Jump to content
[DBS]TH0R

Expert visibility - contrast change dependent on zoom level

Recommended Posts

Was there a hotfix yesterday or so? I can't confirm it on the launcher. I saw a change in one of the bugs that I reported but I'm not sure if there was a hotfix (some servers reported bugs due to a hotfix). Did anything changed with the contrast / zoom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, OBT-Lionel said:

SeaWolf, No, there was no fix recently.

 

Thanks, strange though. I'm having different results on my tracks and my Nvidia driver is the same since the 4.002 update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for ppl who are having bugs with visability ( not, i like it or dont like it, type problems):

 

maybe post recordings or videos, i see they are investigating in topic:

Visibility of contacts: problems, ideas, suggestions

A big request to write VERY briefly.
The topic is strictly moderated.

UPD: as visual materials, it’s best to give a link to the video (with timing) + apply the track.

https://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/12833-видимость-контактов-проблемы-идеи-предложения/

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/5/2019 at 9:51 AM, OBT-Lionel said:

What I do not understand is why they changed the visibility ???

Because they implemented a lot of new stuff with the rendering model, like distant contacts glinting in sunlight etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

for ppl who are having bugs with visability ( not, i like it or dont like it, type problems):

 

maybe post recordings or videos, i see they are investigating in topic:

Visibility of contacts: problems, ideas, suggestions

A big request to write VERY briefly.
The topic is strictly moderated.

UPD: as visual materials, it’s best to give a link to the video (with timing) + apply the track.

https://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/12833-видимость-контактов-проблемы-идеи-предложения/

 

 

Why only post in the Russian forum? Did they posted on this side of the fence as well? If this is just a 'Russian thing', I consider it to be very odd.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, SeaW0lf said:

 

Why only post in the Russian forum? Did they posted on this side of the fence as well? If this is just a 'Russian thing', I consider it to be very odd.

Nothing odd, from what i can se its because more of players on that forum have reported problems with it, so they try to get good data for it.

 

if you have video or track you can just post link for them there also your acount is same on that forum, no need to understand russian or speak it to just post that to help give more data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very odd indeed, they should have created the same thread in our section of english speaking forums. Not like we've been silent here, more than some were stubbornly defensive that bugs are actually features.

 

I only skimmed through the replies there, and it seems the FOV plane disappearing bug is being reported on several occasions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the forums of many players have raised the problems encountered.

 

These problems are very numerous.

 

I do not understand, 1 CGS does not test before releasing a new version ???

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

Very odd indeed, they should have created the same thread in our section of english speaking forums. Not like we've been silent here, more than some were stubbornly defensive that bugs are actually features.

 

I only skimmed through the replies there, and it seems the FOV plane disappearing bug is being reported on several occasions.

I think impresion is differant, as we here post more in correct topics, and they on russian forum usealy just post all in one DD or update topic. So it seams like problem is more noticable there then here, when here its scatared in 10+ differant topics.

Problem can be do to weather or time of day conditions in mission, game graphic settings for player, is it online or offline, and so on... but its clear that airplanes dont show up sometimes in mid ranges, but why who knows... 

 

 

Spoiler

 

Hello!

 

I would like to respond to complaints about the visibility of aircraft, of which there are so many in the Russian-language forum. Most likely, you will not like my answer and my comments, so get ready.

 

I see comments saying that we should return visibility to its original state. This will not be and it is impossible for technical reasons. What we will do - AnPetrovich will deal with the problem with your help, to understand why it caused a lot of complaints and to find out if there really is any technical and stylistic problem that can be solved without destroying other improvements of the visibility system that were made earlier . I am not saying that the problem does not exist and I am not saying that it is, because my experience is different from yours. I have no problems with the visibility of contacts before and after the start of the battle. For some reason, I do not have the problems you are complaining about. I do not know why this is so, but it is. The English-language forum also does not have as many complaints as I see here. This is strange, but perhaps

 

Previously, the main complaint was the inability to see contacts in the air or buildings far enough away. We fixed this and enabled server owners to adjust visibility. Now, the main complaint seems to be visibility at a distance of say 1-6 km, the usual distance in battle. I understand that this can be an unpleasant problem.

 

Our task is to understand exactly what the problem is and what caused it, and then find a way to improve the situation by tuning, without violating the busy schedule of other works. 1C does not give me the opportunity to engage in endless visibility settings or anything else when we need to do so much. Everything that we do will be done within the framework of the current visibility system. I allowed Andrei to investigate this problem without distracting from his planned tasks. The community needs to try to help him sort out the problem if he asks for help. I hope that you can achieve a result that suits you.

 

Now, both the Russian-speaking and the English-speaking community of the game will need patience while we study the problem and it will take some time. And honestly, I can’t promise that something will be changed or say when it will happen. All I can promise is that we will understand the problem, we know about your complaints, so do not shout. We can hear you.

 

I also hope that we find a way to test possible changes better so that you all know what to expect if these changes are final.

 

Personally, I don’t know why finding contacts has become so difficult for you. Problem in LODs? Lighting? Aliens? I don’t know for sure, but we will see what can be done. Just don’t wait for an instant decision, we changed the visibility for the first time in 5 years 🙂 This is true, although it’s just a joke in this case.

 

Jason

Translated from English by Sneaksie.

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/12732-235-я-часть-дневников-разработчика/?do=findComment&comment=742482

Edited by 77.CountZero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not that. On the bug section there are at least five different visibility bug reports - contrast zoom bug (two threads) / cloud bug / planes disappearing mid way / invisible planes. All of them real / serious bugs. They should keep track of bug reports, I assume. This only for bug reports. There are complaints as well.

 

So they [should] know about it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What this guy posted happends offten when contact is close and over forest, hes totaly invisable. You could see contact from higher up but when closer hes just gone. And icon shows that he should be there ( and this didnt happend before visability changes, so its not old bug ):

https://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/12833-видимость-контактов-проблемы-идеи-предложения/?do=findComment&comment=742859

 

2019_12_7__21_37_32.thumb.png.b9c754e8ad

 

2019_12_7__21_37_39.thumb.png.bc497d4697

 

2019_12_7__21_38_43.thumb.jpg.ffaae4a7e8

 

2019_12_7__21_39_8.thumb.jpg.09c7b65b9f6

 

1.png.896d272a7ab5ec2d89c33f098a65c3a9.p

 

1 hour ago, OBT-Lionel said:

Of course they know, what I do not know is why they do not do anything ???

You can see from post by devs that they are doing something.

Edited by 77.CountZero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you say so ... 😉  I'm so optimistic that you,

 

I do not see any improvement and I still do not understand why they changed the visibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OBT-Lionel said:

and I still do not understand why they changed the visibility.

 

*This is what I know. Don't take my word for it.

 

Before the visibility update, the game engine had a limitation of 9.5km when spotting objects. People were complaining about it for years, which involved the inability to spot contrails beyond 9.5km, flak, bombers and even planes depending on the atmospheric conditions. This resulted in sudden merges, when a contrail popped at 9.5km and seconds later you were dogfighting, when a target was being bombed at 12km away and you could not see flak or blasts just because you were 'outside' the 9.5km bubble. The situation became known as the '9.5km bubble', when people were flying in their own bubbles unaware of what was going on on the 'other' bubbles.

 

Il-2 Great Battles engine was a modification of the ROF engine. Back in ROF, people did not complaint about it because planes are slow and the merges takes time to happen, so most people did not even noticed that we were limited to a 9.5km bubble. I just think it was a mistake to mod a game engine for WWII and don't consider visibility paramount due to the things I mentioned above. So in a way, the Il-2 Great Battles engine was already born with a serious limitation on this regard.

 

With the announcement of BoBP, the talk about it grew, since we were getting the 262, a fast plane that would merge even faster than the current piston planes. And people are expecting the Pacific theater for a few years now, and then you 'have' to spot distant ships and their long wakes, spot flak, big bombers, squadrons, etc.

 

Aside that, people were also complaining about spotting, when planes simply vanish in front of our eyes when they go below the horizon line, the lack of reflection, the wings being lit up by the sun (something that is very well done in ROF), etc.

 

In general, both the visibility distance and spotting qualities of the game were being questioned - the former was unanimous, since no one questions that we have to see contrails, flak, ships and such over 9.5km, and this will be a deal breaker as these fast jets and ships comes to Il-2.

 

So they said that they were working on a new visibility model to expand our bubbles to real situations. But it seems to have backfired due to problems with the code they created. Spotting got worse, contrast zoom bug make planes disappear, etc. Perhaps the game engine is limited and they are trying to patch it with things that are not really working. I'm not sure, but it does not seem to have the same level of rendering of the ROF engine. The contrast feature is not really contrast / wings being lit by the sun, but just a patch of brighter color that does not seem to interact with the environment. In ROF, when the planes are close, you can see the reflection run through the plane's wings as in real life.

 

Summarizing it, the visibility patch had to be done for the game to go forward. They just have to fix the bugs, come up with a different solution for the contrast bug I think and perhaps rethink spotting.

Edited by SeaW0lf
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SeaWolf,

 

Thank you for all these explanations.

 

I understand better what they wanted to do.

 

If they do not find solutions, I prefer the old system.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SeaW0lf said:

Before the visibility update, the game engine had a limitation of 9.5km when spotting objects. People were complaining about it for years, which involved the inability to spot contrails beyond 9.5km, flak, bombers and even planes depending on the atmospheric conditions. This resulted in sudden merges, when a contrail popped at 9.5km and seconds later you were dogfighting, when a target was being bombed at 12km away and you could not see flak or blasts just because you were 'outside' the 9.5km bubble. The situation became known as the '9.5km bubble', when people were flying in their own bubbles unaware of what was going on on the 'other' bubbles.

 

I have documented this with a video a year ago (0:30 mark):

 

 

Now that I am watching the video again it seems to me the dots at that range (9.5 km) are way bigger than we have in current version. This was one of the first videos with 1440p that I've recorded (got the monitor in December last year).

 

So in that regard I agree that even though we got the longer rendering range (i.e, bubble removed), the visibility took a step back in so many other areas that in general it is now worse than a year ago.

 

 

7 hours ago, OBT-Lionel said:

I understand better what they wanted to do.

 

If they do not find solutions, I prefer the old system.

 

Wanting to do something and the end result are not matching. This is why I don't believe ALT spotting was a bug, rather scaling we possibly weren't even aware before that got evident with the extended rendering range. Thus the contacts are way smaller today than pre visibility patch - they simply removed it and it created the disappearing effects on wide FOV (perhaps not created, rather more evident).

Edited by [DBS]TH0R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2019 at 7:01 PM, SeaW0lf said:

 

Why only post in the Russian forum? Did they posted on this side of the fence as well? If this is just a 'Russian thing', I consider it to be very odd.

 

del

Edited by =K=Gunther

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, OBT-Lionel said:

If they do not find solutions, I prefer the old system.

 

I think they can't go back. The 9.5km limitation is too crippling for WWII in special (vide THOR's video above). I quit flying at WOL once I realized that I had a limited bubble of visibility. You can't use tactics, position, nothing. Helps a bit for who is on comms because you can crisscross information with other groups, but then it is better to admit the game is flawed and just enable icons. Which comes to the realization that Il-2 before the visibility update was just a furballer / limited to furball servers*. The result was that I halted all my purchases of Il-2 not to protest, but because I won't buy something that I won't use at all (similar to what I did with DCS). I just bought FC because it is my passion, and I bought BoBP because they had brought back then a reflection patch that made things better with the old visibility (and because of the P-38 alone). So they are crippling themselves with this reluctance to work heavy under the hood. They have to solve these things (and many other things) to bring back the old days. At least a portion of the crew have to dedicate time to it, or else it becomes a castle of cards. Eye candy alone and a few legendary aircraft won’t cut it (is my opinion alone).

 

*Ironic, because after the update spotting got so bad that we are back to furballing. In other words, they replaced six for half a dozen.

 

And besides the bugs, flak appears to be limited to the same 9.5km, which is also odd, since we can see planes past that. Perhaps they are doing it step by step, but they did not mention that flak was left behind this time in the visibility update. 

 

7 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

I have documented this with a video a year ago (0:30 mark):

 

Now that I am watching the video again it seems to me the dots at that range (9.5 km) are way bigger than we have in current version. This was one of the first videos with 1440p that I've recorded (got the monitor in December last year).

 

I agree. I have some old recordings and it was way better, but as I recall, Petrovich thought that we should not see contacts after 3km with ease, that it is very, very difficult, so they cut the life support and we are back to pixel hunting. The thing is, with 0% zoom my spatial perception got reduced to 1.5/2km at best depending on the sun position. I'm not sure where this comes from. Not even the 3km thing to be honest.

 

The contrast solution that they found is also messing with my depth notion. Perhaps because it is just a cutout placed on top of the plane profile without interaction with light. Today, in a dawn mission, I saw what appeared to be two planes dogfighting at the other side of no man's land (about 10/12km away). Little did I know that they were on our side of the mud (a couple of kms away). One of them crashed below our balloon.

 

I see these optical illusions all the time with the new visibility patch. It is weird, because ROF was spot on in all these things in general. I wonder how things got so out of hand.

Edited by SeaW0lf
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SeaWolf  +1

 

I agree with everything you just said.

 

Like you I did not buy Battle of Normandy and I even plan to ask for the refund of all my games if it does not improve in the weeks to come. (Not sure to get it ...)

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SeaW0lf said:

I agree. I have some old recordings and it was way better, but as I recall, Petrovich thought that we should not see contacts after 3km with ease, that it is very, very difficult, so they cut the life support and we are back to pixel hunting. The thing is, with 0% zoom my spatial perception got reduced to 1.5/2km at best depending on the sun position. I'm not sure where this comes from. Not even the 3km thing to be honest.

 

Agreed 100%. As if the whole system was tuned to blindness and not realism. I like the fact other real life pilots are slowly starting to voice their opinion how unrealistic spotting in this sim is.

 

If it doesn't get fixed, I don't have any plans to get BON. They need to start fixing show stopping bugs like these before I'll spend more money on this sim.

Edited by [DBS]TH0R
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can say as well, it has really put a damper on my play

 

I barely fly anymore, two buds a flew with moved to DCS because of it 

 

none of us seem to have the drive to play often/ but more planes

and avid flight simmer i work with i have even cautioned not to buy the game yet because he is visually challenged already and even me with at least 20/20 cant see anything. I know my eyes aren't the 20/15 they used to be, but i cant imagine how his experience would be! 

 

AND

when one got on an played we just stumbled around blind at 11,000 feet for half an hour, saw nothing. it got late so we left bored.

 

not a very good experience. it seems now either 2 things seem happen in any given sortie:

1. You get jumped out of nowhere

2. you fly around blind bored 

 

there seems to be a elite few who have no issue with the current state of the game. and i'm not sure what is different for them. maybe if the devs look into it we will finally get an answer but at least for me, and I think many others, game-play often fits into these two scenarios   

Edited by gimpy117
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pictures are more worth than words..

 

for those who speak about visibility in BMS without ever having tried BMS much, or at all..    and for the rest, a how it COULD be.. with "simple",  but PROPER graphics even.. 

(simulation is about TACTICAL purpose (visuals) and accuracy, NOT graphics pimped to new standards of tech and loosing the roots - sales-fuck up)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/8/2019 at 7:59 AM, SeaW0lf said:

The contrast feature is not really contrast / wings being lit by the sun, but just a patch of brighter color that does not seem to interact with the environment. In ROF, when the planes are close, you can see the reflection run through the plane's wings as in real life.

Are you saying you don't see reflections in IL-2? because I see them like this. I have noted and reported a bug where they can vanish on the reflective skin such as the P-38 but not on aircraft like this.

RoF's effect could look overdone like the example here with the Bloom set to On. IL-2 does have reflections on the aircraft though and very similar to RoF from what I see.

2019_12_18__15_3_3.jpg

2014_8_2__21_31_13.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2019 at 6:00 AM, SeaW0lf said:

I agree. I have some old recordings and it was way better, but as I recall, Petrovich thought that we should not see contacts after 3km with ease, that it is very, very difficult, so they cut the life support and we are back to pixel hunting. The thing is, with 0% zoom my spatial perception got reduced to 1.5/2km at best depending on the sun position. I'm not sure where this comes from. Not even the 3km thing to be honest.

 

 

interesting information and research in this thread:

 

Distance of 1.5 to 2.5 nm (2.8km to 4.6km) quoted "where a pilot can reliably expect to detect approaching
enemy aircraft". 

 

Quote:

"The region surrounding an aircraft where a pilot can reliably expect to detect approaching
enemy aircraft extends to about 1.5 to 2.5 nm. Under conditions of good visibility, favorable
lighting, minimal clutter, etc., it is possible to see modern fighter-size aircraft at ranges of 10
nm or more if they fall within the highly focused central vision. Aircraft are sometimes seen
at these longer ranges, especially if the observer is cued and able to limit the search area to a
few degrees, but uncued observers are extremely unlikely to detect enemy aircraft at anything
approaching maximum theoretical range."

 

Without being lynched, can I play Devil's Advocate and suggest that maybe (?) the current spotting system actually is physically realistic and accurate.  The problem may be that in gaming entertainment terms it is not much FUN?! 

 

Begs the question of what we want more - realism or entertainment?

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, kendo said:

maybe (?) the current spotting system actually is physically realistic and accurate.  The problem may be that in gaming entertainment terms it is not much FUN?! 

 

I disagree. 1.5km is nothing. I can see helicopters parked 2km away in a heliport and they look to be just a couple blocks away. A plane 1.5km away is pretty big on your visual field. I see them make the wind leg about 1.2km away and they look as big as a Wingnut model (it is an exaggeration, but they look darn close to me). There are tons of real life pilots reporting bad spotting in these games since DCS years ago. People underestimate the human eye. There was the video on the post “Spotting compared to the game”. The devs opened a Russian thread asking for solutions, so at this point everyone knows something is wrong. Plus we have the bugs and the planes vanishing in front of our eyes. The whole visibility system is all over the place.

 

Joe Rogan - How far away are you from this thing?

Cmdr. David Fravor - I'm at 20,000 feet and its right down on the surface - right off our right side, so I'm probably maybe a couple miles lateral and [at] 20,000 feet [6km], and we're just watching it move around.

Joe Rogan - And so it's very small in your eyes?

Cmdr. David Fravor - Not overly small. An airplane down that low, 40 feet, you can see it pretty well. It was pretty clear.

 

I need to do some testing, but with 0% zoom, planes appear to be just a dot on my monitor (IPS 2560X1080) from 1.5/2km, which then sort of does not match the visual experience I have when walking outside. We need to have a clear view of what is directly around us with 0% zoom. That's spatial perception, something we need in combat. The zoom feature, explained to exaustion on these forums, is just to compensate for focus and the fact that we would have to have 80+ inches 8K monitors to try to reproduce what the human eye can see in real life or something like it.

 

Fo some reason the math about distances and monitors and eye sight got lost in translation, then we have what we have now, a simulation of impaired pilots looking for invisible targets.

Edited by SeaW0lf
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.5 nautical miles in the article = 2.8km

 

Take it you didn't read any of the other material there. The below gives the gist of it:  

 

image.png.a487acbfca135472c0b1270ea70cee06.png

Systematically searching an area of sky requires the observer to focus on a distant object such
as the horizon to ensure proper focus.15 The shaded area in the illustration on the left of Figure
5 represents the visual “lobe” thus formed where an opposing aircraft could physically be
detected by the human eye in one “fixation.” At extreme ranges, the lobe is only about 2
degrees wide, so aircraft A would only become visible on the third fixation, or deliberate
shifting of the visual lobe. During fixation 3, aircraft B would not be detected, even though it is
closer to the observer than aircraft A, because it lies outside the observer’s central vision.
Aircraft C would be detected on fixation 3, even though it is at the same angle to the observer
as aircraft B, because it is close enough to be detected by the less sensitive peripheral vision.
This explains why even when aircrew use disciplined search patterns and fly in formations
where members are assigned different search sectors, the likelihood of detecting enemy
aircraft beyond about 2 to 3 nm is low.16

 

For example, a pilot searching a relatively small sector 90 degrees wide by 20 degrees high

might be physically able to see a target at 7 nm range, but
the probability it would fall within his 2 degree central vision on any given fixation is just
1/450 (0.002). This per-fixation probability increases to only about 1/110 (0.009) at 3 nm and
is still only about 1/5 at 2 nm. The illustration on the right of Figure 5 shows the cumulative

probability a pilot searching each 90-degree sector with 20 fixations per minute would detect
an aircraft approaching from various directions by range.17 The cumulative probability of
detecting the approaching aircraft remains below 0.50 until it is between 1.9 and 2.8 nm. For
simplicity, the series of figures that follow will use a circular 2 nm area to illustrate the region
where visual search is likely to detect an approaching enemy aircraft.

image.gif.7b565ddda39f1aab95bb273d9d9d9e4e.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are following the thread (s), most people are saying that spatial perception got reduced to 1.5/2km. I never said that Petrovich 3km thing is correct in-game, much to the contrary. I just said that he based the changes on his 3km thing.

 

Spatial perception is around or even below 1.5km in most cases with 0% zoom in FC for me, many times even with zoom, since we have several bugs out there. And the 3km thing is depending on the conditions, angle, etc. It is not like planes disappear after 3km or that you can't see them in good conditions. So at this point our spatial perception has to increase considerably to match real life data.

 

Then, no, I still disagree that the game has realistic spotting. It is bad as it has ever been. I was never mentioning figures of your links. And as I said, at this point everyone knows something is wrong and even the devs are looking for solutions [on the Russian forum]

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While all of the data above is nice and dandy, it doesn't really reflect the way it is being implemented into the game. If it is, it only confirms my suspicion that the system was tuned for blindness rather than realism.

 

There are few recent posts from real life pilots saying how much more difficult it is to spot planes in this sim / game than in real life.

 

Contacts are not being rendered at wide FOV (sometimes even normal/default FOV) at medium to long range distances. It is one thing not being able to spot, and another not rendering contacts at all.

 

This is all without even digging into the large number of issues described in this very thread (most glaring one being contrast change dependent on FOV, from either white to fully black) which makes for tracking and requiring the target much more difficult than in real life.

 

IMHO:

 

Expert: not realistic, neither fun.

Alternate: not realistic, somewhat fun.

Edited by [DBS]TH0R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?37759-Methods-of-smart-scaling&p=524546&viewfull=1#post524546

 

https://why485.itch.io/smart-scaling-demonstration

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This should probably go into a separate thread, but since I don't have a track of the run (mere video via Shadowplay) this is the only thing I can post as evidence. And it is also related / dependent on the zoom:

 

 

Not to mention it was confirmed by other squad mates during the attack run.

Edited by [DBS]TH0R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/19/2019 at 9:32 AM, kendo said:

 

interesting information and research in this thread:

 

Distance of 1.5 to 2.5 nm (2.8km to 4.6km) quoted "where a pilot can reliably expect to detect approaching
enemy aircraft". 

 

Quote:

"The region surrounding an aircraft where a pilot can reliably expect to detect approaching
enemy aircraft extends to about 1.5 to 2.5 nm. Under conditions of good visibility, favorable
lighting, minimal clutter, etc., it is possible to see modern fighter-size aircraft at ranges of 10
nm or more if they fall within the highly focused central vision. Aircraft are sometimes seen
at these longer ranges, especially if the observer is cued and able to limit the search area to a
few degrees, but uncued observers are extremely unlikely to detect enemy aircraft at anything
approaching maximum theoretical range."

 

Without being lynched, can I play Devil's Advocate and suggest that maybe (?) the current spotting system actually is physically realistic and accurate.  The problem may be that in gaming entertainment terms it is not much FUN?! 

 

Begs the question of what we want more - realism or entertainment?

 

 

You missed foot note 17 where it notes an average human can make 2-3 fixations per second, but The authors thought a combat pilot would only spend 20% or less of his time eyes out. I believe the problems with the assumptions in this paper were discussed in the thread that link came from.

 

The detection probability goes goes way up when the pilot starts focusing out. That’s the problem with il2. I can be padlocked on a target and some how an aircraft makes it in bombs it, and I have to follow AAA to find them.

 

Even with the worst predictions in that study of 2nm being where a pilot would see an attacker the predicted spotting is still way farther then our spotting distance in this game. Also 2nm is 3.7km and that is still low especially when compared to the spotting study at the beginning of this thread. The most common figure for reliable visual detection of small aircraft is 3nm. At that distance pretty much everyone in the sky is expected to be able to locate other contacts with relative ease.

 

On a side note a mig 17 is roughly the same size as a 109, slightly smaller wing span and 5 ft longer, and a Mig 21 has way less wing span and is only 10ft longer so They should be about as as difficult to see as WW2 A/C

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 1/6/2020 at 5:24 AM, Hasler said:

Even with the worst predictions in that study of 2nm being where a pilot would see an attacker the predicted spotting is still way farther then our spotting distance in this game. Also 2nm is 3.7km and that is still low especially when compared to the spotting study at the beginning of this thread. The most common figure for reliable visual detection of small aircraft is 3nm. At that distance pretty much everyone in the sky is expected to be able to locate other contacts with relative ease.

 

 

On 12/19/2019 at 1:32 PM, kendo said:

Begs the question of what we want more - realism or entertainment?

 

 

Kq1rJ1n.jpg

 

 

Jokes aside (although it is serious), for the last couple weeks I've been going to the lagoon in Rio de Janeiro near the Christ the Redeemer. Helicopter traffic has been heavy lately due to the number of tourists in the city and the lagoon is a central spot for aerial tours. Most of them are small Robinsons 44 and other slim executive choppers. From my vantage point, the furthest they go is 5km, and I have no problem seeing them (both going or coming from the sun), this from 5pm to sunset, a time that in Il-2 you see nothing. When the sun lights them (side, bottom), they become a beacon of light. In shorter distances like 1.5 to 2.5km, they look like London buses going round (while here I have a video of a Bristol disappearing at 1.5km with 0% zoom). All this happening from 500 to 1000m above me. I would have to be visually impaired to miss them. The other aspect is that airplanes, especially P-47s, Spitfires and such have wings, and in banks I imagine the profile would look like huge kites flying around.

 

I need to study it more, observe more the choppers at different times of the day, perhaps spot a small airplane, but it seems to me that plus the contrast bug (regarding the OP), the dots reproducing contacts are anemic, timid, extremely sub dimensioned. I made some videos (need a better camera), and I see what I see here - what I see in video at home is two / three times smaller than what I'm seeing live. The human eye, 3D stuff, high resolution, makes objects way more detectable and bigger. And we are not even discussing the fact that here, in Il-2, planes disappear below the horizon line.

Edited by SeaW0lf
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, OBT-Lionel said:

The last update brought you a better one ???

 

 

Just came back from an evening of MP with the latest patch (KOTA). I do believe the skin loading and unloading bug has finally been fixed. Other squad mates have the same impression.

 

The overly bright LOD of some allied planes also seems to be fixed.

 

The rest... Not in the near future it seems according to the Jason's Officer's club:

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2020 at 3:37 PM, [DBS]TH0R said:

This should probably go into a separate thread, but since I don't have a track of the run (mere video via Shadowplay) this is the only thing I can post as evidence. And it is also related / dependent on the zoom:

 

 

Not to mention it was confirmed by other squad mates during the attack run.

 

I definitely experienced the ships disappearing at different zoom levels phenomena recently on WoL. Even more strangely, three ships were close together and only one would disappear/reappear as I zoomed in and out. I didn't take a track and I can't remember precisely now, but I think the disappearing ship was at a different angle than the other two.

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

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...