Target visibility

[LoBiSoMeM]

In IL-2 1946 dots works. We neen bigger dots in CloD (fixed size, for ANY resolution) and better AA. Maybe some "reflection" too in far objects...

Just that.

Mh. Not sure. Actually I think the difficulty to see planes is an improvement over IL2.

There are numerous accounts that pilots just missed each other despite passing not too far from each other.

I understand the optical issue brought here by OP but IL2 is not a realistic example. With the old IL2 logic one could have as well made the points blinking with a pink arrow painted on top of them accompanied with the tag "Here! Here!"

One can spot planes from a quite a distance (4 km) in Clod if one is attentive and in a good position. Which btw is about in accordance with what Manu wrote on the experiments done by Howell remembering that the plane in Howell's experiment were at least double the size of a fighter. So my guess is visibility limit of 4-5 km for a small plane such as a fighter is fine.

What could be perhaps discussed if at 3 km one could not paint a small trait instead of a dot. I think this is the major concern of OP.

If a better solution of the optical distortion is found without going arcade I will be happy. Old IL2 is imho not the way to go.

[LoBiSoMeM]

To do some testing, we can have an option of "no artificial dots" at all. Maybe in next beta patch?

"Realistic Target Visibility"!

The first LOD will be REALLY pixel size. And people with lower resolutions and big monitors will have some advantage. But we can test.

[Insuber]

To ensure some playability, and avoid boredom killing this game, we need above all to improve DETECTION range by increasing the dot visibility and contrast to 15-20 km, with normal visibility (as in the US Navy document posted by Manu earlier), and also solve the issue of disappearing contacts - linked to the LODs probably. A darker dot would do, imho.

Then, as far as IDENTIFICATION, I agree that in RL you can tell a Spit from a Bf from a longer distance than in this game (I think to events like Duxford, where the plane's silhouettes and colours are identifiable from very far away, let's say 3-5 km). Color of camo helps a lot, and in old Il2 the LOD's at far range were typical of a certain model (more squared for Bf, thinner for Spit); working on LODs to differentiate them a bit may be a solution. Skilled players could then ID a distant contact from the predominant color of the camo and the form of LOD.

Cheers!

[Untamo]

I have never undestood the use of these artificial dots. Why not just use a really simple 3D model (just a few polys) when the aircraft is far away, the 3D engine (if it works correctly) would render the target as it should be seen. What we are after here is the right amount of degrees/radians the aircraft occupies on our screen at given FOV.

When an aircraft gets further away, eventually it is rendered as one pixel, and as it get more distant, this one pixel gets more faint (opacity drops).

At lower resolutions the aircraft would be one pixel at closer range and at higher resolutions further away. Detection wise neither one would have advantage against the other, as at lower res the pixel is larger and at higher res smaller but the target may still be several pixels at the same distance when the lower res screen shows just one pixel. But the size (the degrees/radians it occupies on the screen) of the target would be the same on both screens (assuming the physical size of the monitor is the same).

Originally Posted by Insuber

To ensure some playability, and avoid boredom killing this game, we need above all to improve DETECTION range by increasing the dot visibility and contrast to 15-20 km, with normal visibility (as in the US Navy document posted by Manu earlier), and also solve the issue of disappearing contacts - linked to the LODs probably. A darker dot would do, imho.

Then, as far as IDENTIFICATION, I agree that in RL you can tell a Spit from a Bf from a longer distance than in this game (I think to events like Duxford, where the plane's silhouettes and colours are identifiable from very far away, let's say 3-5 km). Color of camo helps a lot, and in old Il2 the LOD's at far range were typical of a certain model (more squared for Bf, thinner for Spit); working on LODs to differentiate them a bit may be a solution. Skilled players could then ID a distant contact from the predominant color of the camo and the form of LOD.

Cheers!

Keep in mind that the aircraft to be spotted in the US Navy experiment was about or even more twice the size of the planes we discuss here (why do I have to repeat myself?). So I have very very strong doubts that you just can take the findings there and transpose it to fighters here.

I think the dot contrast is fine so I do not need a change here. If you have some difficulties finding the dots due to contrast please first tweak your own monitor settings or the graphic card settings before requesting a change in game that is fine for many others

I agree that something should be done with the presentation between first appearance as dot at 4 km and a presentation as a scaled down model at 2 km). I'd propose to use a something like a dash or so (could be a bold dash at a certain distance).

Sorry but I think it is absolutely unrealistic to see a fighter plane in 20 km distance even as a dot. These fighter planes have a wingspan of about 10m only. Do not compare it to airliners that have 6 or 8 times that wingspan.

The 4 km may be to pessimistic but the 20 is imho unrealistic. Please keep in mind that the 15-20 km in the US Navy experiments were obtained with a bigger aircraft and with the pilots knowing EXACTLY where to look. Both conditions (big aircraft, exact knowledge of position of plane to be spotted) do not apply for fighters in the situations we discuss here. So probably if you knew exactly where to look for a plane you could see a fighter at 7-10 km. But only if you knew exactly where to look.

The only real big issue that I see is that planes with a 3d model suddenly disappear into a dot or what I frequently experience that when zooming my view on a dot or a small plane (at about 2km) it gets invisible (perhaps a smooth zoom in function could work).

[Insuber]

Stormcrow the US Navy document I was referring to was in another thread, and it treated about fighters. I will look for it later for you.

Cheers!

[6S.Manu]

I've found a gem!
"Visual Search in Air Combat" (1990)
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc...f&AD=ADA241347

Here a really interesting graph (page 6 of the original document):


Of course there are factors like camos, sunlight, haze ect...

I'm going to do some calculations to get the positions of ww2 fighters on that curve.

I would only remember to you that it's not a personal problem: all this discussion its to greatly improve the sim.

Great find, Manu.

This is quite in accordance to what I guessed would be a reasonable limit for fighter visibility (when seen from the side) that is about 7-10 km. From front one would see it from perhaps 3-4 km. From belly perhaps from 15km. From top view over land my guess is that the visibility will be worse.

Interesting is also that apparently aircraft type plays a big role in visibility ranges and tendencies can get reversed depending on view angle.

[Wolf_Rider]

silly question: Do you zoom or change your FoV?

zooming, should bring the target a bit closer (larger) but switching to a wider FoV will, in effect, push the target further away.