PeaceSells

Yes, I saw the video. All I can say is... too bad for DCS...

Smart scaling has nothing to do with image quality or monitor quality. It's simply to ensure that the model will be shown to you at the correct size you would see it in real life. Because for normal and even big monitors, at the usual distance from your eyes, in the usual game default field of view, everything is shown to you in a reduced size. So, unless you are using a field of view that matches your combination of monitor size and distance from screen (and this almost never happens unless in VR or some rare cases), the only way to display objects at real-life size is smart scaling, it doesn't matter what year you're in.

Thanks!

In smart scalling you don't control the size of the objects, it's automatically controlled by the sim to a realistic level according to distance. I never used the enlargement sprites of DCS, but if I remember correctly from the menu, it gave you the option to choose the amount of amplification. Maybe that's what produced all those enormous cartoonish sprites that people complained so much.

All I can see is it's health % (if I hover the mouse over it) and available aircraft (if I click on it). Is it the health % that tells you if there are still targets alive?

You can do RECCE in DCS...

Yeah, it's a shame, but to be honest I already suspected there was some technical impediment, since all other servers I know also have it this way. All excellent servers, including Blue Flag, wouldn't have it if there wasn't some technical reason like that. Not my intention to blow it out of proportion, never thought any less of these servers because of that and they are still the best experience I can have in DCS. Specially Blue Flag. Obviously, I just won't agree with players trying to justify it saying that it's more realistic and fair this way... And if ED ever corrects the technical issue (if they ever), expect me to bug you guys some more...

I agree, please remove that too.

The point is all this simplification makes it much easier to operate, ideally it shouldn't be mixed with high fidelity modules. I know the world isn't perfect, so concessions must be made. But giving it, besides unrealistic easiness of operation, superior capabilities, is a combination that doesn't yeld a healthy mix. It goes without saying... We don't know how much simpler to operate is this aircraft when we don't have the info to make it high fidelity. I doubt it's "FC level" simple, specially the non-western 5th gen aircraft. People do dedicate A LOT of time into hobbies. Simming is a hobby that takes a lot of free time, it's just how it is. Real pilots do it for a living, virtual pilots do it for a hobby, the difference is that one isn't risking millions of dollars of equipment and their own lives (and other's). Therefore one can train in limitless ways for limitless hours. And you can't use the capabilities of the aircraft the best if you don't know the manual. I understand the need to simplify the system for people that don't spend that much time on simming, but saying that "it's more realistic to operate a simplified system because IRL pilots already have everything memorized and I don't" is a distorted logic. Sorry, but it's not more realistic by a LOOOONG SHOT. And there's really no need to come up with these types of justifications... You can just say it's simplified to attract the casual mainstream player and increase revenue, and that's all right.

^^ I would love to see 5th gen fighters in DCS as high fidelity, if that was possible. As FC level, nope, don't want to see that at all. Don't get me wrong, what got me hooked to DCS was the free Su-25T (FC level), which was my first experience. From there I bought Ka-50, FC3, Huey and A-10C (and I still haven't dedicated enough time to learn the A-10C). I fly FC3 a lot, it's probably the module I fly the most - due to several reasons, not because I consider it the best, but I do love it. But do I want to see more FC aircraft of any gen? No, as many others I would like to see DCS become this arena of varied realistic simulators, where you can fly against other people. DCS is the only one I know on this path. So, is it possible to survive off making high fidelity sims? I don't know, I guess that's the million dollar question since the commercial failure of Falcon 4.0. With DCS I thought that somebody finally had found a way, but this FC4 thing suggests that it's probably only a partial way, you do still have to mix stuff to make it work... About your example of the family travel, maybe it's a personal thing but I didn't get that vibe at all reading these threads.

You expect me to give you arguments why there shouldn't be automatic spotting of enemies in the map... ... I don't even know why I'm still posting about this...

Yep. If you say so, ok then.

Whatever you tell yourself so you feel better playing like that...

You do know you can take out air defenses without them even realizing, don't you? (what's TM?)

This is a forum, isn't it? Of course we are not here to take decisions for ED. I don't really understand your post, you don't want to hear contrary oppinions?

You're right, that's not the game's fault, but yes, you are missing something...

That's the only valid argument I see, why should singleplayer aircraft be limited because of multiplayer? Specially because singleplayer users vastly outnumbers multilplayer users... But IMO there's an even bigger reason why 5th gen or 4.5 gen fighters shouldn't come to DCS as low fidelity planes... It's against the niche of DCS. Can a fighter like that be implemented as a low fidelity plane? Sure, I was flying F-22's in sims back in the nineties, there are low fidelity 5th gen fighters in several games out there. But there are no sims, other than DCS and BMS, that have high fidelity 4th gen (and also all other generation numbers) aircraft. That's what DCS sells, that's DCS's "trademark" and that's why most of us are here... You can transform it in your default arcade playground, yes, that will attract players, but don't forget there are much better arcade playgrounds out there, with better performance, fluidity, ease of operation etc. So I would recommend ED sticking to what they're good at. And I would recommend players that also like these playgrounds (myself included) playing each game for what they are good at, and not trying to transform one into the other... Plus the multiplayer issues.

That's the problem, you see things at distances you shouldn't, due to the infamous black dot, and don't see them when they get closer. Current visibility system is inverted.

That's so cool, XCOM!

Each post from you guys makes me wonder if you even play multiplayer... Yes, there are multiple things preventing that.... I'm not a scripter/mission designer, I can't spend the time setting up (and maintaining) these cool dynamic missions that run on the good servers. I don't have a computer that's available to stay on and running DCS all day, I don't have a computer with specs enough to have a mission with a good amount of units in it, a good amount of clients on it, neither I have the necessary bandwidth for a good amount of clients on it.

... my point was that nearly all servers have a mix of FC3 and high fidelity aircraft, and that's more than likely to continue like so with FC4 (you don't play a lot of multiplayer, do you?)

Neither does it have units automatically shown in the ABRIS... By that crutch logic, a lot of things should be shown on map for lots of other aircraft too... Each aircraft has its advantages and disadvantages, the Ka-50 has strong advantages that are exclusive to it and no other aircraft in-game has. The fun of DCS is using each machine for its advantages and knowing how to avoid its disadvantages. Otherwise it's no different from any other game out there... (Plus, doesn't the A-10C also have these units shown on his screen?) Yes, but somewhere there's another guy spawining after you who will get the updated situation on his ABRIS. It's an endless cycle... I don't think the idea behind this "HIDDEN OR UNHIDDEN ON MAP" feature implemented by ED is what you guys are thinking... It's kinda clear now that this is a feature available to mission designers to simulate having intel on the enemy positions before the start of the mission. It's designed to show them in the F10 map primarly and automatically transport them to the ABRIS too (makes sense). But in the way it's currently implemented on Blue Flag (and all other good servers too), units don't show on F10 map, indicating that there's no intel on them, but they somehow show on the ABRIS, so only Ka-50 pilots magically have this intel. If an enemy goes through the trouble of stealthly building an unit in the middle of nowhere, that unit will magically appear on the ABRIS of the next Ka-50 that spanws, wont it? By the way, I still think Blue Flag is the best server out there, hands down.

So I imagine that's regardless of the units being set as "HIDDEN ON MAP" or not, right? Because as far as I know, "HIDDEN ON MAP" will hide non-spotted units...

Show me a server where P-51 flies against MiG-29...

I can't test for GCI because I don't own CA... but are they currently seeing all enemy AA units on the map? I thought they could only see in kind of a fog-of-war mode (see only the ones that are being spotted by friendlies). Plus, of course the friendly units themselves...