Low Graphic Options Should Not Be Allowed in Multiplayer Servers

[ShampooX]

I hope this in the right place to post.

 

IL2, TC and all it's modules and certainly it's online servers are, and I think we all agree, the best, most historically accurate, most immersive WW2 sim, or really any sim available, to play today.  They stand a at level that is far above everything else: War Thunder, DCS, Post Scriptum etc etc......but this is not to debate the merits of other games vs. IL2.

 

My concern and the reason for this request, is that the ability for on-line players to gain unfair advantages using low graphic settings allowed by the game is beneath the high standards set for and by the game and it's community.  I understand it's to be fair to player's who may not have the computer or internet power to play the game properly, but to these people I say- sorry, find another game, there are many out there.

 

In online games the two things happen: either the low graphic options are being actively abused by players.  Or players feel like their adversaries are misusing this advantage, rightly or wrongly and then no longer feel like playing the game.  The disadvantages of low graphic choices outweigh the advantages, so why even have it?

 

I'm sure I'm not the first to bring this point up but I would just add that I think it can only improve the credibility of an already great game by disabling low graphic capabilities all together.

 

Thank you.

Shampoo

[Raven109]

2 hours ago, ShampooActual said:

sorry, find another game, there are many out there.

 

Well, of course you'd say that. You're not the one making a living out of selling games. Here's another one for you. What do you do with people who own a 50" screen and can spot you faster and easier. Do you tell them off as well? Should only players who can afford the latest hardware be allowed to play? How many can afford the latest hardware? Better yet, should players buy the same hardware that you're using?

 

It's a public server. There is no guarantee for equality. Been so in every game since multiplayer has been invented.

Edited November 5, 2021 by Raven109

[ShampooX]

On 11/4/2021 at 8:27 PM, Raven109 said:

 

Well, of course you'd say that. You're not the one making a living out of selling games. Here's another one for you. What do you do with people who own a 50" screen and can spot you faster and easier. Do you tell them off as well? Should only players who can afford the latest hardware be allowed to play? How many can afford the latest hardware? Better yet, should players buy the same hardware that you're using?

 

It's a public server. There is no guarantee for equality. Been so in every game since multiplayer has been invented.

Spoken like a guy who relies on low graphics for kills.  Nobody has a problem if somebody wants to go out and buy better equipment to play the game and get better results.  Thats life, and thats how it works in the real world too.   To suggest what you did is kind of stupid.  We only have a problem with people who use lower quality settings, in effect using their own weaknesses, to get a fair playing field or exploited by others to get better results.  Thats kind of like Socialism don't ya think?   Maybe thats your thing, I don't know.  Sorry if you're too poor to afford nice things, but it's 2021 and not 2011 - check it out, computers these days are not as expensive as you might think.  Or, you could always get a job.

Edited November 6, 2021 by ShampooActual

[69th_Mobile_BBQ]

I totally agree with the OP.  It's so annoying to find that bush I was hiding behind in my MiG-3 wasn't actually hiding me at all.  

[ShampooX]

1 hour ago, Luka1999 said:

Aren't you kind of advocating for more socialism here though?

 

You're whining that others have gained an unfair advantage by "exploiting" the system and you're calling for more regulation.
 
Ironic isn't it? ?

 

Let the free market of multiplayer do it's "magic". Either adapt or get crushed by the competition. That's how you want it to be irl too, remember?

I suggest you pick yourself up by the bootstraps, git gud and stop crying.  

Super, then lets all play on low graphics.  Then we can all have the worst gaming experience together while we try to rack up the most kills - free market style.

Edited November 6, 2021 by ShampooActual

[69th_Mobile_BBQ]

So...  how exactly do low settings allow exploitation in Il-2?  I'm asking seriously.

I mean, if we're going to start calling for universal rules for ALL public servers, it's probably a good idea to be specific about what exploits are being used, which is something this thread has totally failed to do so far.

[moustache]

the absence of grass gives a definite advantage in short / distance tank fights and also in the forest, or on small valleys / hills, by improving your field of vision: you will see the other tank before it comes to you. sees, the grass hiding his vision but not you ... and seeing that the grass is high ... to have come across a video where I saw the point of view of the enemy who had killed me a few days before, it's a little frustrating

 

at long distance, the problem is common to all, so it's fairer ...

 

I see you have TC, I'll let you do the test ...

[69th_Mobile_BBQ]

So....  Are there any specific advantages for pilots using low settings?  The amount of servers that don't have tanks integrated greatly outnumbers those that do, and on those that do, pilots outweigh tankers heavily.  Are we to punish the pilots on behalf of a smaller amount of tank players?  

 

Also, if I went to ANY First Person Shooter/ground-based combat forum site and made the same complaint, would I even get the time of day?

 

About the only logical thing about this is for me to ask, "What's thick, standing grass doing on the forest floor anyway?"  I've lived near heavily-wooded areas my whole life.  Grass in the woods doesn't grow tall or thick like it does in an open field (if it even grows at all) and not everything is bushes, briars and thickets in between the trees.  If that's the case, then I would want the devs to fix it.  They could possibly also take the time to fix the invisible obstacles that seem to inhabit the border(s) between open field and tree line(s) as well.  

[ShampooX]

4 hours ago, 69th_Mobile_BBQ said:

So....  Are there any specific advantages for pilots using low settings?  The amount of servers that don't have tanks integrated greatly outnumbers those that do, and on those that do, pilots outweigh tankers heavily.  Are we to punish the pilots on behalf of a smaller amount of tank players?  

 

Also, if I went to ANY First Person Shooter/ground-based combat forum site and made the same complaint, would I even get the time of day?

 

About the only logical thing about this is for me to ask, "What's thick, standing grass doing on the forest floor anyway?"  I've lived near heavily-wooded areas my whole life.  Grass in the woods doesn't grow tall or thick like it does in an open field (if it even grows at all) and not everything is bushes, briars and thickets in between the trees.  If that's the case, then I would want the devs to fix it.  They could possibly also take the time to fix the invisible obstacles that seem to inhabit the border(s) between open field and tree line(s) as well.  

Um yeah, the specific advantage for pilots is you can see tanks hiding under trees because the trees don't render fully in low graphical settings.   I will show you some screenshots to demonstrate.  Your second point is spot on - they us something called "ULG" Ultra Low Graphics in War Thunder.  Nobody complain because nobody cares.  But WT is a piece of shit.  I don't think FVP is a piece of shit.  I actually think it's worth this discussion to save it from becoming the POS that WT is, as more and more players join up.  I don't why people here are talking about grass, it's about the trees man.  The trees.  Where am i in these pics?

Edited November 7, 2021 by ShampooActual

[69th_Mobile_BBQ]

17 hours ago, ShampooActual said:

Um yeah, the specific advantage for pilots is you can see tanks hiding under trees because the trees don't render fully in low graphical settings.   I will show you some screenshots to demonstrate.  Your second point is spot on - they us something called "ULG" Ultra Low Graphics in War Thunder.  Nobody complain because nobody cares.  But WT is a piece of shit.  I don't think FVP is a piece of shit.  I actually think it's worth this discussion to save it from becoming the POS that WT is, as more and more players join up.  I don't why people here are talking about grass, it's about the trees man.  The trees.  Where am i in these pics?

 

1).  The format of these screenshots does not allow me to full-screen them.  They are small on my screen at the largest I can make them so all I can see is the blue marker.

 

2). No matter how "dense" any RL Euro/N. American forest is, there are still plenty of small gaps here and there where one can see clearly to the ground when viewed from overhead.  Ask any RL pilot that flies helicopters or slow-flying civilian planes over dense forest of this type on the regular or charter a tourist heli flight yourself and take a look.

     Euro/N. American forests are comprised of almost the same tree (evergreen / deciduous mixed) and undergrowth types and are not like jungle-type areas you might see in the Amazon or South East Asia where the trees can be much taller and and the tree canopy can be much thicker than forests in Europe or N. America. 

 

3). These are still (no motion) shots made with the pilot knowing where specifically to look.  I'm sure the spotting is much more difficult for the pilot with the plane in motion - even if the tank gave away it's position by firing a round that has tracer properties. 

 

I don't think this is a good example of how low settings affect tanks vs. air.   How does low settings have bad results concerning air vs. air?

[ShampooX]

Mobile, those pics are not an example of low graphic trees, it's an example that there was no way I could have been seen in regular graphic settings (which the recording on which these screenshots is based).  Yet somehow that plane new exactly where to find me.....there were other strange factors, like his 40mm rounds always landed just a little bit off, almost as if I had a target on me, but the target was not right on me.  Anyway - there's a whole thread on this over ion the TC forum.  And I have to disagree, based on about a years worth of FVP play, that there are plenty of spots in all the maps where clusters of trees are so close together that there are no gaps.  If you find one of these clusters, you can not be seen unless the pilot is flying below tree top level.  I'm working on an example of screenshots that demonstrate tanks in woods at low graphical setting and will post them soon.  Thanks.