Jump to content

Discussion on the plane visibility issue


Han
 Share

Recommended Posts

PatrickAWlson
47 minutes ago, Retnek said:

...

 

- A much advanced contact presentation in the lower hemisphere - advanced spotting against the ground. But this has been DIFFICULT all the time, there's a thin line to arcade-gaming here.

 

PS: and all that given above is seen that way by the AI, too.

 

This is what makes the job difficult.  You are not wrong but you are not right either.  That spotting should always be difficult against the ground is a point of view.  Even more to the point: define difficult.  What is difficult for you might be impossible for me.

 

In real life spotting was what it was, and if you couldn't do it you either died or transferred to the infantry.  But this is a game with a customer base, not real life. That means (unfortunately for 1C) that they are going to have to come up with a solution that caters to a wide range of wants and abilities.  That IMHO is the key to success - the understanding that this is probably not a one size fits all solution.

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6./ZG26_Custard
12 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

, what is your configuration? in game graphic settings

Setup.thumb.png.0878227930426cfb5192129a271b42c5.png

 

 Nvidia setting are all at default.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PatrickAWlson said:

That means (unfortunately for 1C) that they are going to have to come up with a solution that caters to a wide range of wants and abilities.  That IMHO is the key to success - the understanding that this is probably not a one size fits all solution.

Was that not the intention of alt. Vis. 
you are right, but I am afraid of what we get

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Megalax said:

I know it's DCS, but he presents some good points.

 

This video is spot on. It illustrates the field of view issues I’ve been referring to (foveon sharp focus).

 

been thinking, 2 d players will need supplemental zoom to achieve it. VR already have it so so in theory it can be eliminated.

 

the only zoom setting should be to FV in my opinion. 
 

thinking beyond this a built in snap view to 6 would be nice in VR as standard

 

nice find

 

jokkr

Edited by WB_jokkr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

PatrickAWlson
Just now, 216th_LuseKofte said:

Was that not the intention of alt. Vis. 
you are right, but I am afraid of what we get

 

In my experience as a SW developer these sorts of tasks are not "one and done".  Similar to the AI, the team is probably going to have to make incremental improvements over time.  This particular task is even more difficult in some ways.  The AI is largely deterministic and can be tested in house.  With this issue you get a lot of "on my machine ..."

@Megalax Confirmed: can't see a thing in DCS either :) 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Megalax said:

I know it's DCS, but he presents some good points.

 

This is achivable in here same way, and since they changed visability to alow contacts to be visable for more then 9,5km i and ppl on ts3 with me can see contacts far from us on expert settings 30-40km, you could pick up bombers taking off and heading to targets from patrling front (when zooming in), but problems start at mid ranges, you lose contacts so easy. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Patrick, you’re spot on. I was the CEO of ICI 20 years ago(developer of Warbirds). I’m hoping this developer phases this in. It should be incremental and seamless for the community. With each release they could add in a feature or two. I don’t even think it’s necessary to announce them and to just judge community reaction to change. Creating expectations can backfire. There are winners and losers in much change. 
 

i do think it’s not a choice of realistic vs arcade vs fun. Realistic can be fun too if well done. 
 

DCS is there potential competitor but the price differential is keeping IL2 in the game. 
 

note a new graphics engine is mostly a matter of efficiency, getting away from single threaded would be the greatest plus if properly done.

 

this old engine still has some life in her (but not forever)

 

jokkr
 

Edited by WB_jokkr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[DBS]Browning

Many people have said what they don't like and many have said the general direction that they would like changes and that's fine, but there have not been many posts about specific changed people would like, so I thought I would have a go.

 

When I use the abbreviation 'px' I'm referring to the width/length of the plane in pixels at the default zoom level.

 

I would like it if:

Very close planes (i.e more than 20px wide) remained the same as they are now.

As planes start to get smaller than 20px, the plane should gradually darken in appearance until at about 10px the plane is completely black. The fade should be gradual enough that it is not noticeable.

Canopy and other surface reflections should remain bright when the plane is at the right angle to the sun. These reflections should always be pure white and always at least one pixel big, regardless of antialiasing as such reflections are brighter than our screens can display.

 

Beyond about 8-10km distance, these darkening and reflection effects should become less and less strong until at about 12-15km distance they are no longer in effect and planes appear as they do now.

 

I have attempted to edit a screenshot to produce the kind of effect I have in mind.

There are 9 planes in the screenshot. The most distant is at 2.85km away. See how many you can spot.

 

KHcPHqX.jpg

 

Now open this link to see my proposal. How many you can spot now?

https://i.imgur.com/PYzUeKf.jpg

 

Here are the icons:

https://i.imgur.com/UcioC15.jpg

 

This approach can be tweaked to produce the desired  result and I don't think it is as obtrusive as aggressive smart-scaling if done right.

 

Simply reducing the distance haze effect on aircraft may also have a similar effect perhaps?

 

Edited by [DBS]Browning
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 25
Link to comment
Share on other sites

PatrickAWlson

@[DBS]Browning I can see four or five.  Two immediately, more after looking more carefully.  I like the general effect of a darker object.  If this was in game and said dark object was actually moving across the terrain I might be able to pick up more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[DBS]Browning

Yes, such an effect is multiplied in its effectiveness when movement is added.

 

There are downsides, as there are with all such things.

At very high closing speeds (think 262s approaching each other) you might be able to notice the planes getting darker if they had a white skin.

In a few atypical situations it will make light planes harder to spot against some backgrounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

E69_Qpassa_VR
1 hour ago, [DBS]Browning said:

Many people have said what they don't like and many have said the general direction that they would like changes and that's fine, but there have not been many posts about specific changed people would like, so I thought I would have a go.

 

When I use the abbreviation 'px' I'm referring to the width/length of the plane in pixels at the default zoom level.

 

I would like it if:

Very close planes (i.e more than 20px wide) remained the same as they are now.

As planes start to get smaller than 20px, the plane should gradually darken in appearance until at about 10px the plane is completely black. The fade should be gradual enough that it is not noticeable.

Canopy and other surface reflections should remain bright when the plane is at the right angle to the sun. These reflections should always be pure white and always at least one pixel big, regardless of antialiasing as such reflections are brighter than our screens can display.

 

Beyond about 8-10km distance, these darkening and reflection effects should become less and less strong until at about 12-15km distance they are no longer in effect and planes appear as they do now.

 

I have attempted to edit a screenshot to produce the kind of effect I have in mind.

There are 9 planes in the screenshot. The most distant is at 2.85km away. See how many you can spot.

 

KHcPHqX.jpg

 

Now open this link to see my proposal. How many you can spot now?

https://i.imgur.com/PYzUeKf.jpg

 

Here are the icons:

https://i.imgur.com/UcioC15.jpg

 

This approach can be tweaked to produce the desired  result and I don't think it is as obtrusive as aggressive smart-scaling if done right.

 

Simply reducing the distance haze effect on aircraft may also have a similar effect perhaps?

 

this is crystal clear what is the problem and a good solution, good job

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@[DBS]BrowningFantastic solution, I'd love to see it. The biggest issue I have is losing enemies against the ground because their colors match too closely (somehow even when the planes are silver)/are blended into the ground, and this could help with that massively. I've noticed that it's easier to find shadows than planes at low altitude (especially over forested areas), which makes me think a lot of the issues are related to colors.

 

A few questions: What would reflect/glint? Is it all surfaces? Just canopy/mirrors?

Also, have you considered if canopy/mirror glint would be stronger than surface glint, and thus visible from further away and/or bigger for longer? A toned-down version of the sniper scope glint from Battlefield comes to mind.

Edited by DJBscout
phrasing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LLv34_Flanker

S!

 

@[DBS]Browning Check also the spotting from cockpit view. Those canopies etc. have a nasty film/smear/filter/whatever on them. Another thing that should change. They should model ALL cockpit glass clear and transparent as well.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Megalax said:

I know it's DCS, but he presents some good points.

 

Spitfire pilots would see Bandits at 20 miles .

F-18 pilot can see SOS in sand at 20 miles . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, x420xTenacious_D said:

Love all the community talking about the long range visual of dots. But I would love to see a stress tracking system for the pilots so we can see when they are " tired " and will black out very fast in a 2G turn or better. Right now you can see you are pulling the G's but have No clue how close you are to being one and done. 

 

When pulling a turn try not to yank the stick back so quickly - notice your sight going grey and darkening - that is the indication you are about to black out.  Ease up on the stick and or throttle or continue, blackout and lawn dart. 🥳

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C6_lefuneste
2 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

@[DBS]Browning I can see four or five.  Two immediately, more after looking more carefully.  I like the general effect of a darker object.  If this was in game and said dark object was actually moving across the terrain I might be able to pick up more.

I may be able to do something with my mod to test this proposition...Of course for SP only because most of server are now blocking injector mod (fortunately).

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, c6_lefuneste said:

I may be able to do something with my mod to test this proposition...Of course for SP only because most of server are now blocking injector mod (fortunately).

 

I understand that some people were abusing from it, but I use only colorfulness because it's God damn awful the colors on this game. Totally washed and off

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, [DBS]Browning said:

I have attempted to edit a screenshot to produce the kind of effect I have in mind.

There are 9 planes in the screenshot. The most distant is at 2.85km away. See how many you can spot.

From the first screenshot I found 5 in a quick sweep (under 2 seconds), 6 with a thorough look (More than 10 seconds) on my Macbook Pro 15" screen, the rest were basically invisible until you pointed them out.  Movement might have exposed one or two more, but that's hard to judge without seeing it.  I also don't play with my Macbook, but rather with a 24" 1080p monitor on my PC, so will have to check there when I get back to it.  That said, your modification of the contrast of the planes does bring them out of the background such that 8 out of 9 were readily visible.  Maybe a bit too far given the distances of some of the contacts?  I'd vote for something in between personally (Once I check on my gaming system, that is... ;) ).  Good suggestion, nonetheless!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, c6_lefuneste said:

I may be able to do something with my mod to test this proposition...Of course for SP only because most of server are now blocking injector mod (fortunately).

 

even for SP only mode this would be a great mod, @c6_lefuneste   !!

 

It's the same story in SP campaigns when your pilot/wingman calls out enemy fighters 5 km away and I can't see jack.

 

and who knows, if it's a great implementation the MP admins might relax their view on this.

 

 

Edited by Didney_World
Link to comment
Share on other sites

C6_lefuneste
4 hours ago, [DBS]Browning said:

Many people have said what they don't like and many have said the general direction that they would like changes and that's fine, but there have not been many posts about specific changed people would like, so I thought I would have a go.

 

When I use the abbreviation 'px' I'm referring to the width/length of the plane in pixels at the default zoom level.

 

I would like it if:

Very close planes (i.e more than 20px wide) remained the same as they are now.

As planes start to get smaller than 20px, the plane should gradually darken in appearance until at about 10px the plane is completely black.

This approach can be tweaked to produce the desired  result and I don't think it is as obtrusive as aggressive smart-scaling if done right.

Can you post a track so I can test your idea with my mod and share screenshot ?

I won't be able to change thing using plane size but I may use plane distance, it should have same effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nighthawk2174
11 hours ago, So_ein_Feuerball said:

 

Wasn´t that one of the reasons why people disliked the alternative visibility?

So whilst I say yay to no difference between resolutions, zooming in should increase the size of the contact.

WIth the alternate scalling methods shown here:

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

All of them never drop below the normal 1:1 scale so even if the equation calls for a decrease in the LOD size to below 1:1 it won't.  Meaning the size of the contact will never drop below what it is now while zooming in.  It may be larger depending on the fators taken into account but it will never get smaller than the unscalled model.  Hec just try the above demonstrator tool.

11 minutes ago, Han said:

Everyone responded in constructive way - thank you! Your opinions are very important for further planning of development.

 

As we see from this discussion, 1/3 of community members are supporting the current approach and around 2/3 have serious doubts against it.

So we allready working of finding the solution. I'm not sure, that common solution is possible which may statisfy so different points of view, but who knows. We are all in discussion and researching inside our team at the moment. Fingers crossed.

 

PS

About smart scaling - we allready have it. We have for many years actualy. But now looks like it's time to back for tweaking it again and may be some other measures should be taken.

 

Once again - thank you for your participation in constructive discussion and your dedication and attitude.

 

Han thank you once again for taking time to look at this issue I hope that you take what i've said and others have as well too heart and take a critical unbiased look at what we've presented.  I hope you are willing to examine the link that's been posted around a few times and consider with smart scaling it can be made to take into account a wide variety of monitors, not only that but you can improve upon what has been developed by Chihirobelmo and Sanpat.  Ofc smart scaling isn't everything, as warthunder shows contrast adjustments and color adjustments are quite needed as well.  And at long enough ranges using a dot system as well, that replicates what you tend to see irl of a plane becoming dimmer and the light gray "dot" fading to sky blue from the outside in.  And ofc glint, glint irl is extremely strong if the angle is just right.  I've had a situation where I saw a glinting aircraft, and getting the range from flight tracking apps, was seeing a small private jet from ~20NMi and it wasn't like the glint was dull either it was still rather quite intense.

Edited by nighthawk2174
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

... You are not wrong but you are not right either.  That spotting should always be difficult against the ground is a point of view.  Even more to the point: define difficult.  What is difficult for you might be impossible for me. ...

I'm aware there are no simple solutions. It will need a process of a lot of small steps - the way the developers did with IL2-GB all the time, successfully! I suspect a lot of critics will be pleased with a re-arranged contact presentation. Imho there it is a common sense here this topic should be addressed. No chance for satisfaction when three guys flying a mission together detect the same target at 9, 6 and 4 km distance. If the chances are somewhat equal for all of us it's much more easy to accept personal shortcomings. And much more relaxed to discuss the "historically correct level of contact spotting in the lower hemisphere", too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The funny thing is that those 1/3 that support the current spoting system are cynical, they use the zoom that is totally unrealistic, even more unrealistic than improve the spotting. Why not remove the zoom? It's totally artificial and fake.

Edited by SJ_Butcher
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LColony_Red_Comet
3 hours ago, SJ_Butcher said:

The funny thing is that those 1/3 that support the current spoting system are cynical, they use the zoom that is totally unrealistic, even more unrealistic than improve the spotting. Why not remove the zoom? It's totally artificial and fake.

As you know I am a bigger supporting of a better spotting system. But zoom still has uses even with a good system like in Falcon BMS. For example, being able to zoom in to view a gauge in greater detail. The best thing would be a spotting system tuned to the widest Fov, but set so that all fields of view have the same contact scaling applied. Even in a case like this zoom is useful for things like what is stated above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mitthrawnuruodo
1 hour ago, SJ_Butcher said:

Why not remove the zoom? It's totally artificial and fake.

 

Zoom isn't any less realistic than an arbitrary fixed FOV. Instead of being limited to a single physically-incorrect view, players can use a range that more closely matches the capabilities of human vision. Obviously the mechanism of zooming in by pressing a button isn't realistic, but the final outcome is more realistic in terms of overall visual capability.

 

Unlike all the other visual aids, idealized zoom never adversely affects the relative scaling or appearance of in-game objects. Therefore, it could be argued that zoom is the most realistic of them all.

 

Restricting zoom for "realism" only makes sense when the dimensions of the display and the position of the observer are fixed, so that a single physically-correct FOV can be chosen for life-size on-screen visuals.

Edited by Mitthrawnuruodo
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. One of the biggest problems I see is that the glass "effect" of a closed canopy seems to make contacts suddenly disappear.   I can see and track a contact just fine with the canopy open, but as soon as he crosses into my glass he just disappears.  In other words, the glass effect is much too strong.  In real planes it is much less noticeable.   Hopefully, this is not too far off topic.

 

2. Other than the glass issue I think the spotting is OK as is as long as everyone suffers equally.

 

3. Perhaps you need to do something to make 1080p and 4K monitors more equal when it comes to spotting.   Maybe a setting of some kind.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FTC_DerSheriff
5 hours ago, SJ_Butcher said:

The funny thing is that those 1/3 that support the current spoting system are cynical, they use the zoom that is totally unrealistic, even more unrealistic than improve the spotting. Why not remove the zoom? It's totally artificial and fake.

Its also not realistic to control your ww2 aircraft sitting on an Office chair staring at a screen with a much narrower fov than your two eyes are capable off. It's also not realistic that your field of view is cut into millions of little squares.  (Pixels).

Hence we need aids to compensate. 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some sort of compromise must be made. You cannot claim to aim for realism and at the same time have things like 1 minute engine limits until complete failure...  for instance.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Han said:

As we see from this discussion, 1/3 of community members are supporting the current approach and around 2/3 have serious doubts against it.

So we allready working of finding the solution. I'm not sure, that common solution is possible which may statisfy so different points of view, but who knows. We are all in discussion and researching inside our team at the moment. Fingers crossed.

Great news! Super awesome to have devs that are so responsive to the community. One detail, although it probably does not matter for the decision made: if we would take into account not just the people posting here but also al the SP people or just more casual players (like most of my friends), then I suspect it would more be like 90% have serious problems :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Han said:

Everyone responded in constructive way - thank you! Your opinions are very important for further planning of development.

 

As we see from this discussion, 1/3 of community members are supporting the current approach and around 2/3 have serious doubts against it.

So we allready working of finding the solution. I'm not sure, that common solution is possible which may statisfy so different points of view, but who knows. We are all in discussion and researching inside our team at the moment. Fingers crossed.

 

PS

About smart scaling - we allready have it. We have for many years actualy. But now looks like it's time to back for tweaking it again and may be some other measures should be taken.

 

Once again - thank you for your participation in constructive discussion and your dedication and attitude.

 

Thank YOU!

 

It's pretty awesome for a team to allow us directly to voice our opinion and knowing it is taken into account.

There has been constructive criticism, but don't worry, people here love your work, respect your choices, and like it much to have you giving us the opportunity have a discussion with you. We love you sim!

 

This team is really incredible...

Edited by Caudron431Rafale
Link to comment
Share on other sites

E69_geramos109

The only isue I find on the game with spoting is the contacts that are near on the close range. The ones that are far away I find that is quite realistic, of course it can be improved with some better reflections etc but I think that the game should not become an arcade where you are aware of everyone just looking arrond for a short time. 

When the planes are close, most of the people flying with monitors we use the minimum zoom to spot. That zoom do not represent how the eyes are looking because the lack of FOV on the monitor. DCS video posted on this forum explains that quite well so from my point of view just something to compensate the problem on the close distance planes when we are scaning the close planes shoud solve the isue and should bring balance between realism and playabiliyt. Spoting planes far away or on the terrain should be difficult and it is normal that there will be people complaining because of that when something is easy

On 8/22/2020 at 4:14 AM, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

Personally one of the frustations I have with the current spotting system is at close ranges, and when the target aspect is from the 12 o clock or 6 o clock. Many times for example in planes with armored glass I have lost a plane I was going to shoot at after checking six o clock just before taking the shot, or needing to zoom in considerably to just keep the track on them, even if they are at less than 2 km away in front of my nose. And I have a 1080p monitor.

Like Scharfi says , I think it has to do with the rendering and level of detail of the planes. It doesn't seem to be consistent from 5km to 1km range.

I set up a quick test, 1v1 quick mission me in P-51 vs AI Bf 109 G-6. I run away in level flight then I cut throttle and let the 109 come closer, in high fov which is the fov I and most players use to scan the sky, given the monitor size limitation compared to our eye field of view, and take screenshots as it comes closer to compare:

unknown.png

These are the results:

unknown.png

You can see that from 5km to 1.5 km there seems to be a problem with the rendering, the distance is significantly closer yet the LOD doesn't really scale up, the contact flickers as well, for example at the 2.5 Km picture it was rendered as a single pixel only! Note this is with the sky in the background.

These are my graphic settings:

unknown.png

 

That is the perfect example about what is happening

Edited by E69_geramos109
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hnbdgr said:

Some sort of compromise must be made. You cannot claim to aim for realism and at the same time have things like 1 minute engine limits until complete failure...  for instance.

You own a car?

 

Get in it, drive to your local freeway, leave your car in a low gear but redline the crap out of the engine for as long as it takes till it blows up - come back here and post the information for comparison.

 

If not, read the engine mode notes and try to fly within those limitations.

 

Thanks. 👍

 

In other news:

- Poor glass on canopies was an issue the VVS faced during the war as their quality of produced glass was lower than Western varieties. 

 

- "Zoom" as people refer to it here is nothing less than adjustment of FOV which caters to helping flyers on monitors and limited FOV VR headsets to pull back the FOV to a wide variant so as to see what is going on around them.  If it was limited to 1 to 1 scale based on monitor size and resolution then people would feel like they are looking at their flying world through slits or horse blinkers.

 

- Nice to see though Han and the team are still looking into it and the DCS test video is something to be aspiring towards.  I can track aircraft in VR but spotting them since that limited amout of time pre 4.006c has been an issue but with that there have been many updates in drivers and the game that combine to contribute to the whole sum experience.  That being said - with differed rendering, we are getting better lighting and my VR performance has improved exponentially which has also led to more contacts in career to fly with and against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, SJ_Butcher said:

The funny thing is that those 1/3 that support the current spoting system are cynical, they use the zoom that is totally unrealistic, even more unrealistic than improve the spotting. Why not remove the zoom? It's totally artificial and fake.

Make the default view the maximum zoom with the ability to zoom out for wider field of view.  Then give us binoculars to look for distant targets. The tanks already have it in game so all you have to do is apply it to the planes. Pilots used  binoculars. That would make it more realistic!

Edited by Esco
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[DBS]Browning
12 hours ago, Han said:

I'm not sure, that common solution is possible which may statisfy so different points of view, but who knows. 

 

I honestly think a common solution is possible.

I believe this because I don't think very big changes are needed. Certainly no changes as big as 'alternate visibility' are needed. Just a subtle darkening of medium distance targets might be enough or a reduction in the effect of haze on aircraft.

 

No one wants to be able to spot every aircraft inside 10km at a glance, but I think the majority would like to be able to reliably spot a plane inside 4km if they are looking in the right direction.

 

Like the last attempt at visibility changes, it is likely that you won't get it 100% right first time, so perhaps it would be a good idea to make the first round of changes as optional.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, [DBS]Browning said:

 

I honestly think a common solution is possible.

I believe this because I don't think very big changes are needed. Certainly no changes as big as 'alternate visibility' are needed. Just a subtle darkening of medium distance targets might be enough or a reduction in the effect of haze on aircraft.

 

No one wants to be able to spot every aircraft inside 10km at a glance, but I think the majority would like to be able to reliably spot a plane inside 4km if they are looking in the right direction.

 

Like the last attempt at visibility changes, it is likely that you won't get it 100% right first time, so perhaps it would be a good idea to make the first round of changes as optional.

 

No no no, I would very much like the option to be able to spot every aircraft inside 10km at a glance. Sure, every now and then I'll hop onto a full realism MP server. But mostly I play this game because I want to simulate the fun bits of air combat, not because I want to simulate looking around in confusion.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[DBS]Browning
1 minute ago, blue_max said:

No no no, I would very much like the option to be able to spot every aircraft inside 10km at a glance. Sure, every now and then I'll hop onto a full realism MP server. But mostly I play this game because I want to simulate the fun bits of air combat, not because I want to simulate looking around in confusion.

It sounds like icons (perhaps less intrusive ones?) might suit you better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, [DBS]Browning said:

 

I honestly think a common solution is possible.

I believe this because I don't think very big changes are needed. Certainly no changes as big as 'alternate visibility' are needed. Just a subtle darkening of medium distance targets might be enough or a reduction in the effect of haze on aircraft.

 

No one wants to be able to spot every aircraft inside 10km at a glance, but I think the majority would like to be able to reliably spot a plane inside 4km if they are looking in the right direction.

 

Like the last attempt at visibility changes, it is likely that you won't get it 100% right first time, so perhaps it would be a good idea to make the first round of changes as optional.

 

Yeah I agree with this,

Most people I've spoken to who expand upon the fact that they don't like spotting,

1. Do actually enjoy the possibility that you might miss  spotting distant aircraft.
2. Do not enjoy the possibility that you might miss something that is extremely close to you, because of the contrast with background objects.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jason_Williams locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...