not planned Easy mode AAR

[Exorcet]

31 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

This wouldn’t help because it’s affecting where your eyes are looking which is really important and sorta hard to control. You would find your eyes glued to this indicator when they should really be taking in the visual cues of the tanker. 
 

It’s clear from these suggestions that you guys haven’t figured this out yet. That’s the problem with this thread. It’s people trying to make suggestions who haven’t figured out what this task requires. How about taking advice from someone who can do this? Those players will all tell you the same thing. Practice. 

If you want advice from someone who has successfully refueled, you can look at my posts. I don't follow your critique at all, your eyes can't be glued to something that doesn't exist. The indicator appears when you stray too far. Before that point all you have is the visual references on the tanker/tanker lights.

 

Even if the over extension indicator was on screen at all times, it doesn't prevent someone from using other queues. Conceptually it isn't all that different from the tanker guidance lights themselves, just without the drawbacks that make the lights hard to read currently.

[Tippis]

34 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Because it’s a physical skill you need to master. A tutorial in the game can’t do that for you.

Incorrect in every way. You see, physical skills can be tutorialised quite easily if there is a way to isolate the different components.

 

34 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

The only way to develop the skill is to put n the practice

…and guess four thousand times what helps when you practice? The first 3,999 guesses don't count, but here's a much needed hint: it has something to do with a method of transferring knowledge from one person to the next that has been around since the very first instant we could even figure out the concept of a person.

 

25 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

This wouldn’t help because it’s affecting where your eyes are looking which is really important and sorta hard to control. You would find your eyes glued to this indicator when they should really be taking in the visual cues of the tanker. 

Of course it would help because it would be possible to affect where your eyes are looking, which is really important and quite easy to control given the right circumstances. You would find your eyes being guided towards the indicators and cues that you should be looking at rather than flailing in the dark without any direction in some inane and vain hope that “practice” will somehow deliver this knowledge in a lightning bolt from the blue.

 

31 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

How about taking advice from someone who can do this? Those players will all tell you the same thing. Practice. 

It's these kinds of massively ignorant claims that ruin your line of argumentation every time.

What you're stating here has been proven false from the get-go, and no amount of lying will help you recover from your position of absolute lack of credibility. Quite the opposite.

 

What you mean to say is, how about taking advice from someone who can do this with a pinch of salt? Those players will tell you all kinds of things depending on how they learned it, and their experiences are not universally applicable or even good examples to begin with, especially not when they fly in the face of millennia worth of teaching and learning practices.

 

 

14 minutes ago, draconus said:

It's fine for SP but how can it be any fair in MP? Take for example a guy who can't AAR yet mismanaged their fuel so should end up in the drink or eject normally but with the option he does AAR and might come back to fight.

Fairness is not a particularly relevant factor to begin with. And the guy who mismanaged their fuel would come back to the fight regardless because that's just how DCS operates. The only difference is that by letting him go through the AAR process, he'd most likely be out of the fight much longer (or end up in the drink since he couldn't manage his fuel well enough to actually do the refuelling).

 

It would also be fair in MP because now you don't have to dumb down the mission to the lowest common denominator or worse, as SharpeXP keeps suggesting, make it completely unrealistic for all participants (although that's certainly fair for all… of sorts). Rather, they all have to worry about the same things and have to make the same considerations about what they bring along and about how and where they fly.

[sthompson]

19 minutes ago, draconus said:

It's fine for SP but how can it be any fair in MP? Take for example a guy who can't AAR yet mismanaged their fuel so should end up in the drink or eject normally but with the option he does AAR and might come back to fight. Or the guy who can AAR but will exploit the option to make it faster. It probably won't decide on winning but are you fine with it? It'd take away the care to have some fuel buffer when it's too easy to get.

Go read the OP. He wants it for his group's MP use. So whether you consider it unfair or not, that was the request. It presumably would be disabled, like easy comms and many other features, on hardcore MP servers.

[SharpeXB]

22 minutes ago, draconus said:

It's fine for SP but how can it be any fair in MP? Take for example a guy who can't AAR yet mismanaged their fuel so should end up in the drink or eject normally but with the option he does AAR and might come back to fight. Or the guy who can AAR but will exploit the option to make it faster. It probably won't decide on winning but are you fine with it? It'd take away the care to have some fuel buffer when it's too easy to get.

Yeah you’d have players running around on burners the whole game popping over to the tanker for an easy fill up. They wouldn’t need to load out with tanks either. It would affect the gameplay and also the type of player (ie air quake) attracted to the server. 

[Exorcet]

3 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Yeah you’d have players running around on burners the whole game popping over to the tanker for an easy fill up. They wouldn’t need to load out with tanks either. It would affect the gameplay and also the type of player (ie air quake) attracted to the server. 

Easy AAR has nothing to do with this, the unassisted would be able to do exactly the same thing, that's obvious. If you can fly burners forever and ignore ext tanks, your mission is too small.

[Tippis]

8 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Yeah you’d have players running around on burners the whole game popping over to the tanker for an easy fill up.

Same as they would if/when they learn to refuel. So that's good.

 

And it would be infinitely better than the completely boneheaded idea of using infinite fuel, since it would not only lead to that behaviour, but also to people carrying around completely nonsensical loadouts and flying the most ridiculous routes.

 

Oh, and since you've now outed yourself as being wholly unfamiliar with the concept of fuel management and AAR, I would feel remiss not to point out that if they kept running on afterburners and didn't carry any tanks, they would quite often not actually make it to the tanker…

 

Quote

They wouldn’t need to load out with tanks either. It would affect the gameplay and also the type of player (ie air quake) attracted to the server. 

You do understand that all you're describing is your proposed alternative solution, and why it is being dismissed for being a non-starter, right?

Edited March 26, 2021 by Tippis

[SharpeXB]

14 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

A tutorial can be immensely helpful, by telling you what to look for, though. BalticDragon's AAR tutorial for the Harrier is brilliant and really helps in what would otherwise be an extremely difficult task due to lack of a visual reference on the probe. The best way to do AAR is to find one or two visual cues (such as the "30" of Tomcat's pitch ladder or Harrier's canopy mirror), line them up and fly that. A mission that tells you what to look for will make AAR a lot less painful than trying to figure it out by yourself. 

Yeah there are tons of videos to show you this.
The “what” isn’t the challenge, it’s the doing part that requires practice. 
And see, ED didn’t need to do anything in tutorials because a third party already made a better one. There’s almost no point in ED or any game developer making instruction or tutorials. Remember game guide books? 

Today there are scores of really polished YouTube channels to teach you anything. 

[Tippis]

3 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Yeah there are tons of videos to show you this.

According to you, that doesn't work, so why do you keep bringing them up?

 

Quote

And see, ED didn’t need to do anything in tutorials because a third party already made a better one.

Actually, ED still needs to do something in tutorials because a third party is limited by the tools available to them and for no reason that anyone can think of, AAR must seemingly not be allowed to have the same tools as other parts of the game.

 

You have yet to explain why AAR is so insanely special that it deserves this level of abandonment.

Edited March 26, 2021 by Tippis

[SharpeXB]

3 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

Easy AAR has nothing to do with this, the unassisted would be able to do exactly the same thing, that's obvious.

Yeah but the unassisted have to actually work at it and have the ability. Easy AAR would attract air quake noobs to a server. 

[Tippis]

Just now, SharpeXB said:

Easy AAR would attract air quake noobs to a server. 

And?

[SharpeXB]

25 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

I don't follow your critique at all, your eyes can't be glued to something that doesn't exist.

What doesn’t exist? The colorful screen graphic right in your view? That would be pretty distracting. 

[Tippis]

Just now, SharpeXB said:

What doesn’t exist? The colorful screen graphic right in your view? That would be pretty distracting. 

Whatever it is you're fantasising about. Same as always when people explain a feature to you and you imagine something completely different and then complain about your own invention.

A colourful screen graphic right in your view would be just what the doctor ordered to keep you from being distracted by irrelevancies. That's kind of the whole point of having on-screen cues to begin with, after all.

[SharpeXB]

19 minutes ago, sthompson said:

Go read the OP. He wants it for his group's MP use.

So why can’t his group put some time into teaching their members to do this? Or run missions that are suitable for everyone to participate in?

[Tippis]

Just now, SharpeXB said:

So why can’t his group put some time into teaching their members to do this?

Go read the OP. It is explained there.

[Exorcet]

9 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Yeah but the unassisted have to actually work at it and have the ability. Easy AAR would attract air quake noobs to a server. 

Well firstly who is welcome is up to the server, so it's not really much of an issue. Secondly if it's OK for people to fly in burner all day and act unrealistically, then your point is moot. Surely if realism means anything it's not OK for people to fly in forever afterburn just because they had to put a tiny bit more effort into AAR.

 

It's also extremely unlikely that easy AAR is going to be the solid dividing line between an air quake server or not. The players demanding instant action don't want to sit at the tanker in the first place, they want to takeoff and shoot stuff. A mission with AAR is likely to turn them away, assisted or not.

 

It seems like the original suggestion works. It's optional to implement, it provides guidance for inexperienced players, and it's not prone to creating bad behaviors.

  

7 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

What doesn’t exist? The colorful screen graphic right in your view? That would be pretty distracting. 

 

I explained already:

  

34 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

your eyes can't be glued to something that doesn't exist. The indicator appears when you stray too far. Before that point all you have is the visual references on the tanker/tanker lights.

 

Edited March 26, 2021 by Exorcet

[Lurker]

Hat off to you Tippis for trying to present your arguments in a clear and decisive way, but I fear you're jousting with windmills here. There are some people who clearly feel very strongly about how things should "be" for lack of a better word, and any changes to their little and narrow view on the world they take as a personal offense. 

[Dragon1-1]

5 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

And see, ED didn’t need to do anything in tutorials because a third party already made a better one. There’s almost no point in ED or any game developer making instruction or tutorials.

Humbug. No one should be required to go to YouTube to find instructions necessary to get the most out of a well-polished simulator. For the kind of money they're asking, well-made, voiced, built-in tutorials are certainly called for, especially considering much older, cheaper games pretty much always include such features. It's ED's job to make both the manuals and the training missions that cover all the functionality included in a module. That free 3rd party materials are seen as better only means they've got to step up their game.

 

Relying on community to figure it out and post YouTube videos is cheap. If you're lucky, you end up with some good stuff in a sea of crap. If you're not, there's only a handful of tutorials, which are all crap. DCS is definitely closer to the latter situation. I'd take BalticDragon's hands-on instruction (or ED's training missions for that matter) over some shmuck on YouTube talking about everything except the sole thing I want to know about.

[Tippis]

7 minutes ago, Lurker said:

There are some people who clearly feel very strongly about how things should "be" for lack of a better word, and any changes to their little and narrow view on the world they take as a personal offense. 

Honestly, I'd be fine with it if they could just own up to their implicit (or sometimes even explicit) wish to keep DCS restricted to an increasingly tiny niche of obsolescence and irrelevance, if they could just argue why this would somehow be good for the game them. What I object to is that they can't even be bothered to do that; that they come up with these utterly baffling and inherently contradictory (ir)rationales, like how in order to ensure that the game is kept realistic, everyone should be using the second ore third most unrealistic feature in the game, or should be exploiting bugs. Like… what?!

 

If people don't want ED to develop the game they've said they intend to develop then fine… ish… I guess, but at least they should have the common courtesy to explain why.

[SmirkingGerbil]

Man, these comments. Mostly here just to revisit the drama. Not sure why, it is like jabbing yourself in the eyeball. Nonetheless, a few simple observations.

1.) Make it an "on/off" feature of Multiplayer for server admins if you want ultra realism and no one using it as an exploit.
2.) Make it user electable in SP. Those of us who enjoy PIO pain and struggle, can do so. Those who want easy mode for self made missions can do so.
3.) ED's own comments and actions promote inclusive design where capable, but without loss of realism and fidelity. They can/will do what is right for the community.

Drama queen elitists invoking various "whataboutisms" because a guy is trying to look for options in a "wishlist" to help out older members are just trolling. Albeit in a high brow manner, but it is just trolling for drama, and the podium to thump from.

Personally, I see no conflict in a user option or server admin MP option for this. Not sure why others do.

ED will do, what ED will do, based not only on input, but internal research and knowledge. All of this, is just pages of chaff and blather. Personally, I hope ED can find a way to implement it, but leave it fully realized for us Sadomasochists that like PIO hell mastery.

Edited March 26, 2021 by SmirkingGerbil
spelling and syntax

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Humbug. No one should be required to go to YouTube to find instructions necessary to get the most out of a well-polished simulator.

DCS already has a sufficient amount of manuals and training missions. The rest is up to you. Some people just want hand-holding, not instruction. 
And really in today’s world it’s hard to justify the cost for something that’s going to be instantly outdone by the community. There’s another flight sim out there which could hardly justify creating its own manual because the community could be counted on to just do it better and faster. 
I bought an airliner for another sim and taught myself to fly it all through YouTube including the actual Untied Airlines CBT videos. The maker of this $99 DLC plane didn’t need to create a game manual for it, because they didn’t need to. If I need to open the trunk of my car I could just say “Hey Siri how do I?” and bam there’s instantly this professional grade tutorial video popping up on my phone. 

Ah should have linked this several pages ago... so much for everybody wanting this...

 

Edited March 26, 2021 by SharpeXB

[Fri13]

2 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Because it’s a physical skill you need to master. A tutorial in the game can’t do that for you. The only way to develop the skill is to put n the practice. What you need to do is be able to reflexively predict the input and reaction of your aircraft in the same way as riding a bicycle. The only way to gain those reflexes is through hours of practice. 

 

And here you again come around back to the point, to have a such system that has been discussed and wished, but you have been declined to accept - a assisting system that literally does provide the guiding and training for the practice that otherwise can't be learned by everyone.

 

 

[Tippis]

16 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

DCS already has a sufficient amount of manuals and training missions.

Fortunately, the devs disagree and keep making more.

 

Quote

And really in today’s world it’s hard to justify the cost for something that’s going to be instantly outdone by the community.

So it would be pretty easy to justify the addition of all kinds of AAR simplifications and helpers since that's nothing the community can do anything about — the tools just aren't there exactly because ED hasn't added those simplifications and helpers. You're confusing what third parties can do using the tools ED provides with what tools ED needs to provide to give the third parties something to work with.

 

It always comes back to ED having to implement the core functionality.

 

16 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I bought an airliner for another sim and taught myself to fly it all through YouTube including the actual Untied Airlines CBT videos. The maker of this $99 DLC plane didn’t need to create a game manual for it, because they didn’t need to.

So again, you're illustrating that the core developer needs to provide something in order for the third party to be able to benefit from it. In this comparison, the community would be DLC developer and ED would be UA. As always, you're making the exact opposite point to the one you were going for.

 

  

16 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Ah should have linked this several pages ago... so much for everybody wanting this...

It was. You're just very bad at reading what people write. That's why you have to make up these strawmen arguments to compensate.

The only one who is saying that “everybody” wants this is you. No-one else.

Edited March 26, 2021 by Tippis

[Jackjack171]

6 hours ago, Tippis said:

Ok. That's a clear answer at least, even if it is highly worrisome.

 

Just about everyone who's trained in the matter by competent professionals in the last few decades. I know it's still there — that doesn't mean it's not antiquated, only that it is clinging by long after it should. Teaching has evolved as we have learned more and more how learning works. It turns out hand-holding is an important part of it. It's why demonstrations and even quite literal hand-holding are part and parcel of the transfer of skills, especially when it comes to tacit knowledge.

 

Not by competent teachers, no. They see it for what it is: a tool in the general toolbox that can and should be applied to the appropriate problems at the appropriate skill levels. It's something we've been doing for millennia, and for good reason. And again, even if it weren't, it would still be something that DCS is supposed to provide, irrespective of your opinions of the utility of it. So again, your preferences and your views on quitters, ineptitude, or any other disparaging descriptor you want to use are wholly irrelevant.

 

Ok? And…?

 

It's how the semantic marker of emphasis is commonly communicated in written text. It's one step below “strong emphasis”, commonly highlighted in bold. In this case, it's to emphasise that it's SharpeXP, and no-one else, that is making the claims that SharpeXP is complaining about. Because that's how his (wholesale lack of) argumentation always work: if it's not an outright fabrication, it's a complete fallacy — commonly both.

 

You should probably read the post more carefully — the names in each quote block are there for a reason.

 

Worrisome? Only to you maybe. But why worry, it's not worth it!

In the last few decades of my service, which was only 3 years ago, the school of hard knocks exist and is very much used. It's funny that you are here on DCS which simulates Military action yet you have no clue about how we operate. I am fortunate enough to have the collegiate education as well as the school of hard knocks. The best of both worlds!

And you didn't answer my question. Where you an instructor? If no then you cannot possibly speak on what's competent teaching and what's not! 
I've trained countless individuals in Military curriculum spanning 2 decades with a 100% completion rate covering topics from Aircraft firefighting to drug and alcohol counseling. So try again please and tell me what school you magically came up with and this idea about how teaching is done. It sounds like it is only your idea honestly. I've never heard of any teacher thinking the way you do. The slow guys that needed hand holding didn't make the cut, some went home. Some went to do other things.

I mean, maybe you or your squad like to be spoon fed everything because it makes you feel better, but there are those of us that don't. I do like how you've become the speaker for the silent minority! Very noble, a waste of time but noble.

The guys that want easy AAR should use the unlimited fuel option if it's too hard (why it's so hard is laughable mostly). That's the hand holding you mentioned that ED implemented for you all, so have at it!

About the quote block, I didn't miss it! We all know who is replying to who here so there was no need for the italicized words bro. Kind of pointless! That's cool, I like little humor! 

Thank you for that much! Awesome conversation brother!


 

6 hours ago, Fri13 said:

 

At older age your mind can be sharp as razor, but your body doesn't anymore respond like a 15 year old....

 

You can handle radar systems perfectly, you can know by the heart all about weapons, but you can't even keep your hands steady... 

 

There are different people, so what is problem to assist them in different parts of the game?

 

And is the air refueling now part of a basic airmanship now?

I get that bro as I mentioned it earlier IRT the truly handicapped guys! But this thread isn't about that at all. And quite frankly, some dudes suck at formation flying. Go no further than YouTube and see for yourself! AAR is mostly form flying! 

[Fri13]

21 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Ah should have linked this several pages ago... so much for everybody wanting this...

 

 

Who here has been claiming that everyone requires or want the assisted in-air refueling?

 

32% of the player base would be fairly big amount of all players who want it...

(More than I would have thought, so thank you enforcing the high need for this feature.)

[SilverHawk94]

On 3/22/2021 at 11:27 AM, Furiz said:

 

The reason why real pilots ever fly as much as 2 different planes throughout their carrier tells a thing or two about learning curves, flying every plane makes you jack of all trades but master of none. Pick one plane and fly it for few months and you'll manage your AAR, with practice ofc.

 

AAR takes practice and patience and not jumping from one plane to another cause every plane is different.

 

 

Why not make an AAR mission?,

you have 70+ members, so make missions so that only members that passed through training (and are capable of AAR) can participate, like in real airforce.

Do AAR training missions with your members that can't do it, teach the rookies? That's how squadrons do it, they train together so they can do missions together.

 

I fly the F-18 and f-14 the most and stop making it seems that I bounce from plane to plane every 5 mins. Geesh its just a game. Relax some of us have a life beside playing DCS 24/7

I was saying it would be a nice feature to have.  If not then I will just check "unlimited fuel" or land at an allies base and refuel. Btw, Ive done plenty of AAR practice even online. I have my settings set just right.  It's mental with AAR and I just have to keep trying if that what I choose to do.  Happy Flying   

Edited March 26, 2021 by SilverHawk94