NEW ARENA SETTING: WAY TO GO

nah .hohun .if u ask me we doesnt need plane id ..
the settings would been for everyone and why should u let the PC shows you vs what type u fly ..there are alot of things that let u easy identify an target.
What about ralls mission , he crashed nearly his plane before he could identify the con ..we have no weater effect and no clouds ..now everyone has eagleeyes ,and i had no problem to identify a con ..without Icons ..even on a 14"
and it adds tactics when u dont know whats the dots around ..depends whats ur next step ..when u see far dots ,could that just be everything all golds ,all reds i think that need more tactic ..u can say what you whant ..with short icons the fights are more interesistig and a challenge ..tactical situation like this fits more in this game or u can turn easyflight on too
camo near ground ? icon d30 have no camo at all ..u totaly kill the effect of camo you ignore weather conditions ..we have no weather effect ..but would be nice to "simulate" weather
and i still dont belive what u say ...
what about the story from Rall?.. why do you think with ur eye u could see always everything and notice any plane type at those ranges..

 

once more:

friendly/enemy-id at d12, friendly fire on, no plane types....

thats the way it is

 

The icons just tell us what we should know if we had good eyes in real life, but this make everyone have equal vision here in WB. And its not fair. Some of us can identify dots from higher distances than others and its a part of the game!
Everyone know when they say: the best pilot see and identify the enemy first.

So, doenst matters if u use a 14" monitor or a 21". Independent of ur resolution u just have to get used to your monitor to know how to identify other planes and must pratice identifying and not only shooting.
This goes for reality where they studied alot the enemy planes design to know how to identify them in flight.

Using icons here makes everyone have the same "vision" and it ruins the simulation.

This games is much more than just fun, it makes u study tactics that works here just like in real life and identifying planes is a BIG PART of it.
So, if u want succes in a simulator go study.
If you just want to take off and kill, please go away but dont stay here to ruin it.

I will repeat once again:
So, doenst matters if u use a 14" monitor or a 21". Independent of ur resolution or 2D/3D mode u just have to get used to yout monitor to know how to identify other planes.

*It means that who have a big monitos and play using high resolution will have more detailed dots.
OK
*Who have small monitors and less resolution will see less detailed dots.

BUT, both will have its owm carachteristics that a pilot used to it will be capable of knowing about the dots just like others.

Get used to this game, pratice and pratice, study tactics, study planes designs and suddenly you will find urself knowing many things about war planes and MANY SECRETS will be revealed to your eyes, independent if its here in WB or real life.

Maybe u can say that you dont have time to study it, but i tell you that i dont have all my day to study WB and planes too, but i do when i have time and its not hard to find time when u do what u like.

Now, if you dont really like WWII history/planes and u say u not interested in evolution in what u do then go do something better for your life and dont stay here asking for stupids configs just because its easy for you.

Yes, im a hardcore simmer, air combat lover, aviation enthusiast and there is many others like me and many BETTER than me and im sure thay want
evolution.

Actual config is old and boring. This game WB is great since more than 4 years ago and still great but needs some strategicy news. Or will be ruined anyways being free.
Good pilots who want more challenge will give up from here and only quakedweebs furballers and ignorants (not to offend) will stay and will definitely ruin it.
Who are actualy a dweeb but like it will look for evolution and will go on.

Personaly im tired of just easy finding and identifying enemies and diving to kill em.
I want more challenge and im sure BIG part of who plays here wants it too.

Study and pratice in WB will reveal many secrets to your eyes.

I did it.

check mate

[ 19 January 2002: Message edited by: Hans Haupt ]

 

hi hans haupt,

you seem to believe, that this comment of yours is of such an importance, that you post it two times (see "this is just perfect")?
i think it's not so important to give it twice an answer (see "this is just perfect")!

 

Ledada, both topics are talking about the same problem. My post goes the the problem.

And yes, i think its important.

 

Ho-Hun answer to your problem(in your logic.) would not be having icons(icons are just compromise you see). If you follow your own idea that simulation must do simulated things like in reality even if some things are missing. You simply couldnt have icons. Only way in your own logic would be make simulation and RL resolution the same. no compromises because they are unrealistic. (yes its true) but technology doesnt allow it. In wb we have few things helping us tho.(too many imo)

(as compromise) I think we can identify planes by colors
(as compromise) You think we can identify by colors+icons

I think latter makes unrealistic neon warning sing in distances under 3km. I think it's not necessary because we have different colors of different planetypes. I don't think its realistic because we can spot planes without it. I dont think its realistic because it lets me judge exact E-state from closure and direction. (dont have to see plane..only icon number, its changing speed and alt. without seeing even the plane i could say in most cases if i win the fight or not, its not realistic)

Well we are just bringing these same points again and again.

I just don't agree with you. I understand your arguments but don't think same way than you do. IMO they prove just nothing. You think they do.

This wont change even if we discuss it forever.

[ 19 January 2002: Message edited by: illo ]

 

Hi Ledada,

>"the result should be, that the gamer feels like he thinks he would feel, when experiencing the real situation."

That's more precise, but we have a lot of different gamers who'll all disagree on the "feeling". For example, I think the "feeling" is very close to the real situation with ranges as they are now. The large differences to what I'd consider "real" that remain are due to many other factors than icon ranges.

>if you insist on talking about resolution and angles and dots and pixels, i can easily stay that and can write you some clear words to show you in scientific facts, where you are wrong - and wright. but this would take more than it's worth

As you can see, I don't insist. Don't mistake that for a sign I believe your research would change much - you should be aware that I consider the current icon ranges an excellent compromise (emphasis on this term).

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

Hi Thomba,

>think about it....its no arcade...no rl...its a simulation.

A simulation should have realistic identification ranges. The ranges you suggest are unrealistically short.

>if it is be able to switch on players-private-channel or send a check-six-call with mouse....it must be able to send plane type of enemies, also.

Fascinating idea! Spontaneously, I'm not sure what to think of it, but keep being imaginative!

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

Hi Asgar,

>the settings would been for everyone and why should u let the PC shows you vs what type u fly ..there are alot of things that let u easy identify an target.

Where's your evidence? Post some screenshots to prove your point please.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

Hey, Thomba! Take that into consideration guys, that sounds interesting. You won?t have those damn neon warnings but would still be able to id a/c at realistic ranges by a mouseclick. That is the pro. The con is that you have to get your hands of the stick/throttle in order to "look". But on the other hand it requires only little time and it should be enough to do it only once before deciding/engaging, if you have good SA/tracking abilities.

BTW: I think the neon-warning is much more a problem for jabos/stukas (a/c for which surprise is vital) than for an attacking fighter: I also often failed in surprising a target. The reason was that I tried to jump it from high six like a mad monkey. You can bet that in RL you would have also failed by doing so if the enemy pilot checks his 6 even just a little, because the high six pos is one of the first fields to check, and it?s easy to check. But as soon as I began to attack from a dead angle I had much more sucess in surprising. I learned that from illo and fletchman (website), who even says that he is ready to lose some angle advantages regarding the geometry if he can get into a dead angle for that. And it works, it?s true. Even if the target is aware of you it makes sense, because who is losing the enemy out of sight, will lose the fight . I had also known about those dead angle-attacks long before, but I always underestimated them because I thought geometric angle advantages were more important. Dweebish

Regards
heartc

[ 19 January 2002: Message edited by: heartc ]

 

Hi Hans,

>Ledada, both topics are talking about the same problem. My post goes the the problem.

I think an identical double-post is sort of a nuisance, and I don't like being counted to the "quakedweebs furballers and ignorants" twice.

You'd help your cause better by sticking to facts, even if you'd post them only once.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

Hi Illo,

>Ho-Hun answer to your problem(in your logic.) would not be having icons(icons are just compromise you see).

I'm not arguing against compromises - in fact, I called the current range icons a compromise right at the beginning. Maybe we could agree on a different compromise being more realistic, but it's not my impression that the "no icon" people are interested in compromises.

>I think latter makes unrealistic neon warning sing in distances under 3km.

I'd like to suggest to separate the range and the ID icon issues, preferably in a another thread (just to keep the discussion more efficient.)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

Ok these are my 2c...

In the first day of the Kursk scenario I couldn't tell the diference from a yak a la5 or a cow, so to me they were all la5 with 37mm cannons .
But in the second day when I was flying with rogerwilco (mcosta, rcosta and me) I could tell the diference from a yak, la5, p39 even from d10 sometimes (and start yelling in the micro ).
I use 1024 resolution and I have a 17'' screen and I prefer flying with no ID.

Has I said before.. my 2c

 

Hi Platy,

Thanks for your contribution!

How about posting a screenshot from your system, showing a fighter at a range where you consider it identifiable?

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

hi hohun.. i really think we should stick to one thread, but anyways

the prejudices that icons (ID, range or whatever) cause to the realism of the game are much too bigger than the adjustment of aircraft identification. identifying by color is well enought for about d5 shorter than RL. but that small difference ruins half the realism in aircombat situations.

cya
nic

 

A screenshot!??!!

Are you insane? Look HoHun... I haven't seen you post a SINGLE WB screenshot of a UFO, so how dare you ask everyone to post screenshots to prove they could identify the plane?

The proof that I could ID the planes is that I had a good score and that I could evade or kill most of the cons I met, I don't need any screenshot to come to the forums and to say what I said.

You want proof? Fine..

Get ingame, find a nice red field, take off, w8 for a la5 and a yak to take off and stay at a d10 distance from high, then turn the icons off, and then tell me you cant tell the diference betwen the 2 planes... If you cant then I would hadvise you to check with you phisician.

I'm sorry if I'm being rude, but I'm getting a little bored of reading 3 threads about icons, 3 threads about the score being screwed, and 3 threads about killshooters. Besides I don't think that either HoHun or the rest of the ppl will change their minds (including me) so I guess we weill have to w8 for a decision from the FH team of how things should be and that is it... as simple as that

[ 19 January 2002: Message edited by: Platy ]

 

Hi Nicae,

>identifying by color is well enought for about d5 shorter than RL.

So where's your screenshot?

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

Hi Platy,

>Are you insane?

Foul.

>I haven't seen you post a SINGLE WB screenshot of a UFO, so how dare you ask everyone to post screenshots to prove they could identify the plane?

I don't claim I can identify anything, but you are. So far, all your claims have been without any verifyable evidence. If you feel insulted by a request for verifyable evidence, sorry, that's what it takes to help your cause.

>I'm sorry if I'm being rude, but I'm getting a little bored of reading 3 threads about icons, 3 threads about the score being screwed, and 3 threads about killshooters.

That's no excuse for being rude. You could simply have ignored the threads if you didn't want to read them. All you have to do is not to click at them.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

Well I do want to read forum if you dont mind, I wouldnt want to ignore everyone else just because of you....

Bur just in case you havent understand... you are almost the only one that claims that it is impossible to ID a plane.. well you ahev alot of ppl here saying that they could, and that they did and can ID a plane from d10 or d5 or even d2.
So unless everybody else bunch of masoquist that want to be glued to the screen to ID a plane from d10, or you are too lazy to even bother yourself to adapt to new fighting conditions.. and guess what I believe in the last one.

Oh and btw... ist not foul... I think you mean fool.

This is my last post about this.. I think mcosta will carry on in this thread or one of the others.

 

You want a screenshot, you'll have it.
they are on this page ( they are too big to be posted here. that would be abusive to our fellow pilots with slow modems ).

http://www.idtsoft.com/~mpcosta/garbage/

as soon as i saw the 2 dots, i immediatelly knew the white dot was surelly a p51d ( sometimes i got a red pixel, that puts a ki61 apart ). The other was a FW190D9, due to it's movements and colour.

keep checking that site... i'll post there the promised spitfire d5, as soon as i get one

( yes, today is yak/la5/p51d day )