Improved Spotting

[vicx]

So I was looking for reasons why the ground objects have a much larger visibility sprite than aircraft ... and it looks like there has always been visibility scaling in DCS.

 

LODS at 0m, 3000m and 10000m

 

 

 

 

Could be why the ground objects have a larger visibility sprite than aircraft ... boosted in size twice?

 

And yeah there is a funny coincidental scaling with collision models too.

 

Chechens have huuge collision models. Russian soldiers have fat collision models and US M4 solider has collision model smaller than his body. For sure accident of history where the models where first appeared in different versions of Lockon/DCS but grist for conspiracy theory. :)

Edited October 7, 2015 by vicx

[Darkwolf]

that may explain why a tank at 40km has the size of a cruise ship :lol:

[SharpeXB]

As much as I disagree with the idea of having another server setting. This MV thing is going to have to be one. Many people are not going to want to fly with it and see cruise ship size ground targets or see air contact that are actually 20 miles away rendered at the same size as those which are half that distance. It sounds confusing and just bad looking. If you play online you'll be forced to use the largest setting or be at a disadvantage. And then your game will look doofy.

So yes. It will have to be a server option and then that's going to split up the 8-12 people who even play WWII online. But so be it. Be careful what you ask for.

 

MV is like a backward progression rather than going forward. The progress in these games is towards larger and higher resolution screens which are going to become really popular in the next year or two. Or even VR

And yet there's a system here implemented that's a throwback to games from 20 years ago.

Edited October 7, 2015 by SharpeXB

[[DBS]TH0R]

that may explain why a tank at 40km has the size of a cruise ship :lol:

 

Perhaps this is what Wags was referring to when he mentioned unrealistic spotting distances of ground targets. :P

 

As much as I disagree with the idea of having another server setting. This MV thing is going to have to be one. Many people are not going to want to fly with it and see cruise ship size ground targets or see air contact that are actually 20 miles away rendered at the same size as those which are half that distance. It sounds confusing and just bad looking. If you play online you'll be forced to use the largest setting or be at a disadvantage. And then your game will look doofy.

So yes. It will have to be a server option and then that's going to split up the 8-12 people who even play WWII online. But so be it. Be careful what you ask for.

 

I don't see it as splitting up the community, rather establishing an even playing field. And no, 8-12 is not a realistic number of people playing WWII as much as you keep telling yourself or trying to prove a point by continuously underestimating the number of people that relish in online WWII game play. Some even exclusively.

 

Besides, all this is still WIP, in a beta version of the game.

[SharpeXB]

And no, 8-12 is not a realistic number of people playing WWII as much as you keep telling yourself or trying to prove a point by continuously underestimating the number of people that relish in online WWII game play.

Actually I don't even understand why MV is even needed in the WWII era. The dogfighting distance of all these planes is well within the distance of the normal graphic settings. MV only comes into play when an object is smaller than 5 pixels. That screenshot I posted of the Red Tails fur ball. All those planes are larger than 5 pixels, even the very small ones. You're not dogfighting anyone that far away in WWII

In Flaming Cliffs you are. But not WWII.

[Zompa]

Actually I don't even understand why MV is even needed in the WWII era. The dogfighting distance of all these planes is well within the distance of the normal graphic settings. MV only comes into play when an object is smaller than 5 pixels. That screenshot I posted of the Red Tails fur ball. All those planes are larger than 5 pixels, even the very small ones. You're not dogfighting anyone that far away in WWII

In Flaming Cliffs you are. But not WWII.

 

You must spot planes to dogfight. At any distance.

[NineLine]

You must spot planes to dogfight. At any distance.

 

One set of eyes weren't the only tools used for spotting in WWII either, you had numerous other sets of eyes looking as well, plus ground based radar, etc. Even with all that, spotting a single aircraft at a great distance is pretty tough, or impossible... spotting a large number, better. Knowing they are bad guys? Heck there are stories of pilots having to get right up behind an aircraft to make sure they were about to fire on an enemy.

 

Everyone here wants a good balance between an enjoyable experience and a realistic one... because we are playing on a puter, sometimes that balance can be tough... we all have different set ups, we all see colour and contrast different, etc.

[Talisman_VR]

Actually I don't even understand why MV is even needed in the WWII era. The dogfighting distance of all these planes is well within the distance of the normal graphic settings. MV only comes into play when an object is smaller than 5 pixels. That screenshot I posted of the Red Tails fur ball. All those planes are larger than 5 pixels, even the very small ones. You're not dogfighting anyone that far away in WWII

In Flaming Cliffs you are. But not WWII.

 

Do you even want to try and understand, or are you a closed book on the subject?

Do you fly on your own mostly with or against AI or just off-line with AI or just fast jets with missiles and modern weapon systems and AI? Perhaps if more people regularly tried to fly on MP as part of a human squad mission in WWII aircraft using WWII formation and combat tactics against human opposition with co-operative missions between other friendly squadrons in the air, they might get a better perception and appreciation as to why something like more real world visual capability is needed in DCS.

If you do all this and still think there is no need for more realistic air-to-air visibility then, frankly, I am almost lost for words. There are a lot of WWII sim enthusiasts, particularly virtual squadrons, waiting to see if DCS can deliver a decent WWII experience. Some of us feel like the poor relations to the modern fast jet world at the moment and mostly fly other sims while waiting to see if the DCS WWII project is worth committing to. If I had DCS standards of visibility on my PC for my real life vision, I would be considered visually impaired, LOL.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

[Talisman_VR]

One set of eyes weren't the only tools used for spotting in WWII either, you had numerous other sets of eyes looking as well, plus ground based radar, etc. Even with all that, spotting a single aircraft at a great distance is pretty tough, or impossible... spotting a large number, better. Knowing they are bad guys? Heck there are stories of pilots having to get right up behind an aircraft to make sure they were about to fire on an enemy.

 

Everyone here wants a good balance between an enjoyable experience and a realistic one... because we are playing on a puter, sometimes that balance can be tough... we all have different set ups, we all see colour and contrast different, etc.

 

I often wonder how many people who post about this have tried to effectively lead or take part in a squad of, say 6 or more, WWII fighters taking off in good weather and visibility in DCS and flying together for an air-to-air mission and remaining in visual contact with each other to maintain tactical battle formation integrity?

To have numerous set of eyes working for you and fly together as an effective force in the combat area requires being able to fly together in visual contact as a large force in the first place. DCS was not up to this prior to patch 1.5. I have not tried 1.5 yet, but clearly something needed to be done, so I am glad DCS has tried to solve the visibility issues that are there.

[[DBS]TH0R]

I often wonder how many people who post about this have tried to effectively lead or take part in a squad of, say 6 or more, WWII fighters taking off in good weather and visibility in DCS and flying together for an air-to-air mission and remaining in visual contact with each other to maintain tactical battle formation integrity?

To have numerous set of eyes working for you and fly together as an effective force in the combat area requires being able to fly together in visual contact as a large force in the first place. DCS was not up to this prior to patch 1.5. I have not tried 1.5 yet, but clearly something needed to be done, so I am glad DCS has tried to solve the visibility issues that are there.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself. And lack of understanding or even will to understand the problem of some posters here is borderline insulting IMHO.

[NineLine]

I often wonder how many people who post about this have tried to effectively lead or take part in a squad of, say 6 or more, WWII fighters taking off in good weather and visibility in DCS and flying together for an air-to-air mission and remaining in visual contact with each other to maintain tactical battle formation integrity?

To have numerous set of eyes working for you and fly together as an effective force in the combat area requires being able to fly together in visual contact as a large force in the first place. DCS was not up to this prior to patch 1.5. I have not tried 1.5 yet, but clearly something needed to be done, so I am glad DCS has tried to solve the visibility issues that are there.

 

I've done it in a number of sims, and its not easy, but then I am not sure its supposed to be easy, and it depends on the entire group working together, that in itself can be tough to find.

[NineLine]

Couldn't have said it better myself. And lack of understanding or even will to understand the problem of some posters here is borderline insulting IMHO.

 

That of course is a two way street...

[SharpeXB]

Do you fly on your own mostly with or against AI or just off-line with AI or just fast jets with missiles and modern weapon systems and AI?

Mostly in DCS I fly the A-10C and the Flaming Cliffs. Also the WWII birds. I do MP and SP

And I have RoF and BoS and CoD

I don't really consider DCS very much worse than any other in this regard. Sometimes it seems better sometimes not. The only flight sim where the visibility problems made it just about unplayable IMO was Vanilla CoD since it lacked antialiasing and had some other LOD problem.

DCS 1.2 is way better than that. If I think there's a realm in DCSW that stretches the ability of a PC player beyond its limits its the fast jets that can engage each other from 20 miles away. A WWII plane can't shoot you from that far away so why worry? And the problems of "I can't see my wingman" or "he disappeared in front of me" wouldn't be solved by MV anyways. Those aircraft in those situations are bigger than 5 pixels.

[Chimango]

I often wonder how many people who post about this have tried to effectively lead or take part in a squad of, say 6 or more, WWII fighters taking off in good weather and visibility in DCS and flying together for an air-to-air mission and remaining in visual contact with each other to maintain tactical battle formation integrity?

To have numerous set of eyes working for you and fly together as an effective force in the combat area requires being able to fly together in visual contact as a large force in the first place. DCS was not up to this prior to patch 1.5. I have not tried 1.5 yet, but clearly something needed to be done, so I am glad DCS has tried to solve the visibility issues that are there.

 

Perfect! Agree 100%.

 

PS. it's typical human behavior to talk about things they don´t really know. It happens here, it happens everywhere :music_whistling:

[NineLine]

Perfect! Agree 100%.

 

PS. it's typical human behavior to talk about things they don´t really know. It happens here, it happens everywhere :music_whistling:

 

Its also human behaviour to assume that if someone has a different opinion of you, they dont know what they are talking about ;)

 

Both statements are off topic of course, and we should focus on the discussion and not what we think or assume the other person knowns or doesn't know... its self can be insulting..

[Chimango]

Its also human behaviour to assume that if someone has a different opinion of you, they dont know what they are talking about ;)

 

I also agree!

[dooom]

I've done it in a number of sims, and its not easy, but then I am not sure its supposed to be easy, and it depends on the entire group working together, that in itself can be tough to find.

 

I often wonder how many people who post about this have tried to effectively lead or take part in a squad of, say 6 or more, WWII fighters taking off in good weather and visibility in DCS and flying together for an air-to-air mission and remaining in visual contact with each other to maintain tactical battle formation integrity?

To have numerous set of eyes working for you and fly together as an effective force in the combat area requires being able to fly together in visual contact as a large force in the first place. DCS was not up to this prior to patch 1.5. I have not tried 1.5 yet, but clearly something needed to be done, so I am glad DCS has tried to solve the visibility issues that are there.

 

This is merely my observation as a dedicated prop head in DCS: Yeah, those of us in the DoW sqd regularly fly together tactically WVR and Sith is correct... its not easy with the pre 1.5 default visibility but it was certainly more that possible when we work together as a group. This is why our server never implemented the visibility mods seen elsewhere... I dont think our experience or expectations have been the same as others. In many respects it has been a credo of not denying ourselves the pleasure of our hobby and enjoying/ learning to leverage what we have. With practice, we became very good at keeping together and exploiting our multiple sets of eyes to dominate the field.

 

All it required was some rally point designations and clear communication from flight lead on altitude and headings. We could always find each other to rejoin if seperated and find the enemy by using landmarks and proper bogey calls. Absolutely doable (aye...not easy) and our group has enjoyed DCS WWII simulation pre 1.5 with great satisfaction and enthusiasm.

 

Now with 1.5 out, we are happily watching to see how the beta plays out moving forward. Things certainly feel different at the moment but if change can help the broader player find his way to me and pick a fight ... hey, I'm all for it... thats why I fly afterall. I'm in the wait and see camp for now though to see how the final implementation of the visibility works itself out. Feels like a positive direction to me though.

[Charly_Owl]

I often wonder how many people who post about this have tried to effectively lead or take part in a squad of, say 6 or more, WWII fighters taking off in good weather and visibility in DCS and flying together for an air-to-air mission and remaining in visual contact with each other to maintain tactical battle formation integrity?

To have numerous set of eyes working for you and fly together as an effective force in the combat area requires being able to fly together in visual contact as a large force in the first place. DCS was not up to this prior to patch 1.5. I have not tried 1.5 yet, but clearly something needed to be done, so I am glad DCS has tried to solve the visibility issues that are there.

 

WWII big wings are sometimes more common than you think. I did some with buddies online. Tons of fun. Having good visibility is indeed a very important factor. It's much easier to spot people with 1.5 IMHO.

 

Edited October 7, 2015 by Charly_Owl

[SharpeXB]

I often wonder how many people who post about this have tried to effectively lead or take part in a squad of, say 6 or more, WWII fighters taking off in good weather and visibility in DCS and flying together for an air-to-air mission and remaining in visual contact with each other to maintain tactical battle formation integrity?

I'm sure that was even more difficult to do in real life than it is in the game. And DCS 1.2 is just fine in that regard. I have no trouble seeing another plane as close as a wingman is.

[VincentLaw]

I'm sure that was even more difficult to do in real life than it is in the game.

How sure are you really? Maybe it depends upon your hardware. I expect quite the opposite. Since I don't have head tracking set up, looking around is very cumbersome. My view is locked straight forward most of the time, and I alternate between around 60 degrees and 30 degrees field of view. Both of these cases have lower resolution than my eyes in real life (significantly worse with the 60 degree case). Since I don't have multiple monitors, I have almost no effective peripheral vision. Since I don't have an Oculus Rift, I have no benefits from stereoscopic vision, so a dot on the canopy glass or on my monitor looks just like a plane in the the sky. In addition, many people report that flying is easier in real life than in the sim because of the seat-of-the-pants sensation that your computer can't give you.

 

If you wanted real life to be more like DCS, you would need to sit in a freezer until you go completely numb, and then try to fly with one eye looking through a card board toilet paper tube. That would probably do it.

[Crumpp]

How sure are you really?

 

Pretty damn sure because I have experience flying formation in RL.

 

:thumbup:

[VincentLaw]

Maybe it depends upon your hardware.

 

Pretty damn sure because I have experience flying formation in RL.

the difficulty mirrored reality on my machine.

This is really what it comes down to. The experience of the user is largely dependent on both their hardware and their real life visual acuity. I think variations in these things is causing most of the disagreements here.

[SharpeXB]

How sure are you really? Maybe it depends upon your hardware. I expect quite the opposite.

I meant that I'm quite confident that it's much more difficult to be a fighter pilot in real life than in a game. The reason we all suck at tactics and flying formation and such isn't just because we're on PC screens, we're all a bunch of gamer amateurs, or most of us are anyways. :pilotfly:

[VincentLaw]

I meant that I'm quite confident that it's much more difficult to be a fighter pilot in real life than in a game.

Well, yes, in general I agree with that statement. In real life you have to pass strict entrance criteria, study and train rigorously, deal with g forces and restrictive harnesses, you can't pause and walk to the fridge, and if you die in real life, you die in real life... but that's largely a different topic.

[[DBS]TH0R]

That of course is a two way street...

 

True. Apologies if my views offend anyone.

 

 

I meant that I'm quite confident that it's much more difficult to be a fighter pilot in real life than in a game. The reason we all suck at tactics and flying formation and such isn't just because we're on PC screens, we're all a bunch of gamer amateurs, or most of us are anyways. :pilotfly:

 

Definitely true about the real life part. However, from the pilots that I spoke with and that have tried formation flying - it is actually much easer in real life. On the other hand... I don't suck at formation flying, not real WWII bomber formation tactics at least. :P

 

 

I often wonder how many people who post about this have tried to effectively lead or take part in a squad of, say 6 or more, WWII fighters taking off in good weather and visibility in DCS and flying together for an air-to-air mission and remaining in visual contact with each other to maintain tactical battle formation integrity?

 

Most of my flight simming over the course of past 10 years was online, I could say exclusively. See signature for details about DBS.

 

I've organized large historical missions in '46, and led bomber formations up to 20 planes on more than one occasion. All human piloted. The last being on one mission organized by Czech community.

 

We even participated in filming the promo for DCS WWII by Mysticpuma, the four mustangs dropping tanks and peeling off way my idea. I flew no.4 position.

 

 

So I pardon me if I think that I have some understanding of what the MP problems are in WWII flight simulator.