Convert helipads or leave as is?

[MAESTR0]

Hi!
We made helipads to give helicopter pilots the opportunity to feel not as guests on the map, but as if they were at home.
This feature is not provided by the engine, so there are a lot of helipad icons on the map.
We can convert helipads into regular places without parking places and add H icons on the map.
What we see as a disadvantage: in the mission editor you will not be able to use "takeoff from parking hot" and "takeoff from ramp".
You will only be able to use "takeoff from ground"

What do you think about this?

[Minsky]

2 hours ago, MAESTR0 said:

This feature is not provided by the engine, so there are a lot of helipad icons on the map.

It won't be possible to please everyone without making changes to the engine, I'm afraid.

DCS already has multiple aerodrome types with different icons: 'large', 'normal', 'closed', etc. Have you asked ED to create another one for helipads? A smaller icon with a smaller title, placed on a layer below aerodromes, so to never overlap them. A cherry on top would be the ability to hide these icons in the ME settings.

Edited Friday at 07:42 PM by Minsky

[swartbyron]

Leave as is but name them using the nearest town or village rather than numbering them.

H GDR 12 just tells me it’s located in the GDR but we all know Bitburg AFB is located near Bitburg.

Use the actual name of the base or range or radar site if it represents a real life location that the player will be spawning into, navigating to or targeting.

Edited Friday at 09:44 PM by swartbyron

[Minsky]

1 hour ago, swartbyron said:

Leave as is but name them using the nearest town or village rather than numbering them.

You mean make most of the names longer, cluttering the map even further?  

[Northstar98]

11 hours ago, swartbyron said:

Leave as is but name them using the nearest town or village rather than numbering them.

H GDR 12 just tells me it’s located in the GDR but we all know Bitburg AFB is located near Bitburg.

Use the actual name of the base or range or radar site if it represents a real life location that the player will be spawning into, navigating to or targeting.

Agree with this, but personally, there shouldn't be fictional air defence sites or training ranges in the first place. Instead, those should be up to mission editors to make.

This would not only make the map more accurate, it would help remove clutter in certain areas.

10 hours ago, Minsky said:

You mean make most of the names longer, cluttering the map even further?  

The other thing with the map is that aerodromes have a large, bold-faced font. If the font was smaller and not bold-faced, clutter would be less of an issue. Though obviously this is something for ED to fix.

Edited Saturday at 09:40 AM by Northstar98
Probably overexaggerating

[swartbyron]

Not many votes?

I think this post needs to be shared where people can see it.

[Minsky]

I get it why more people have voted to leave it as is: a feature is better than no feature.

I just hope that Ugra won't take the results as a carte blanche to continue cluttering the map without solving the underlying UI/UX problem.

If it is this bad now, imagine how terribble it will become once they add these sixty-ish promised airfields.