Target visibility

[topgum]

Hi Manu and all the other mates,
I am realy thankfull for this thread and I apprichiate a lot all your comparing screenshots, us-navy graphs and your further to the sim related calculations, as I am thinking about this subject since a while. When I went out for a walk 2 weeks ago in good visibelity conditions (not optimal), the sky was crowded by a lot of low flying a/c (400m; pov 200m). First, I detected AND identified a pair of paragliders in a distance of 7km at their usual starting place. They have a similar wingspan like a 109 & spit, 10-13m. I can tell you exactly because I took notice of my pov and, back at home, I had a look in the wanders-map. So did I, when suddenly a squadron of Canadairs CL-145 Fire-engines came allong to get water: They apeared behind a mountin in 6 km distance (half front/half side). It would be easy to distinguish them from DC-3 (both wingsp 29m) at that distance. Not enough, I spotted an Ultralight in 750m and discern all important details. At that distance you will recognize a marking, while in the sim at 300m the marking of the 109 is just a dot! I draw a map with all observations, and - sigh- there's big difference to RL (and I need glases) and the sim, independend if I run it on 1920x1080 on 15"screen or on 1024x768 res, projected by my video projector, in front of me. I get use to fly without objectsymbols and found out, that the size of the screen does matter, but a dot is dot or not
Otherwise, if you run a mission with 40ish a/c, better you red a book than your display, it is simply to much text, which you can't reduce like in IL2 1946. This would be the easiest way to fix it. Personaly, I could live with an (sub)option where you can decide from which distance a (text)info appears and when it disapears again.
Example: Realismsettings/objectsymbol: on or off:
when "on", 4 sub-settings available:
"allways on", like it is now
"easy": Info appearance in a Range from 300m to 10 km
"normal": 1km to 6 km and
"hard": 2km to 5km
Further in-gameoption: the option just to select a SYMBOL of the marking (like Ironcross + or cocarde O) instead of the whole book (like this post,
that does it for me, for instances.
What do you think?

[proton45]

Sadly...with the differences in screen resolutions and pixel density from one monitor to the next. I'm not really sure that there is a universal solution.

[Untamo]

Originally Posted by proton45

Sadly...with the differences in screen resolutions and pixel density from one monitor to the next. I'm not really sure that there is a universal solution.

IMHO the "technique" I proposed earlier would be a solution for this particular problem. Doesn't solve the difference between RL and in-game detection range though....

[TUSA/TX-Gunslinger]

Interesting thread - relevant and great work.

Whatever would come of this - visibility option should ultimately be scalable, for adjustable gameplay.

I remain a bit sceptical regarding the true fidelity possible. It seems that your nailing the size vs aspect vs distance - and will achieve something to that end.

Where I'm concerned is the inclusion of high fidelity specular (glint) effects, properly represented. Significant impact to the detecting aircraft when located is upsun in the early morning and late evening. While small-area scale games like BF3 are making efforts in this area - how do you imagine this will work over a large area, like our CoD maps? The BF3 mechanics aren't even tied to time-of-day and atmospherics as these are static on each of the tiny maps.

Canopy and metallic glint can be seen a very long way off. While there are accounts and studies of minimum detectable range - what of long range detections, made at altititude? How do you propose to simulate this?

Imagine when bare metal skinned aircraft are introduced?

Maybe someday, very high level systems may be able to render these necessary effects - but low level systems might not. I'll even go out on a limb and say that probably no current computational system can do justice to this type of ray-tracing physics, in real-time - to match the level of LOD detail you are discussing. If there is not a balance between the effects - then there will be less reality - not more.

That's my concern - but please don't let that dampen your work. Again, great job, knoble pursuit.

S!

Gunny

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by topgum

Hi Manu and all the other mates,
I am realy thankfull for this thread and I apprichiate a lot all your comparing screenshots, us-navy graphs and your further to the sim related calculations, as I am thinking about this subject since a while. When I went out for a walk 2 weeks ago in good visibelity conditions (not optimal), the sky was crowded by a lot of low flying a/c (400m; pov 200m). First, I detected AND identified a pair of paragliders in a distance of 7km at their usual starting place. They have a similar wingspan like a 109 & spit, 10-13m. I can tell you exactly because I took notice of my pov and, back at home, I had a look in the wanders-map. So did I, when suddenly a squadron of Canadairs CL-145 Fire-engines came allong to get water: They apeared behind a mountin in 6 km distance (half front/half side). It would be easy to distinguish them from DC-3 (both wingsp 29m) at that distance. Not enough, I spotted an Ultralight in 750m and discern all important details. At that distance you will recognize a marking, while in the sim at 300m the marking of the 109 is just a dot! I draw a map with all observations, and - sigh- there's big difference to RL (and I need glases) and the sim, independend if I run it on 1920x1080 on 15"screen or on 1024x768 res, projected by my video projector, in front of me. I get use to fly without Objectsymbols and found out, that the size of the screen does matter, but a Dot is dot or not
Otherwise, if you run a mission with 40ish a/c, better you red a book than your display, simply to much text, which you can't reduce like IL2 1946, this would be the easiest way to fix it. Personaly, I could live with an (sub)option where you can decide from which distance a (text)info appears and when it disapears again. To make it multiplayer-playable by using Object symbol setting on/off:
when "on", 4 sub-settings available:
"allways on", like it is now
"easy": appearance 300m to 10 km
"normal": 1km to 6 km and
"hard": 2km to 5km
Further in-gameoption: the option just to select a SYMBOL of the marking (like Ironcross or cocarde) instead of the whole book (like this post,
that does it for me for instances.
What do you think?

My concern, apart from the immersion-breaking effect of icons, is that stealth approaches and surprise attacks would not be possible.

[335th_GRAthos]

Yesterday I flew for 2hrs 5min (the time before CTD due to the usual memory leak bug) on the ATAG server.

My whole flying was devoted into intercepting incoming bomber formations.

I did not intercept a single formation for two hours.

The worst moment was watching a Wellingtoin (BIG bomber) formation of nine planes flying above me (distance xxxx - how can I judge in this game... ), following from behind while climbing in order to reach their altitude. Then, I moved my eyes away from the sky while checking my fuel gauges/ switching among fuel tanks ... and I completely lost sight of the bomber formation (9 big bombers)!

Then flew for 30mins circling around trying to find them again, without success!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Of course I may be a noob and ignorant* but based on my 7+ years IL2FB in full real online flying, this is complete and utter XXXXX³\#~ **

I like that it is more difficult to trace airplanes, but this is not realistic.

~S~




*always debatable...

** Moderators, please add the word of your choice, suitable to a 2-3 week ban...

Originally Posted by 335th_GRAthos

Yesterday I flew for 2hrs 5min (the time before CTD due to the usual memory leak bug) on the ATAG server.

My whole flying was devoted into intercepting incoming bomber formations.

I did not intercept a single formation for two hours.

The worst moment was watching a Wellingtoin (BIG bomber) formation of nine planes flying above me (distance xxxx - how can I judge in this game... ), following from behind while climbing in order to reach their altitude. Then, I moved my eyes away from the sky while checking my fuel gauges/ switching among fuel tanks ... and I completely lost sight of the bomber formation (9 big bombers)!

Then flew for 30mins circling around trying to find them again, without success!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Of course I may be a noob and ignorant* but based on my 7+ years IL2FB in full real online flying, this is complete and utter XXXXX³\#~ **

I like that it is more difficult to trace airplanes, but this is not realistic.

~S~




*always debatable...

** Moderators, please add the word of your choice, suitable to a 2-3 week ban...

I think the situation is not so unrealistic. There are numerous accounts that say after a very short dogfight they were first surrounded by many ac then all alone. Alone probably just because they could not spot the others despite still being in visual range. It is a difficult task to scan the 360 deg sphere around you and spot everything.

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow

I think the situation is not so unrealistic. There are numerous accounts that say after a very short dogfight they were first surrounded by many ac then all alone. Alone probably just because they could not spot the others despite still being in visual range. It is a difficult task to scan the 360 deg sphere around you and spot everything.

I've read many accounts of this type, mate. But I tended to explain it with the high speed that planes reached at an height. For instance, in 3 minutes a plane at 400 km/h runs for 20 km. And planes running in opposite directions at the same speed separate by 26 km in 2 minutes.
Or maybe they could not spot the others because of thick layers of clouds, as it happens frequently ... Who knows ... but instead of subjective opinions, we can have a look at the experimental and quantitative approach of Manu and Tamat, and at the US Navy documents.

Cheers,
6S.Insuber

[6S.Manu]

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow

I think the situation is not so unrealistic. There are numerous accounts that say after a very short dogfight they were first surrounded by many ac then all alone. Alone probably just because they could not spot the others despite still being in visual range. It is a difficult task to scan the 360 deg sphere around you and spot everything.

I think stress, adrenaline and fatigue can have a role in these anecdotes.
And of course the pilot can find himself in a different fighting area: think about diving, about the speed of these machines and the distance that they cover in some dozen of seconds (that surely seem to last minutes) (EDIT: as Insuber writes).

I really can't believe that in RL you can lose a formation of 9 bombers... above all if they are still flying in formation at medium-high altitude (and no stress, no fatigue for me). Airplanes of that size are visible at great distances and after some minutes you should have find them if you were circling in that area...

Two days ago on Repka I've found a bomber over England.. I did 2 attacks, the bomber was smoking: I looked at the fuel gauge and could not find my victim anymore (btw after 5 minutes CloD CTD)
Probably at 4 km it was just a pixel.

[Insuber]

As I'm not convinced about the icons, so I thought about a more historical and immersive approach.

IMO Luthier should perfection the radio vectoring to the targets, as it was in reality (both sides, actually Brits achieved it few months before Germans). For instance:

The sector control center gives the usual alarm:

1 - Incoming fighters in M14, 3500 m, hdg 160
2 – Incoming bombers in K17, 4000 m, hdg 180

The player can either select a target, lets say by a keyboard combination as Ctrl + 1, or the sector control center assigns him a target depending on his position.

The sector control center takes then care of vectoring him to the target with more precise and frequent directions, such as:

<Leader, Hornchurch calling, 12+ dorniers coming in over Folkestone, vector 120, angels 25, 12 miles from your position>

I believe that this is what we expected originally from BoB: SoW, and this alone can solve the enemy spotting and avoid the hatred icons. Of course dots and LOD's must be improved as well.