there is no way to tell if anyone`s picture is better or more realistic. Hence the ability to spot or track multiple dots in real life is irrelevant, because the RL conditions are impossible to replicate by the displayed game picture.

If I was ever to switch monitors with one of the guys who boast about seeing dots ingame easily at 3-8km, he would probably have huge problems seeing/tracking anything on my display or any other that is not his.

 

Not all people are stupid and / or blind. There are several monitor/video setup threads that recommend monitor/colour/vid settings that are replicated to the last detail, yet still feedback in spotting effectiveness varies considerably.

[SharpeXB]

3 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

we need bigger, better and HDR certified monitors to help to simulate this even better

An HDR monitor isn’t a benefit in this game since it does not support HDR

 

I’ve been playing this sim since early access on many different displays 27”-32” 1080p and 4K

and have never had all the trouble you’re going on and on about. 

Edited October 18, 2019 by SharpeXB

[RavN_Sone]

Nobody here did. It was introduced just lately. 

 

[SharpeXB]

5 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

I have a 2560x1440 @ 27" monitor, which translates to 108.79 PPI, 0.2335mm dot pitch

Compared to your 3440x1440 @ 34" screen, you have 109.68 PPI, 0.2316mm dot pitch

 

Now lets compare this with "run of the mill" monitor with 1920x1080 @ 24" ... 91.79 PPI, 0.2767mm dot pitch

 

One can start to understand why a larger pixel gives the advantage in pixel spotting.

 

Lets continue with a 4K gaming TV, one of which SharpeXB recommended earlier on:

 

I'll take this one (LG B8 OLED) : https://www.techradar.com/reviews/lg-b8-oled-oled55b8-oled65b8

 

The smallest 55" model running 4096x2160 DCI 4K resolution translates to 84.19 PPI, 0.3017mm dot pitch

Dot pitch isn’t relevant because it’s not taking viewing distance into account. Generally people with larger screens sit farther away from them especially if they are TV sized. Sitting with your nose pressed up to a 55” screen might be awkward. 

 

Pixel size is only relevant if the game is using pixel sized sprites or whatever. DCS did this where the minimum size of an aircraft was set at about 3 or 5 pixels. That did cause distant aircraft to appear larger on lower resolutions and it’s one of the reasons it was abandoned. I don’t know if Normal Visibility in IL-2 does that although from all accounts it seems Alternate does. That’s perhaps why 1080p exhibits more problems with seeing too distant aircraft. I don’t see that effect or the inverse zoom in 4K

4 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

Very interesting. What do you then think of the recommendation SharpeXB is so adamant about?

You misunderstand my point about TVs vs monitors. What I was referring to was how much more prevalent HDR is with them as opposed to monitors. 

[Dakpilot]

So what happens when you run at low res.. 720p or such

 

And people will (if it benefits them) no matter how horrible it looks 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

[[DBS]TH0R]

5 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

An HDR monitor isn’t a benefit in this game since it does not support HDR

 

And just like that, you made your main argument about gaming TVs with certified HDR support worthless in this discussion. ??

[SharpeXB]

7 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

And just like that, you made your main argument about gaming TVs with certified HDR support worthless in this discussion. ??

The question was about their popularity in general and whether that would encourage developers to support HDR in games. That’s relevant. The Devs know what type of display or resolution players use so they can decide for themselves if it’s worthwhile.

And HDR is inevitable. It’s only a matter of time until it arrives here. 

[[DBS]TH0R]

16 hours ago, III./JG52_Maple said:

I found disabling "sharpen" filter box helped a lot. With that checked it makes planes practically invisible, particularly around the wings. At high aspect, nose to nose the plane was invisible due to the filter. With it off I was able to make out the air-frame and at distance the black dot became visible and more prominent. Test ON and OFF for your own results. Note: I still use sharpen landscape filter, which doesn't seem to have an effect. 

 

Maple 

 

I need to do a lot more testing, but on the first attempt there seems to be an obvious difference with Expert visibility and global sharpening filter ON that contributes to the issues described here. In my recent testing I set 2x3 B-25Ds at 10km and 1km lower than my altitude "face to face". With Expert it was hard to make them out, now with sharpening filter OFF it Expert visibility seems much easier.

 

Can more people test this ON and OFF with Expert visibility?

Edited October 18, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[RedKestrel]

4 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

I need to do a lot more testing, but on the first attempt there seems to be an obvious difference with Expert visibility and global sharpening filter ON that contributes to the issues described here. In my recent testing I set 2x3 B-25Ds at 10km and 1km lower than my altitude "face to face". With Expert it was hard to make them out, now with sharpening filter OFF it Expert visibility seems much easier.

 

Can more people test this ON and OFF with Expert visibility?

I fly with Sharpen filter on, but I also fly with landscape filter 'blurred' as this was recommended to me in previous 'spotting' threads and seemed to help.

I will not have time to fly tonight but I will test over the weekend and see what I notice.

[gimpy117]

20 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

 

His premise is that other games with easier spotting have lulled people in to thinking that things are easier to spot in real life than they really are.  That is probably true.  Next time you see a contrail pass overhead and see the very small object at the front of it, realize that this is likely at least a 737 sized aircraft at a distance of about 7 miles.  Now remove the telltail contrail, make it's size about 5 times smaller, give it a drab camoflauge scheme, and put it against a cluttered background.  Easy?

7 miles is 11 km. i've personally been in light aircraft and have been able to spot low flying traffic that aren't that size miles away when there are literally just a dot. I did that from the back seat of a 182 looking over the pilots shoulders. 

[RavN_Sone]

Just an example of spotting inconsistency encountered during quick online test. Does that finally prove invisible units?

It's also worth noting that these ships kept on popping in and out (few at a time) as I flew around them even without changing FoV (aka 'zoom').

 

Shows clearly it's not just about resolution, pixel size and monitor settings. This is without a doubt an in-game issue that needs fixing as soon as possible.

 

 

1440p with G-Sync, KotA server 19.10.2019, 'expert' visibility setting

 

Edited October 20, 2019 by RavN_Sone

[[DBS]TH0R]

6 hours ago, RavN_Sone said:

Shows clearly it's not just about resolution, pixel size and monitor settings. This is without a doubt an in-game issue that needs fixing as soon as possible.

 

Agreed. Thank you for the video description, thus confirming there are definitely issues with the spotting system.

 

Slightly OT: why are some posts (starting from RavN_Sone's post) not visible unless you sign in to forums?

Edited October 19, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[69th_Mobile_BBQ]

9 hours ago, RavN_Sone said:

Just an example of spotting inconsistency encountered during quick online test. Does that finally prove invisible units?

It's also worth noting that these ships kept on popping in and out (few at a time) as I flew around them even without changing FoV (aka 'zoom').

 

Shows clearly it's not just about resolution, pixel size and monitor settings. This is without a doubt an in-game issue that needs fixing as soon as possible.

 

 

1440p with G-Sync, KotA server 19.10.2019, most probably 'expert' visibility setting

 

 

I've seen this exact thing when Combat Box was running Alternate visibility mode.  Might be both modes.  I don't think ships are affected by either setting, just planes.   In alternate mode, I also have seen planes 7-8km out disappear for a few seconds or 'blink' in and out as I'm zooming.  I really prefer Expert but, no reason not to help out the "Alt Vis" players out if they need their mode 'tuned' too.  

[SharpeXB]

[edited]

 

On 10/19/2019 at 4:16 AM, RavN_Sone said:

most probably 'expert' visibility setting

You should be certain of which settings you are running. And then see if you can make this repeatable. If you can then make a track and post it to the bug report section. 

Edited October 22, 2019 by SYN_Haashashin

[RavN_Sone]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

You should be certain of which settings you are running. And then see if you can make this repeatable. If you can then make a track and post it to the bug report section. 

I wasn't sure as this was an online session and I couldn't get the information at that time, but now I confirmed it with the admins: this is expert.

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

I never had the constant trouble some people seem to have with this issue. 
The problem lies with the players themselves, not their gear. It’s most likely the got accustomed to the easier less realistic mechanics of older games and can’t adapt to the greater visual fidelity of current ones.

 

The fact that you're not experiencing any problem doesn't mean there is none.

This topic started on 9th of October. Nobody here was having such problems with the pre-patch spotting, so it is not an issue of IL-2's visual fidelity. On top of that, the above video sums it all up.

[[DBS]TH0R]

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

The problem lies with the players themselves, not their gear. It’s most likely the got accustomed to the easier less realistic mechanics of older games and can’t adapt to the greater visual fidelity of current ones.

 

You contradict yourself on so many levels that this is borderline for physiology exam, let alone some moderating work.

 

First you state the realistic rendering would be better represented with an HDR certified gamingTV (or monitor, else I will probably "misunderstand" you again), coming back a full circle stating the game doesn't yet support one. In other words, "there is an issue, yet we better not address it since anything other than my special vision of how realistic rendering should look like ... I just don't really like".

 

Best of all, the above bolded text - you aren't certain of anything except trolling this thread and repeatedly attempting to stop any meaningful discussion that could yield any positive results that might come out it.

 

If you don't have anything constructive to add to the discussion, your vote on the matter is just that - one vote / opinion. And in no way it can or will have more weight over the rest of us here. No matter how many times you re-post it opinion here.

Edited October 19, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

First you state the realistic rendering would be better represented with an HDR certified gamingTV (or monitor, else I will probably "misunderstand" you again), coming back a full circle stating the game doesn't yet support one. In other words, "there is an issue, yet we better not address it since anything other than my special vision of how realistic rendering should look like ... I just don't really like".

A summary of what I said was:

IF the game supported HDR that would really help the visibility issues.  
 

NO having an HDR monitor right now won’t help because the game doesn’t support that. 
 

how is that unclear?

Edited October 19, 2019 by SharpeXB

[Guest deleted@50488]

I would be good with something like what I have in War Thunder Sim mode.

It's way better than every try ED did with DCS target spotting IMHO, and better than what I see in IL.2 Great Battles at present.

 

Edited October 19, 2019 by jcomm-il2

[[DBS]TH0R]

46 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

IF the game supported HDR that would really help the visibility issues.

 

Visibility issues = confirmed then. ?

 

5 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

There’s only so much Devs can do with this issue. The rest is up to you. The constant griping about this issue gets really old. Why is it that flight sim players expect their game to feature 100% visual fidelity when that’s impossible with any current display technology and many other games actually have the same issue. 

 

Rest is up to you = one of the mods people do to the game I have already mentioned here is forcing 0.65 gama in combination with reshade mod in order to increase contrast and make spotting easier (to live with).

 

Many other games having the same issue = DCS being only one you mentioned. I presume the "older games" part refers to the IL-2 1946...

 

OTOH I've listed Cliffs of Dover Blitz as an example, jcomm-il2 just now listed War Thunder Sim mode and BMS scaling is another previously mentioned example. DCS's attempt at solving the problem is an unsuccessful example and should not be replicated here. Or shouldn't have been, since some of the ALT visibility stuff looks like C/P. Instead, ALT should follow one of the successful solutions to the problem if not having only one visibility setting in game is the way it will stay.

 

 

Edited October 19, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[gimpy117]

I really like Thor and his well rounded posts. good arguments, great research.

 

the problem is I think certain people didn't like the pre hot-fix zoom because it was harder for them to work the visibility system and fly around unseen with impunity. 

the first time I ever got a mirror to actually be useful in was pre-hot fix as well. I'm sure that has something to do with it. but the "pro" and "git good" crowd that is used to flying with settings and im sure other "tweaks" that allow them to see you but not you to see them saw their K:D's go down...and we can't have that 

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

Visibility issues = confirmed then

There will always be this issue in flight sims. No display technology can equal the real world in terms of resolution, color depth and contrast. And most monitors are not going to display a life sized image either. 
HDR would help because it expands the color depth from 16.7 million to 1 billion. And provides a much higher contrast ratio. That would go a long way to making other aircraft more visible. 

1 hour ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

DCS's attempt at solving the problem is an unsuccessful example and should not be replicated here. Or shouldn't have been, since some of the ALT visibility stuff looks like C/P.

Alternate Visibility is similar to what DCS did in that it makes distant aircraft too visible. It’s also a user/server setting which is causing multiplayer problems in the same way. In that way it’s repeating the same mistake. 

1 hour ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

BMS scaling is another previously mentioned example

That system is what causes so many player trouble as they try to adapt to other sims that don’t use it. They’ve been accustomed to aircraft artificially rendered at 2x the size of what they see in IL-2

1 hour ago, gimpy117 said:

the problem is I think certain people didn't like the pre hot-fix zoom because it was harder for them to work the visibility system and fly around unseen with impunity. 

Most people that don’t like the Alt Visibility don’t like it because it allows aircraft to be visible from ridiculous ranges across the entire map. It’s completely unrealistic. 

[gimpy117]

2 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

 

Most people that don’t like the Alt Visibility don’t like it because it allows aircraft to be visible from ridiculous ranges across the entire map. It’s completely unrealistic. 

as opposed to now when they randomly disappear? at least we didn't have 109's teleporting behind like now.  and I wouldn't say "most" the community is pretty split and it think its mostly along of the lines of people who cheesed the old visibility system and those who didn't. 

 

i'm not really getting how allowing everyone to see everyone at a distance more easily without hyper tweaked settings isn't fair.  seems like a much more level playing field to me. unless that is, it's unfair to you. 

 

and again if you honestly see better with the new system and some pepople see better with the old system then why can't both be allowed as a GFX setting? 

Edited October 20, 2019 by gimpy117

[SharpeXB]

43 minutes ago, gimpy117 said:

as opposed to now when they randomly disappear? at least we didn't have 109's teleporting behind like now. 

If that happens it may or may not have anything to do with the new visibility system. People complained about “disappearing” aircraft before 3.201

And in multiplayer there can be connection issues that cause “teleporting”. 

48 minutes ago, gimpy117 said:

 

i'm not really getting how allowing everyone to see everyone at a distance more easily without hyper tweaked settings isn't fair.  seems like a much more level playing field to me. unless that is, it's unfair to you. 

It’s only fair if everyone is playing with the same settings. That’s how it is already. Whichever Visibility mode is being used is set by the server. It’s not realistic to see other aircraft at those distances but as far as gameplay is concerned it’s fair. 

[gimpy117]

6 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

If that happens it may or may not have anything to do with the new visibility system. People complained about “disappearing” aircraft before 3.201

And in multiplayer there can be connection issues that cause “teleporting”. 

yeah, but usually you get "outdated hit data for that". I don't think this is the case. I think broken spotting, even more than before is to blame and not in the way of it being to easy 

Edited October 20, 2019 by gimpy117

[SharpeXB]

53 minutes ago, gimpy117 said:

and again if you honestly see better with the new system and some pepople see better with the old system then why can't both be allowed as a GFX setting? 

If you’re implying that the Visibility setting shouldn’t be server side, that’s never going to happen. I’m sure the overwhelming majority of players want these visibility options to be server side.

5 minutes ago, gimpy117 said:

yeah, but usually you get "outdated hit data for that". I don't think this is the case. I think broken spotting, even more than before is to blame and not in the way of it being to easy 

You’ll have to make a track of it and post it to the correct forum section. 

[gimpy117]

1 minute ago, SharpeXB said:

If you’re implying that the Visibility setting shouldn’t be server side, that’s never going to happen. I’m sure the overwhelming majority of players want these visibility options to be server side.

im not so sure about that. 

[SharpeXB]

Just now, gimpy117 said:

im not so sure about that. 

Everyone else is. Guaranteed. That’s why 1CGS made it that way. Anything else would really upset a very large number of players. No online game has a setting like that player-controlled. Graphics sure, but not basic difficulty settings. 

 

If you’re so sure about it, start a poll and find out. 

[RedKestrel]

On 10/18/2019 at 2:45 PM, RedKestrel said:

I fly with Sharpen filter on, but I also fly with landscape filter 'blurred' as this was recommended to me in previous 'spotting' threads and seemed to help.

I will not have time to fly tonight but I will test over the weekend and see what I notice.

I flew a bit with sharpen off. I think it does help a bit, but it’s hard to say how much. Odd, because before it was noticeably better with it on. I didn’t do any really intense testing, just flew on MP with it on, I didn’t have a lot of time to fly this weekend unfortunately.

[[DBS]TH0R]

On 10/20/2019 at 12:20 AM, SharpeXB said:

There will always be this issue in flight sims. No display technology can equal the real world in terms of resolution, color depth and contrast. And most monitors are not going to display a life sized image either. 
HDR would help because it expands the color depth from 16.7 million to 1 billion. And provides a much higher contrast ratio. That would go a long way to making other aircraft more visible. 

Alternate Visibility is similar to what DCS did in that it makes distant aircraft too visible. It’s also a user/server setting which is causing multiplayer problems in the same way. In that way it’s repeating the same mistake. 

That system is what causes so many player trouble as they try to adapt to other sims that don’t use it. They’ve been accustomed to aircraft artificially rendered at 2x the size of what they see in IL-2

Most people that don’t like the Alt Visibility don’t like it because it allows aircraft to be visible from ridiculous ranges across the entire map. It’s completely unrealistic. 

 

So, we should just leave it like that - limits of display tech simulating non realistic way of spotting objects in-game? Or just wait for X number of years until HDR monitors become standard and in the meantime don't do anything to help and improve the flight sim we all love here. Even that is a "big if" HDR will help. Great thinking and logic = scr** the customers. ?

 

Alternate visibility is solving some, and inflating other problems. In other words, repeating the same mistake DCS did a while back. When developing a game (or any project by that matter), I don't see a logic in repeating other people/developer mistakes. Instead, one should look for successful solutions and pick up / improve from there. Especially in DCS regard, whose developers did not understand the problem to begin with.

 

The bolded statement: is the core of your thinking problem, right there. Replace "aircraft artificially rendered at 2x the size of what they see in IL-2" with "a compromise in order to bridge the gap of display technology and real life spotting". For which you have no understanding what so ever simply because you yourself do not have a problem on your system / don't like the solutions offered. More importantly, the simple fact is that in reality you just don't like scaling in any way, which you continuously back up (i.e. try to "hide") with one bad example / attempt at solving the problem as "a proof" that it cannot be done with today's hardware - yet we have listed many examples here how it can be and what benefits it would bring. Do you now start to notice the arrogance within your posts that gets so many people agitated here?

 

The bolded statement in red: no one here is arguing that, on the contrary. Once again, for n-th time: we would like to have realistic rendering distance with Scaling or Alternate systems. Not the "40km seeing-eye".

 

 

On 10/20/2019 at 3:23 AM, SharpeXB said:

Everyone else is. Guaranteed. That’s why 1CGS made it that way. Anything else would really upset a very large number of players. No online game has a setting like that player-controlled. Graphics sure, but not basic difficulty settings. 

 

If you’re so sure about it, start a poll and find out. 

 

Here is a suggestion: leave Expert as is, and give us BMS/CloD/WarthunderSIM scaling as an ALT mode and let people chose which to use online. Or are @SharpeXB and @77.CountZero too afraid that people might flock to ALT spotting then? ?

 

As long as things stay like they are, people will find all sorts of solutions to help themselves out (e.g. lowering gamma to super low values, 3Dmigoto mod). Scaling or ATL spotting eliminates that need and gives everyone equal playing field.

 

Last but not least, IL-2 GB already features HUD scaling (predefined size no matter the resolution). Why not use the similar principle/algorithm for airplane contacts?

Edited October 21, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R
spelling, typos, etc...