Wolf Rider

no. no, thank you Home Fries... you seem to be saying "low resolution" makes it more difficult. Oh! and btw, those shots are a 1/4 ~ 1/2 the distance out to which you quoted ;)

Actually Bitmaster, you've hit on a very good point there... that being "eyesight" seems some just want a FPS shooter "sim" but don't want the work which goes with it.. in a 'sim" in "real life" ya gots to work for target acquisition - and any amount of "I CAN" therefore everybody should, is just hassling and a misnomer. A complete misdirection to fuel the "Kill buzz" eg on the internets, I'm sure I can spot stuff out clearly at 30KM... real life is a much different story though Now, having said that... yes, there is most certainly room for improvement within the DCS sim regarding "Dogfighting"... most certainly there is room for improvement. At least lets all keep it honest and factual, not just something which feeds unrealisticness, or a personal rush. @Solty... Solty... the "eyes hurting" thing is a really, really old one - just kick back and relax instead of sitting up close and tense. (me personally, I'm 55 and can still pass a driver's license renewal - heavy vehicle - eye test unaided/ uncorrected)

10miles/ 52,000ft/ 16Km (twice the height of Everest)... ain't gonna happen (except for the very, very few - those with totally exceptional eyesight

Turn Threaded Optimisation to OFF as well (Don't leave it set on AUTO) ;)

What FoV setting do you normally fly with DavidRed?

"Zoom" (narrowing the FoV) does indeed bring some problems to bear... then again so does widening the FoV, with regard to the ingame default FoV. Its something no-one will get away from with current technology as for the rest of the post.... " As part of the North Vietnamese triad system of defense, surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) had become an ever-increasing threat. U.S Air Force Brigadier General Robin Olds describes a typical encounter with surface-to-air missiles, which during a period of time in Vietnam was referred to as either a "MiG day" or a "Sam day", this was a Sam day.[53] Here come the SAMs. The trick is seeing the launch. You can see the steam. It goes straight up, turns more level, then the booster drops off. If it maintains a relatively stable position, it's coming right for you and you're in trouble. You're eager to make a move but can't. If you dodge too fast it will turn and catch you; if you wait too late it will explode near enough to get you. What you do at the right moment is poke your nose down, go down as hard as you can, pull maybe three negative Gs at 550 knots and once it follows you down, you go up as hard as you can. It can't follow that and goes under.[54] This passage from a USAF booklet explained a MiG day: "If you know a MiG-21 is in your area or you lose sight of one and want to find it again: Roll out wings level for 15 seconds, then look in your 6 o'clock about 1.5 miles. It will be there. Probably you'll see mach 2 Atoll (air-to-air missile) smoke trail first before you see the MiG. But remember that's where the MiG-21 is! Just ask one of the 20 aircrews shot down during Linebacker that never knew they were under attack."[55] " Wiki

crikey, its just a tad short at the moment isn't it?? iEDIT gee, I can actually get a sentence off without timing out

therein. lay the problem... no- one is complaining about change... you're becoming shrill again. I can see just fine @ the 1km you quote, with no "mod" and default settings don't know about "rendering issues" as such, but yes, lets see what is what there there was a lot of both B'nZ and turn fight The AVG used B'n'Z to great effect also not so.. the problem is in your monitor in the name of god? crikey

I agree as well Airdoc... maybe EDGE will yield the results? Thor... I was asking you what you thought, what you believed

"Their paper is entitled : "Predicting Visibility of Aircraft" and the link can be found here : http://www.plosone.org/article/info%...l.pone.0005594 (access is free). In their work they describe a tool that they have developed, termed Spatial Standard Observer (which they have patented), which incorporates divergent parameters such as aircraft size, shape, lumination, colour, contrast, etc, and predicts various parameters, the most relevant of which -for flight sims- is the threshold range (or threshold distance). The latter is defined as "the largest distance at which an aircraft can be seen" (for the given parameters). Their model predictions are tested against human observer results, setting up an experiment with 3d aircraft images in a monitor. They also compare their results with older data from real-world experiments. Their work highlights the fact that for given atmospheric conditions, threshold range depends largely on contrast (the difference in luminosity between aircraft and background), target size (i.e. wingspan, etc) and spatial frequency of the background (roughly a measure of its complexity)." and the question immediately after that post was "Won't people with different monitors and different contrast settings have a completely different end result?" ... which largely seems to have been ignored. To add in to that, is those who insist on running "peripheral vision" and what colour space are they running? also, there is colour perception itself and the simmer's age useful chart though - thank you... most indicate xxkm to xx km for a blip (dot); what do you believe it to be?

okay... if you're going to be reasonable, I'll ask you what you believe that distance to be

Solty... you're argument is shrill and tending towards exaggeration. I started off with CFS2 - SQN40 ;) way before the Zone Monster and zero weight laser kiddies struck Thor... "zooming in" has always worked. It means he hasn't adjusted his FoV wider to try adopt some false notion of "peripheral vision". Now, you can't offer what distance you should be able to see a plane, nor offer up what the default FoV actually is... so, what are the developers to do?

Sorry, nooo... I never said that - you have these accounts from Hartmann; Well you can't believe it, but the Sturmovik, which was their main ground-attack aircraft, flew like B-17s in formation and didn't attempt to make any evasive manoeuvres. And all they had was one peashooter in the back of each plane. Also, some of the pilots were women. Their peashooter was no threat unless they had a very lucky hit on you. I didn't open fire til the aircraft filled my whole windscreen. If I did this, I would get one every time.[16] His favourite method of attack was to hold fire until extremely close (20 m (66 ft) or less), then unleash a short burst at point-blank range—a technique he learned while flying as wingman of his former commander, Walter Krupinski, who favoured this approach. This technique, as opposed to long-range shooting, allowed him to: Reveal his position only at the last possible moment Compensate for the low muzzle velocity of the slower-firing 30 mm MK 108 equipping some of the later Bf 109 models (though most of his victories were claimed with Messerschmitts equipped with the high-velocity MG 151 cannon) Place his shots accurately with minimum waste of ammunition Prevent the adversary from taking evasive actions[9][17] - wiki

no... maximum FoV doesn't give "peripheral vision. there is no way anyone can get "peripheral vision" without a properly set up full wrap around screen. The sim also needs to be designed to account for that. What happens on a 2D monitor, which they all are, when you make the FoV larger than the default (which by the way, you don't see all the cockpit instruments when looking forward.. if you mean without tilting the view down to take it all in) is create a distortion... this distortion has the effect (pincushion, I think it is) of pushing everything back. Its like taking a flat image and pressing it into the bottom of a bowl - your planes are made much much smaller. If you are adjusting your field of view.... you're setting yourself up for problems

Thanks, you've just made my point... Point made again actually, they had the ability for a bloke up on the front line calling in co-ordinates, with a field radio, from a map... for both airstrike or artillery. Yes, that's right... it was difficult to ID targets yes, that's right... depending on if it is camouflaged or if the viewer is able to actually keep track or not Yes, but those "compromises should be realistic... don't you agree? Cartoon Balloons/ over size objects aren't, in all honesty, realistic - are they? "Bad Habits" are very much are part of that which should be looked at... I had one flyer (years ago now) who couldn't see an "attacker" flying level 100m off his six; due to his bad habits okay, I can accept the no range finder thing... but what do you consider "normal FoV"?

and that's why TGP (for ground) and radar (for air) was developed... because of the limitations of the MKI eyeball. let's not allow bad habits to get in the way of reasoning, eh? Also too bad, you choose not offer up some numbers on distances, etc as I really was curious to know you thoughts there.

okay... let's go further into "see at a distance, with the naked eye"; how far out (at what distance) would your "normal vision" allow for an aircraft to be seen at and then separately to that, clearly identified? all this though, isn't to say the situation in sim can't be or shouldn't be looked at by the developers and with a mind to keeping things realistic. The equivalent of "flashing neon arrows", in whatever form they may be wished for by those who only want an easier time of things, is far from realistic

Thor... you said; "IMO those trucks should be visible in normal FOV, represented by a dot that may or may not look slightly out of proportion" "slightly out of proportion" is cartoon balloon and just out of curiousity; what do you refer to as "normal visual range"?

To further this... parts of aircraft at distance do indeed "vanish". It depends on lighting conditions and parts, say a wing, enter into shadow. what a lot of people could try; is to go a real life airport and do a bit of plane spotting - wait until they take off, keep them in view, then as they recede off into the distance look away and try re-aquiring them. then, "cartoon balloons' is the result That's just it though... objects do, in fact, disappear when out of normal visual range again... that's the TGP was developed, as well as JTAC and forward spotters

DCS dropped 32bit support quite a while ago now... it was well published

just set the H100i to the onboard header (don't use the software) at set it in BIOS TO manual, or the case fan controller (making sure the rpm wire is to the onboard header, to register in case of pump failure), with either, set to 60 ~ 70% and leave it fixed... it will work well and NOT cause hearing damage ;)

actually, that's why TGP's and RADAR were developed... because real life objects don't scale, don't adjust their contrast to suit the attacker and are hard to both spot and ID

Something which has helped others, when running an oc system is the revert the system back to stock speeds Also, what is your system's DEP setting? (Control Panel/ System/ Advanced system settings/ Advanced(tab)/ Performance- settings/ Data Execution Prevention another to consider, if not already mentioned, could be to open the Mission in the Mission Editor and re-save it. (some older Missions get a little wonky when being run on a later version DCS)

Try disabling all the Start Up items... http://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/929135